Pakistan's Centrifugal Politics Threaten Its Viability

The political conflict between the PTI, the establishment and the PML-N threatens to undermine Pakistan's already fragile state stability unless a more durable solution is found. The status quo's latent conflict will only serve to deepen Pakistan's crisis.

Pakistan's Centrifugal Politics Threaten Its Viability

Pakistani society has just emerged out of a civil war like situation, amidst the increasingly divisive nature of its political and social life. In such an environment, any military commander commanding troops deployed in urban centers of the country would perceive threats to the military formation he is commanding from the urban population. Suicide bombings against military personnel and installations, gun attacks and terrorist intrusions into military bases were common occurrences till the last decade. 

Imran Khan proved himself to be an unsavvy politician with the coordinated attack on military installations by his party workers on May 9, 2023. By doing this, Imran Khan forced a multiplication of Pakistani military commanders’ threat perception emanating from Pakistani society. In other words, the last vestiges of trust between the general public and Pakistani military commanders have eroded with what Imran Khan himself perceived to be a swift and stern reaction to his arrest at the hands of paramilitary forces in Islamabad. It is not that the military is lacking in mechanisms to relate with the masses — they have many such tactics in place. But a Pakistan military commander would never be able to trust political workers and political parties as far as the security of his installations and his troops are concerned.

The May 9 attacks were no ordinary events. First of all, these attacks were carried out by a political party, PTI, which never had any connection with organized violence in Pakistani society. The PTI as a political party has never been involved in organized violence at any time during its existence since the 1990s. Secondly, the PTI is a party which is Punjab-centric, with a political culture deeply immersed in the mindset of majoritarian segments of society, which is loyal to the military and the military dominated power structures that prevail in our society, and which is, in a rather crude and ostensible way, endowed with the religious axioms of Sunni orthodoxy. Secondly, the PTI is not the only political party that holds grievances against the military and its leadership. Not long ago, the PML-N was expressing similar complaints against the military top brass. 

The problem with the May 9 attacks is that if they go unpunished, the attacks would open the floodgates of grievances against the military to manifest into palpable forms of violence against military installations and personnel throughout the country. It would set a precedent.

The MQM, PPP, even Jamaat-e-Islami and even the ANP on different occasions in the past have all expressed grievances against the military with varying degrees of intensity and severity. Thirdly, there are a number of political parties which are not as loyal to the military dominated political system as the parties I have just mentioned. These include Sindhi nationalists, Baloch nationalists, and the Manzoor Pashteen led PTM. Fourthly, there are groups armed to the teeth and highly motivated, which are bent upon overthrowing the military dominated political system. These include the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, many other offshoot groups which have recently emerged in the Pak-Afghan border areas, not to forget the Baloch separatists’ rebel groups.

The problem with the May 9 attacks is that if they go unpunished, the attacks would open the floodgates of grievances against the military to manifest into palpable forms of violence against military installations and personnel throughout the country. It would set a precedent. TTP and Baloch separatist rebels never miss an opportunity to attack military installations, military personnel and bases in any part of the country. The fear is that even political parties as non-violent as PTI could indulge in violence against the military if some tangible solution to the problem of the May 9 attacks is not found in the immediate future. After all, there is no mainstream political party which has not been on the wrong side of the military at one time or the other in the post-Zia period. My own sense is that the extremely harsh reaction of the military leadership and military commanders to the May 9 attacks was primarily aimed at creating a deterrent against insurrection taking roots among Pakistani political groups.

I haven’t seen any moves to tackle the underlying problems that led to the May 9 attacks at the political level. All we see is the rampant use of the coercive machinery of the state to exclude PTI from the political process. The political problem could be identified as a situation where the country's armed forces are now pitted against one of the most popular political parties in the country. I think that this is the biggest challenge to our national security that the military is perceived as a threatening force by a political party which according to the latest poll results has emerged as the largest parliamentary party in the National Assembly. 

Right now, we are facing a clear security threat on our Western border in the form of the TTP—this is a group which not only threatens our social and political stability, it also, according to some accounts, is bent on overthrowing the system itself. And yet we have our major political parties opposing a much needed military operation against this menace.

On the other hand, our military commanders cannot trust the country’s largest political party with their own security—a political party which in every possible way could be considered a future ruling party in Islamabad. This mistrust is the biggest security threat to our national security structures. It’s primarily a consequence of the dysfunction of our political system that it could come up with nothing better than using the coercive machinery of the state to solve this prickly political problem. Our political class should show some ingenuity towards clearing the mistrust between the military and popular political forces. Historically, the military has always been on one end of the conflict between non-representative institutions and popular political forces.

The long-term impact of this tussle on our national security could not be overstated. Right now, we are facing a clear security threat on our Western border in the form of the TTP—this is a group which not only threatens our social and political stability, it also, according to some accounts, is bent on overthrowing the system itself. And yet we have our major political parties opposing a much needed military operation against this menace. We never discuss what impact the divisions in our society have on the execution of our foreign policy. 

We have never noticed that the Indians stopped taking us seriously since the launch of the lawyers’ movement—it’s not that this is something to be blamed on the country's lawyers. It is the responsibility of the incumbent government not to allow the creation of situations, the consequence of which are social, political or religious divisions. Since the end of the Musharraf government, we never had a government which did not face a legitimacy challenge of one or the other type. The result is that the world doesn’t take our governments seriously, which in turn reflects on our foreign policy failures.

The PTI is a party which has swiftly transformed itself from a protégé of the military and intelligence services to one of their worse opponents. Ideologically, it is deeply confused as to what it intends to do when it comes to power in Islamabad.

There are at present three political forces in our society which are either in control of the state or which might in the future take control of the state machinery because of the constitutional process. None of these three political forces have a plan to meet the national security challenge which carries the potential of derailing our democratic process. 

Presently, the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) is controlling the state machinery. It doesn’t have the capacity to see beyond its own narrowly defined interests of remaining in power, no matter what. Opportunism, fraud, coercion -- everything goes. The second political force which is co-handling the state machinery is the military top brass. They are presently dominating the power structure, but find themselves standing on ground made of shifting sand. 

Other power centers have also emerged in society, and the military is making adjustments as a player which is relatively more sophisticated. The military sees the political situation from the perspective of their institutional interests. Hence, it is party to the abovementioned conflict and expecting a solution from the establishment which can resolve the conflict is a waste of time. The PTI, the third salient political force, which might be able to get one hand on the state machinery by way of its chances to become the next ruling party, defines its political agenda narrowly as part of its antagonistic relations with the present ruling party. The PTI is a party which has swiftly transformed itself from a protégé of the military and intelligence services to one of their worse opponents. Ideologically, it is deeply confused as to what it intends to do when it comes to power in Islamabad.

In such a situation, the Pakistani state is rapidly losing its economic and financial viability and its image as a responsible state in the international system. Pakistan is very much seen as the sick man of South Asia, a society at war with itself. Pakistan’s rulers make promises to its people about putting Pakistan on the path to development and progress, which end up as nothing more than cruel jokes. 

First, Pakistan has to make peace with the world and with ourselves. We must make ourselves financially and economically viable. The three above mentioned players in the political game must realize that none of them can dominate the arena on its own. Their mutual tussles and conflicts could not only derail the political process, they could potentially derail the state’s stability itself.

The writer is a journalist based in Islamabad.