|
Shuja
Nawaz's latest book on the Pakistan Army is an exciting read that
could turn defence analysts, like myself, green with envy for not
having the kind of contacts within the country's armed forces that
would open up a wealth of information. The prose flows smoothly
as the writer takes us through the journey of the development of
the army from the colonial times to the most current period.
Spread
over 606 pages with 18 chapters, the book tries to decipher the
reasons behind the power and influence of the military, and its
relations with the political forces, the US and the mullahs. These
are the three critical areas that have been covered by several academics
in various works. One of the important questions which the writer
asks is whether Pakistan's military is like the Turkish military,
which is engaged in nation-building, or the Indonesian military
which is predatory. Although one of Nawaz's recommendations is that
the military must shed its commercial role, he appears quite gentle
in analysing the military's role and its professional capacity.
Considering
the kind of access the author had to military archives and sources,
the book is extremely revealing in terms of information. For the
first time it has been revealed that Liaquat Ali Khan was "sold
on" the idea of Ayub Khan as the army chief (page 80). We know
for sure now how Major General Akbar Khan planned the 1947/48 military
operation in Indian-administered Kashmir with the help of tribal
warriors, which led to the first war with India. Then there is information
about how Iskander Mirza, Ghulam Mohammad, Ayub Khan and Pakistan's
ambassador to the US, Amjad Ali, were all independently trying to
build relations with the US. How there were ethnic tensions in the
army during the early days, with officers suspicious of those whose
families had migrated from India. How Ayub Khan created a system
of perks and privileges for the officers, which was opposed by some
officers such as Sher Ali Pataudi. We also learn that Ayub Khan
imposed the first martial law after he heard rumours about himself,
spread by politicians, that he was paid off by the Indians during
his November 1953 trip to the US. Also, that Bhutto and General
Akhtar Malik influenced Ayub Khan to launch 'Operation Gibraltar'
that led to the 1965 war.
We
are informed that while Ayub Khan wanted to solve the Kashmir issue
for good when he went for talks with the Indians, it was Bhutto
who was dragging his feet. And that Yahya Khan wanted to rule for
14 years so that the country did not fall into the hands of 'wolves.'
The other revealing information pertains to how the ISI bribed politicians
like Jatoi, Junejo, Pir Pagaro, Hafeez Pirzada, and Jam Sadiq to
topple Benazir Bhutto's first government. We also learn that the
Sharif brothers bribed senior military officers with BMWs and blackmailed
Begum Abida Hussain after she had taken money from them to pay off
her political opponent.
The
author very systematically explains the evolution of Pakistan-US
relations. In fact, these details are interesting, as the book seems
to be addressing two types of audiences: the Pakistan Army and the
US. According to Nawaz, Ayub Khan established links with the US.
The details on the bilateral relations are worth reading. However,
he fails to mention how Jinnah was equally keen to develop these
relations to get weapons and material help to build the country
against India.
Indubitably,
the book is explosive in terms of the new material it provides.
Nevertheless, there are a few issues which one would like to raise
with the author. Before one embarks on that, it is important to
slot the book in the right category. The existing literature on
civil-military relations in Pakistan, its politics and the military
falls into three categories: (a) sympathetic to the army, (b) critical
of the army and (c) that which views the issue from a structural
paradigm. Although Shuja Nawaz's book has sufficient potential to
fall in the third, it actually belongs to the first category. The
author is critical of generals Yahya Khan and Zia-ul-Haq, but sympathetic
to the views of generals Ayub Khan, Mirza Aslam Beg, Asif Nawaz,
Waheed Kakar, Jahangir Karamat and Pervez Musharraf. In fact, he
completely ignores the information that Ayub Khan had received a
bad ACR (Assign Channel Reassignment) from his bosses prior to the
partition of India and had become a general through machination.
While
Nawaz points out the flaws of the Yahya Khan regime, especially
how it suffered from centralised decision-making and how it launched
an unwise military operation in East Pakistan, his narrative almost
justifies the military action during the 1950s. While pinpointing
how various civilians were inept in handling the state, he fails
to link the political problems during the country's early years
with the birth of the state. Since Pakistan was born as an elitist
state, it was natural for the political elite to behave irresponsibly
and for the state to turn into a rentier one. He does not necessarily
see the relations with the US as part of the rent-seeking culture
of the elite or the state. Furthermore, the author distinguishes
between the 'irresponsible' politicians and the generals, while
both belong to the category of the rent-seeking elite of the country.
Another issue, which one would like to raise with the author, pertains
to his assessment of the military as a professional organisation.
He continues to refer to it as professional, but admits that the
generals have made mistakes and behaved irresponsibly. At several
places Nawaz points out how the military's professionalism was compromised.
Professionalism is, indeed, a subjective issue. Does one link it
with the level of training as compared to that of less trained militaries,
or the passion of the soldiers to attain tactical objectives, or
the ability of its generals to attain strategic objectives? Interestingly,
the author does not analyse the Kargil crisis critically or note
down the fact that it was not just due to the folly of Nawaz Sharif
that Pakistan was compelled to withdraw but the fact that the army's
line of communication with its troops was severed during the operation,
which allowed the Indians to regain ground. Moreover, what can one
say about the professionalism of an army that allows militants to
penetrate its rank and file?
Another questionable issue pertains to his assessment of the army
as having no links with the Islamists and it being a secular institution.
This analysis runs counter to some of the details given in the book.
Perhaps, if Nawaz had looked carefully he might have been able to
see that the army's fundamental flaw lies in its links with the
tribal warriors and militants, whom they view as the most potent
tool against India. It really does not matter if the bulk of the
army interacts with the militants or not, the fact remains that
militancy is part of the larger strategic design and militants have
penetrated certain critical segments of the organisation. In fact,
Nawaz notes that the ISI was responsible for supporting the jihad
in Kashmir. But alongside, the author also tries to build a case
that the Taliban were not created by Pakistan's ISI. However, his
knack for details does not include information as to how the Taliban
managed to launch an organised offensive in Afghanistan, which smacked
of professional help.
More importantly, the author fails to note that Pakistan's politically
ambitious army's links with Islamists and their religious ideology
are as strong as those of politicians due to the problem of legitimacy.
The army does not have any political base and the Islamists have
served as their constituency in the past.
Although Nawaz discusses the problem of the military's system of
perks and privileges, he classifies it as part of the larger problem
of entitlement. One wonders if the problem didn't merit greater
attention.
Reading the book, one is reminded of the philosophy of Pakistan's
strategic analyst Hassan Askari-Rizvi, who is of the opinion that
one must keep a distance from the generals to arrive at an unbiased
opinion. The bulk of the information, which makes Shuja's book such
an interesting read, obviously came at a cost
|