General Raheel Sharif – who is credited with prosecuting Pakistan’s most effective fight yet against terror – in North Waziristan and elsewhere along the Afghan border -– has announced that he would retire from the powerful army chief post upon completion of three-year term in November. In a functioning democracy that would not even have made a news but in the context of Pakistan’s civilian-military power equation, the development corrects some of the imbalance.
Sharif is the first general in 17 years to have rejected the idea of extensions. Peddled by former military leaders, and acquiesced by democratically elected governments under constitutional authority, such thinking stemmed from the time-old pretexts of necessity and continuity. The extensions also gave aura of indispensability to former military rulers and further empowered the key Army Chief position.
To the outside world, such extensions during democratic governments reinforced the message that military was in charge of the fight against terror and that political leadership did not matter much.
But a comparison in the performances of Gen. Sharif and his two predecessors turns this notion on its head, although his departure would leave a question mark over the country’s momentum in the fight against terror.
With the conclusion of the general’s term, it will be now after a long time that an elected democratic leader will oversee appointment of a second army chief during his tenure – an important indicator of democratic development in the backdrop of repeated dismissals of civilian governments in the past decades.
The last few years also saw some episodes of power struggle. Analysts say there was a time during the 2014 opposition party PTI’s protests against the Nawaz Sharif government, when the army strengthened its grip on some security and foreign policy areas like relations with Afghanistan and India. As an institution, the army has also been critical of the civilian government’s performance with regard to use of soft power measures like economic incentives and Madrassa reforms that may curb militancy in the long run.
But now, into last year of his service, Gen. Sharif has made it clear that he has no political ambitions. The statement by General Sharif – whose approval ratings soared to 82 percent – has diluted the perception that he had become more important than democracy since, despite having achieved some macroeconomic stability, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s government has been found wanting in many areas of governance, especially energy, education and health. Secondly, the announcement smothers the impression that the general had become larger than the military institution.
Regarded well in Washington and other capitals for his determination to fight terror, the general has also been received favorable reviews in Pakistan for contributing to marked improvement in dealing with a low-intensity insurgency in Balochistan and providing paramilitary support to the government in stopping Karachi’s law and order decline – an implication of the port city’s unwieldy politico-ethnic climate. As a result, Pakistan has regained control over several areas, the scale of terrorist attacks is significantly down and the country can now boast of having achieved relative stability, necessary for investment and economic growth.
Externally, Pakistan has made efforts for Afghan reconciliation, hosting the U.S., China and Kabul representatives for a roadmap that might finally push the Afghan Taliban to abandon insurgency and enter into a negotiated settlement of the conflict. Just last week, the two Sharifs traveled to Riyadh and Teheran in an effort to ratchet down Saudi-Iranian tensions that, if blown into a conflict, could have serious repercussions for Pakistan.
With India, the situation remains sensitive. Experts say Pakistan military establishment has no incentive to see an upsurge in tensions with India on the eastern border, when more than 200,000 of its troops and security forces are battling Pakistan Tehreek-e-Taliban in the tribal belt along the western Afghan border.
For the United States and China, which have high stakes in Afghanistan achieving a modicum of stability, Gen. Sharif’s departure would time with a key transition decision, when at the end of 2016 Washington and its allies decide on the nature of future engagement with the landlocked country facing old threats – al-Qaeda and the Taliban insurgency – as well as new threat of the Daesh trying to enter the dangerous militant fuel mix. As the recent attacks in Afghanistan and on Bacha Khan University in Charsadda show, Pakistan cannot afford to lower its guard in the fight against militancy and militant mindset.
Also, in the regional perspective, Iran’s comeback as a major economic and political player, India’s rise as economic powerhouse, the Middle Eastern uncertainty and sectarianism, collapse of several states, and perennial fragility of Afghanistan demand Islamabad chart a clearly defined course to secure its economic and security interests, which no single institution of the country can do by itself.
However, Pakistan needs a lot more than a civilian control over and leadership on defense and security matters. As democracy makes some advances – peaceful transitions since 2007, local government elections, and a general awareness of the imperatives of development – Pakistan’s civilian and military leadership owe it to their country to work constitutionally and make amends for the lost decades because democratization is likely to remain a work in progress for years to come.
Sharif’s announcement to shun any extension would not immediately diminish the military’s longstanding clout. It is also a fact that, as in other countries, the military’s institutional input on national security and defense issues, would be a key consideration in formulation of national policies.
In Pakistan’s peculiar context, what the general’s declaration does is amplify the space for democracy to deliver and for the country’s political system to gain strength. In this respect, experts say Prime Minister Sharif must lead by example to make the most of his remaining time in office until 2018. The best way the third-term prime minister could do so is by bolstering governance, having the services of competent people as heads of civilian institutions – something that can come through expansion of his kitchen cabinet to include the top skilled capital of the country. The 2013 general election put almost all major political parties to work – PPP in Sindh and PTI in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa – and the degree of their performance would also factor into advancing the argument for democracy being the best possible answer to the country’s myriad troubles. Putting people first must be the shared motto of all political parties.
In recent days Pakistani leaders have tried to correct some of the lingering anomalies in the national narrative by gestures toward Christian and Hindu minorities. This week, while traveling in Europe, Prime Minister Sharif hailed Dr. Abdul Salam – a Nobel Laureate sicientist from the Qadiani community – as a national hero. Pakistan’s pluralism of thought, creativity, entrepreneurial talents of its people, and economic inclusiveness of all provinces will form the bedrock of a functioning democracy.
The parliamentary democracy, undoubtedly, remains the most suitable form of governance for the country having a diverse demographic complexion, but success of the system depends on effectiveness of governance. The country must persist with democratic development through devolution of power but also waste no time in ensuring fair distribution of economic benefits as people expect quick results. PM Sharif’s government must step up inter-provincial coordination, fight corruption, and carry forward the fight against extremism and terrorism in real earnest. Only such a course would instill confidence among the marginalized segments and skeptics and with it raise common man’s stakes in defending the democratic form of government.
Good analysis.