For decades, the military in Pakistan has been revered as the nation’s saviour, a steadfast guardian against internal and external threats. Their authority and public respect were largely unquestioned. Yet, a significant shift has occurred. The image of the military, once unblemished, has deteriorated in the eyes of many. Why has this happened?
The prevailing sentiment is that politicians are inherently corrupt, prioritizing personal gain over public interest. In contrast, the military was consistently seen as incorruptible, the ultimate protector. This perception began to unravel when Imran Khan (IK) was ousted from power. Many believe his tenure marked a rare period of progress for Pakistan, and his removal was a significant setback.
The public largely trusts IK, viewing him as an honest leader unwilling to embezzle funds for personal enrichment. While acknowledging that some individuals around him may have engaged in corrupt practices, the belief in IK’s integrity remains strong.
The Military’s True Mandate: Defending the Nation and Upholding Democracy Crucially, the military’s mandate is to defend the country, not the personal interests of its commanders. Their sacred oath compels them to protect the nation and, as per the constitution, to uphold and support democracy. The recent actions of certain military leadership have, unfortunately, brought about severe political instability in Pakistan. This political turmoil has, in turn, gravely jeopardized the nation’s already fragile economic stability.
It is a fundamental truth that the military itself cannot thrive or even survive effectively without a stable political economy that is organic and self-sustaining, rather than one that is artificially orchestrated or manipulated. A strong and prosperous nation is the bedrock upon which a strong defence force is built.
Geopolitical Realities: Navigating Regional Turmoil
Pakistan’s geopolitical position is uniquely complex, situated at the crossroads of South Asia, the Middle East, and Central Asia. This position, while offering strategic advantages, also exposes Pakistan to the ripple effects of regional conflicts. The ongoing tensions between Iran and Israel, including recent strikes and calls for a ceasefire, present a delicate balancing act for Islamabad.Pakistan maintains a principled stance, strongly condemning Israeli actions as violations of Iran’s sovereignty and international law and reiterating its unwavering diplomatic support for Iran at various international forums, including the United Nations and the OIC. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has engaged in calls with leaders from Iran, Saudi Arabia, China, and Qatar, emphasizing de-escalation through dialogue and diplomacy. While expressing solidarity with Tehran, Pakistan has deliberately avoided making military commitments, underscoring its caution.
This strategic clarity is essential. Pakistan shares a long, porous border with Iran, particularly in the volatile Baluchistan region, making it highly susceptible to spillover effects such as cross-border militant activity, a potential refugee exodus, and disruptions to vital trade and energy supplies. The threat of a prolonged conflict exacerbating internal security challenges, including sectarian tensions and militant violence, is a paramount concern. Pakistan’s consistent stance has been one of non-alignment and a firm belief in resolving conflicts through dialogue, recognizing that regional instability directly impacts its internal peace and economic well-being.
A Call for Collaboration and a Path to National Renewal
It’s time for the military leadership to recognize the current landscape. In today’s complex environment, a collaborative approach with Imran Khan could be profoundly beneficial for both the military and the country. IK, while possessing significant public support, cannot operate effectively in isolation. He requires the strong backing of the military to be heard and taken seriously on a global scale.
Some in military leadership might fear a loss of control in such a partnership. However, the reality could be quite the opposite. By aligning with IK and leveraging his popular mandate, the military could strengthen its position and influence on the international stage.
The West, keenly aware of the military’s diminished public support within Pakistan, often uses this as leverage, manipulating propaganda and pressuring the establishment to conform to their agenda. By integrating IK and gaining public endorsement, the military would present a united front, making it more challenging for external powers to exert undue influence.
This is a critical juncture for Pakistan. It’s time to set aside personal grievances and preconceived notions. Our collective survival depends on uniting all available forces to counter external adversaries who show no mercy. The world has changed, and so must our policies to safeguard national interests. Personal revenge must not dictate policy decisions, as such actions would leave us vulnerable to our enemies.
Bringing Imran Khan on board would offer the military an invaluable asset: widespread public support. This alliance would enhance the military’s perceived strength and influence globally. Imagine a scenario where IK, with the strong, unwavering support of the military operating in the background, takes the lead in international relations, particularly with powerful nations like the USA and China.
Such a partnership could be transformative. With the combined strength of IK’s vision and public backing, and the military’s strategic support, Pakistan could embark on a path of national rebuilding, potentially achieving significant progress within a decade. This unified approach would enable Pakistan to emerge as a stronger, more influential player on the world stage, capable of effectively navigating complex geopolitical challenges and fostering organic economic stability.
What are your thoughts on this potential shift in Pakistan’s political landscape?
