Document Type : Research Paper
Highlights
1- Introduction
This article analyzes the military intervention of the army (praetorianism) in Pakistan's foreign policy. The military has played a significant role in shaping Pakistan's foreign policy due to its historical involvement in politics and governance. This has sometimes led to tensions with civilian governments and has shaped the country's foreign policy orientation towards certain countries. the military's influence in Pakistan's foreign policy has also been reflected in its approach towards regional issues, such as Afghanistan and Kashmir. The military's strategic interests and objectives have often guided Pakistan's stance on these contentious matters, leading to complex dynamics in the region and affecting the country's diplomatic engagements. The hypothesis presented in the article suggests that the Pakistani army has exerted significant influence over the country's foreign policy by controlling key strategies related to internal and external balancing against India, addressing the Durand problem, managing government dynamics in Afghanistan, and combating terrorism. This control over crucial foreign policy areas has allowed the military to maintain a prominent position within Pakistan's political structure and emerge as a key actor in shaping the nation's foreign relations.
2- Theoretical Framework
The term 'Praetorianism' originates from the Praetorian Guard of ancient Rome, known for its significant political influence and involvement in appointing Roman emperors. Praetorianism is deeply embedded in a country's military and political frameworks. Modern praetorian regimes employ diverse methods of intervention and influence that may not necessarily entail a coup or direct military governance. These regimes often arise when civilian institutions lack legitimacy or are dominated by the military.
Praetorianism often appears in countries that are in the early or middle stages of economic development and political mobilization. In those countries, if civilian groups fail to establish legitimacy, the military may step into political affairs. In countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh and Thailand, when civilian political structures and institutions failed and governance weakened, the military turned to political interference under the pretext of "protecting the constitution".
3- Methodology
In this descriptive-analytical paper, desk studies (review of textbooks and online databases) were used for data collection. This method is usually employed to examine events and phenomena in addition to explaining and analyzing a particular issue. The analysis focuses on the role of Pakistan's army in shaping foreign policy. Firstly, the theoretical framework of Praetorianism is outlined, followed by a detailed explanation of the army's involvement in three key areas: the Kashmir crisis, the Durand crisis and terrorism.
4- Discussion
Pakistan is a classic example of a unique combination of direct military rule and praetorianism.
Due to its unique security situation, the Pakistan army has effectively seized control of crucial foreign policy affairs and has maintained its authority, dynamism, and interests within the country's political structure. While in the country the military sometimes transferred power to civilian governments, the transfer was never complete. In Pakistan, the return of "civilians" to power, even after free elections, did not mean "civilianization" of power, as the military had always maintained its hegemony over politics.
This analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the role of the military in shaping Pakistan's foreign policy, particularly in relation to key issues of foreign policy such as India, Afghanistan, and terrorism.
The historical context of Pakistan's lack of coherent and democratic governance since independence has allowed the military to maintain its hegemony over politics. The Kashmir crisis and the necessity to internal and external balancing against India have been one of the key drivers for military intervention in politics. In this regard, Pakistan's attempt to increase its military and nuclear power and development of its military and security cooperation with America and China can be analyzed respectively in the context of internal and external balancing against India.
The Durand crisis is another challenge of Pakistan's foreign policy, which has become the basis for strengthening the influence of the army in the political structure of this country. Pakistan looks at Afghanistan as its strategic depth, thus, it has always sought weak government in the country. A weak government in Afghanistan would be less likely to challenge the Durand Line, which is backed by the Pakistan army. Also, a weak government in Afghanistan provide Pakistan an opportunity to enhance its influence within the country. The fight against terrorism serves as another significant motivation for military involvement in politics. Pakistan's military consistently receives financial and military assistance from the United States under the pretext of its counterterrorism efforts. During the peak years of the fight against terrorism, particularly between 2001 and 2010, the United States allocated nearly $19 billion, averaging over $2 billion annually, to Pakistan for combating terrorism, So, the army has benefited the most from this money.
5- Conclusion and Suggestions
The article concludes that the military has significant influence over Pakistan's foreign policy and often thwarts the efforts of politicians who are far from military interests.
Military intervention in Pakistan typically occurs when political and civil institutions prove ineffective in resolving political crises due to escalating factional conflicts. In such circumstances, the army steps in to assume political control and preserve order and stability. Weaknesses within civil parties and institutions, along with the lack of unity among political elites, have further contributed to politicians' acquiescence to military authority in Pakistan. The army has asserted control over political affairs through various methods such as influence, replacement, and coup, solidifying its position as an unchallenged power. This has been facilitated by the passivity of politicians opposite to military dominance.
