THE civil-military relationship in Pakistan has never been ideal. Despite recent conciliatory efforts and the policy of accommodation adopted by the coalition government, concerns within security-focused circles persist about the handling of several government affairs. For now, though, there is little chance of an escalation in civil-military tensions involving the federal and provincial governments; the last hitch was the PTI government, which was ousted through governor’s rule and emergency. The major allegation against the PTI government has been that it was hesitant to take a clear position against the terrorists, enabling them to expand their influence in parts of the province, especially in the southern districts.

The establishment is sensitive about the narrative, and considers it subversion and part of hybrid warfare; it looks upon any political or ideological support for it as support to the enemy. Terminology describing Taliban-aligned terrorists as ‘Fitna al-Khwarij’ and Baloch insurgents as ‘Fitna al-Hindustan’ reflects the same approach. Everyone is expected to follow this approach; the PTI government’s disagreement on several security-related policies is, therefore, interpreted as an act of subversion. Meanwhile, it is clear how much civilian governments actually contribute to security-related affairs.

The security domain has often caused friction between the establishment and civilian governments; over the decades, the political leadership has learned not to voice disagreement on security-related affairs. ‘Memogate’ was the last........

© Dawn