The Warrior State: Pakistan in the Contemporary World

Abstract

T.V. Paul, The State: in the Contemporary World, New Delhi: Random House, 2014, Pages: 257, Price: Rs. 499.00Books that try to test theories by analysing the practice normally tend to be very intense. Paul's State is not an exception to the rule. Delving into his analyses in earlier literature, this book focuses on Pakistan's insecurity paradigm, based on the political history of the country generally, and wars particularly. Also analysed in the process are the nature of the elite - both civilian and military, and its contribution (rather lack of it) to the state since inception. The author tries to test his theory, making use of the prevalent war-making and development of state (relationship) literature based on analyses of a range of other countries to explain the state of as it stands today.The State presents the political developments in in a coherent way, with one chapter flowing into the next, in a continuum. For Paul, the state's Hobbesian view of the world (where is a natural state of affairs, p. 4) is responsible for what is today. The author pinpoints the reasons for Pakistan's situation: against military elites prone to group think, the absence of a strong demand for institutional reforms (normally made by powerful social and political groups), weak civil society groups (retreating after initial activism), lack of demand for institutional reforms, and outside aid compensating for economic shortfalls (pp. 29- 30). Paul holds external factors responsible for not seeking transformation and perpetuating status quo, calling the United States a case of lost opportunities and misguided policies, and secondary supporters like China and Saudi Arabia as unlikely candidates seeking the change in view of their own aversion to democracy (p. 30).The eye-catching idea in the book is the geostrategic akin to resource in which resources like oil can turn out to be a curse for countries, which have them in abundance, explaining how (its elite) has not been able to use its geopolitical advantages as assets for national development or nation building. Rather, it became a rentier state, its elites taking this rent from great powers as well as Islamic countries. According to Paul, post-Independence developed a hyperpolitik worldview, overstating the external threat to the state and understating the domestic imperative. Its quest for strategic parity with India, which has been an obsession with Pakistan, (the conflict with India is about territory, power, status, and national identity, p. 95) resulted in the military's dominance over the state on the one hand and on the other, prevented emergence of viable domestic (civilian) political institutions and economic development. According to Paul, the basic problem is the structural asymmetry with India, which is unbridgeable despite some things in Pakistan's favour ...the competition with its neighbour creates intense warrior tendencies in its elites (p. 126).Dependent on foreign aid, the resultant rentier state least globalised in terms of economic categories of trade, hotbed of transnational terrorism, home of Al Qaeda and Taliban, which saw the rise of its military especially after the 1971 war, betrays absence of vision for peaceful coexistence. Continuation of security problems is in the material interest of the army. The US aid from 1960-2012 amounting to US$ 73.1 billion benefitted the military (pp. 20-21).Particularly interesting and analytical are Chapters 2, 6 and 8 that deal with the causes of Pakistan's warrior state status, religion, and the state. They sum up the status of the warrior state. The focus of Chapter three, A Turbulent History is on the three wars with India. The Kargil war has been mentioned (p. 60) as well as the War in Afghanistan. Paul maintains, Warrior state mentality will hold its sway over Pakistan (p. …