Post-Withdrawal Civil-Military Relations

Abstract

Post-martial law Pakistan represents the typical dilemma of states that have experienced prolonged periods of military rule and where the military transfers power to the civilian elite after securing its future through constitutional and political engineering and cooption of a section of political elite. The civilian regimes that succeed military rule face serious identity crises. On the one hand, these governments want to prove that they are not under the tutelage of the military and can act autonomously. On the other, they cannot afford to alienate the top brass of the military whose goodwill and support are crucial to their survival. Their task is complicated by the fact that once the tradition of direct military intervention in politics is established, the top brass are disinclined to surrender all the power and privileges they enjoyed during the years of military rule; they make sure that there are sufficient guarantees for their entrenched position in the post-withdrawal period. Furthermore, extended military rule creates vested interests and beneficiaries who support authoritarian and non-democratic governance. Military rule also accentuates political fragmentation and divisive tendencies in a multi-ethnic and diversified society especially if there are ethnic and regional imbalances in the military. These factors make the task of political management difficult for any post-martial law civilian regime aiming to establish itself as a genuine democratic government while not alienating the top commanders.