Preventing Military Take Overs

Over the years, an uneasy tension has developed between the civil society and the military. The fascination and admiration for the armed forces that one saw during the 1965 war is now missing. Primary reason is the frequent take over of the civil governments by the military. The blame rests equally on both sides namely the politicians and the army leaders. The army leaders have begun to consider the politicians as inefficient and corrupt. Military’s contention has been that their intervention has always been in the supreme national interest and only when pestered by the politicians to do so. The politicians feel that the military has to confine itself to its professional role and not consider it the sole guardian of the national interests. As for corruption, politicians say that military has many of its skeletons hidden in the cupboard. They also argue that military was in the forefront in all the major national blunders such as the Dacca debacles, loss of Siachin, creation of the Taliban or the folly of the Kargil. Actually, it all began with that first slip back in the fiftees when Ayub Khan, the serving Army Chief, was appointed as the Defense Minister. Since then the military has been gradually making inroads into all spheres of civilian activity and creating a permanent place for it in those areas.

The fact is that in today’s world, countries ruled by the military are considered uncivilized and are not taken seriously. Civilian supremacy over the military is now a well established civilized norm. We have been messing up on this account for the last fifty years. Now it appears that lessons have been learnt by both the politicians and the military. And it is time to put an end to this recurring national failure and get back into the comity of nations as a progressive, liberal and an enlightened state. Military reforms are needed not only to let the military grow and develop itself in its professional field without any distractions but to also to enhance its image in the eyes of general public. These reforms would need to be comprehensive covering all areas including the chain of command, overall defense structure, military organization, training of senior officers, re-location of cantonments and many other smaller but effective measure.

The starting point has to be clearly defining a chain of command. The civilian supremacy over the military has to be established both in letter and spirit. Barring a short period during the days of elder Bhutto, military has never really been subservient to the civilian leadership and has been, overtly or covertly, exercising its influence over the national policies which are outside its domain. There is a general assumption that a service chief is a grade 22 officer which is wrong. The service chiefs enjoy a special status equivalent to a minister and this was done during the Gen Zia era. In all other countries, the service heads come under the defence secretary. The same chain of command needs to be implemented here and the military officers’ precedence in protocol accordingly re-adjusted.

Our overall defence structure also requires a change. In our military take overs, the air force or the navy play only a nominal role. In most cases, they get the news from the media. Even the army, collectively as an institution, is not involved in the take overs. The decision is taken by a few officers at the highest level of the ground forces who feel confident enough with a decisive physical force under their command to get the decision implemented. Even the chief of joint staff which has a higher status is not in the loop. Thus the problem lies with concentration of power of entire ground forces under one head. In other countries with ground forces of our size, the defence structure contains more than one ground forces group. The same can be done here and Pakistan Marines can be created out of the existing forces comprising elements of army, navy and air force and headed by a four star general. Pakistan marines would come directly under the joint staff headquarters like in other countries. It would be a specialized force at par with other advanced nations. Pakistan marines could be based in Baluchistan which has minimum military presence thus also satisfying an age old demand of Baluchistan. Such an arrangement would also make it difficult for the army chief to unilatelly take over the civil government on his own; or at the least increase his degree of difficulty.

The training of the senior military officers is another area needing attention. The syllabi of the higher institutions of the military requires a review. The national defense college and war colleges actually expose their senior officers to the non-military issues such as the process of formulation of the national policies. These officers are introduced to the working of civil government departments and have to produce research papers on different national issues. While this is only a preliminary introduction to the running of a civil government and their research papers are no more than hasty rehashing of their half baked knowledge, the damage done is that the officers begin to have a false confidence of knowing everything about everything. At times, it is the same old research papers that come handy after the take over. The syllabi of the military institutions of higher learning should be confined strictly to the military strategy and military issues. If the senior officers have to be exposed to the non-military issues, they should be sent to the civil universities to get degree in the specific subject so as to comprehensively comprehend all aspects of the subject.

Segregating the military from the main stream civil society is another reform that could keep the armed forces involved in their own professional field with no outside interference or temptation. Moving around in cities of the developed nations, one hardly comes across the military on the streets. Their military establishments are well clear of the main cities. The same was true in the Sub-continent during the British Raj. But with passage of time and outward expansion of the cities, the cantonments have now fallen right in the middle of our built up areas. These cantonments now cover huge tracts of residential land as their exercises areas, go downs and workshops. The existing cantonments need to be shifted out of the cities into uninhibited areas not likely to fall under any civil use. This proposal would straight away be objected to on the basis of cost involved. But it may be borne in mind that shifting of the cantonments out of the cities would generate an enormous economic activity something that our economy badly needs right now. This cost is well worth incurring.

There are many other smaller but effective reforms that could be carried out. The 10% quota of the armed forces in the civil departments has no logical rational. It is not done in any other civilized society. Likewise, no such quota is available to the civil officers in the military. There has been an overall resentment on this issue in the civil departments. There are, however, some civil departments where it makes sense to send the military personnel such as the para military forces, cost guards, naval security agency, civil aviation etc. But there is little justification for sending military personnel into areas such as culture, sports, tourism, universities, public corporations etc. Another weakness of our civilian presidents, prime minister, governors and chief ministers to have serving military uniformed personnel as their secretaries and ADCs. This is no more than an ego trip and these positions can easily be filled out of the civil departments. The military officers should left to fully devote themselves in their own professional fields. Exposure of military personnel so close to the corridors of political power is not a healthy practice and later leads to complications affecting the very careers of such officers as happened during the last military take over.

The military personnel perform an honorable task and the country needs to look after them well. Allotment of agriculture land, residential plots and housing has been done to ensure that they live a comfortable life after retirement. What is required is to treat these facilities as welfare and not as perks of the rank. As such, this welfare needs to be done in an equitable manner across the board in all ranks in the military. While a retired junior commissioned officer gets a pittance after retirements, a senior officer, particularly two star and above, are worth around 30 million rupees on retirement. Some even term it as legalized corruption. Allotment of agriculture land should be totally stopped while the allotment of residential plots and housing be done in a fair manner across the board as a welfare measure and not as a rank privilege. Similarly, the military estate department which deals with transferring of government lands to the military and then categorizing its use should be reverted back under the civil government as was in the past. This is to avoid the possibility of misusing the state lands, given to the military for defence needs, by converting them into residential or commercial purposes. Similarly, the vast military industrial complex needs to be a part of the level playing field with the other industries with no additional exceptions in terms of excise or taxation duties.

It would be wanting if the military reforms did not deal with the subject of role and the functions of the ISI. Here again, the blame rests with the politicians who introduced the ISI to the non-military areas and used it to their own selfish ends. ISI itself has also been unlucky since its flag ship ventures have been backfiring one by one be it the MQM, the Talibans or the jehadi outfits. ISI needs to be confined to intelligence matters involving the three services. All else needs to be transferred back into the civilian fold. By virtue of its training, and rightly so, military is India-fixated and its entire world view is through the India-Lens. As we look into the future, we hope that the civil governments will normalize our relations with India and we would head towards a gradual reduction in our standing forces. That would leave a bigger chunk of our budget for development and would broaden our economic base. A sensible implementation of the military reforms could go a long way towards distancing the military from national affairs and help regaining the admiration and fascination that the civil society once held for it. In the final analysis, the strongest prevention against a military take over is a the responsibility and accommodation displayed by the politicians towards each other; and a strong resolve not to let the military interfere in the political life of the country.