Military and Democracy: The Military Politics of Pakistan

Key Chapter Title List

1. Introduction
2. Waging War, Building the Nation
3. Advancing Towards Martial Law
4. From Revolution to Rebellion
5. Reasserting Control Over the Nation
6. From Zia to Musharraf
7. Musharraf and Military Professionalism
8. The Military and Democracy
9. Conclusion

Document Introduction

This study delves deeply into the central role of the Pakistani military in domestic politics and its profound impact on democratic development. The core argument of the report is that the custodial beliefs and norms developed by the Pakistani military during its formative period—specifically within the context of geopolitical insecurity and nation-building challenges in the early years of the state—have profoundly shaped and continuously legitimized the authoritarian expansion of its role within the state and society.

Through the lens of historical institutionalism, the report systematically traces the roots of the imbalance in civil-military relations in Pakistan since its independence in 1947. The analysis indicates that the persistent conflict with India, internal contradictions during the early nation-building process (particularly the ethno-linguistic rift between East and West Pakistan), and the rapid modernization of the Pakistani military through U.S. security assistance during the Cold War collectively contributed to the military's institutionalized advantage over weak civilian institutions. This advantage is not only reflected in resource allocation but has also been internalized as a belief within the officer corps that it holds a privileged role in governance and defining national interests.

The analysis of this study is based on extensive military sources, including interviews with officers, professional military publications, as well as curricula, research papers, and strategic documents from the National Defence University, Pakistan. These internal perspectives provide crucial insights into the mindset of the officer corps, their perception of their appropriate role, and their conditional acceptance of democratic institutions. The report examines in detail successive military regimes and transition periods—from Ayub Khan to Yahya Khan, and then to Zia-ul-Haq and Pervez Musharraf—revealing the institutional logic behind military interventions and the continuity of the custodial mentality.

The study finds that the professionalization of the Pakistani military has not distanced it from politics; instead, it has stimulated its interest in solving political problems through military methods and skills. The norms of this custodial professionalism are reinforced through continuous socialization processes (such as education at the National Defence University) and promotion/selection mechanisms, leading the officer corps to widely perceive itself as the ultimate arbiter of national interests and a provisional administrator when necessary. Finally, the report assesses the prospects for democratizing civil-military relations in Pakistan against the backdrop of rising new power centers like the media and judiciary, and discusses the comparative implications of this research for other countries undergoing transitions from military authoritarian rule, such as Egypt and Myanmar.