Civil-military ties: More manipulation on the cards?

On November 29, 2016, General Qamar Javed Bajwa took over as Pakistan’s 16th Chief of Army Staff (COAS). The transition marks another phase in the historically fractious civil-military relations in the country. Whether it is merely about new personnel, or more substantive recalibration, remains to be seen.

A section of the analysis remains fixated on the new chief’s personality and the personnel promoted to important offices, thereby suggesting that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif may have chosen a COAS less adversarial and ambitious than his predecessor. However, such analysis underplays the institutional dynamics that underpin civil-military ties.

The nature of a rigidly hierarchical organisation, such as a military, means that personnel commanding the apex exert significant influence on the operational decisions of the organisation. However, the fact that top appointments are made from a pool of career officers who rise from within the institution prescribes strong limits to actual deviations in ideas and behaviour. Therefore, all the discussions about points of persistent contention — such as civilian control of foreign policy with regional and global powers, internal and external security strategy and even aspects of political accountability, demonstrate strong continuity in recent years.

What does change, however, is the strategy deployed to pursue institutional and national goals. In the case of General (retd) Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, behind-the-scenes manipulation and politicking was seen as a preferred way to discipline errant civilian leaders. With General (retd) Raheel Sharif, it was a public relations campaign and moral acclaim, selective support to the sitting government against political opposition, and a generally proactive approach towards security matters that ensured the military’s self-defined interests.

There is little in the new COAS’s first month in charge that tells us about his team’s preferred strategies. It is likely that a blueprint will only emerge after a conflict or contention emerges with the sitting government. What one may assert with certainty, however, is that long-held institutional views on a number of internal and external affairs will continue to define civil-military relations over the next three years.

This was originally published in Herald's January 2017 issue. To read more, subscribe to the Herald in print.

The writer is a columnist and writes on politics, culture, & economic affairs in Pakistan.