Notebook
For the better part of its history, reporters in Pakistan have been closely watching the relationship between prime ministers and Army chiefs — presence or absence in meetings, tone and tenor, twist and turn, even body language has been analysed to gauge whether the big two in Pakistan are getting along or not.
In November 2019, Prime Minister Imran Khan extended the tenure of General Qamar Javed Bajwa for a period of three years; a vote of confidence in an Army chief widely believed to have helped him to an electoral majority in 2018.
With regular meetings dutifully pictured in the media, it appeared that this most difficult relationship in Pakistan was being managed well by Mr. Khan and Gen. Bajwa, both going out of their way to extend courtesy to the other. And then came a public spat over the appointment of the ISI chief in 2021.
On body language, the verdict of two dawnnews.tv anchors — Mubashir Zaidi and Zarar Khurro — after Pakistan’s National Day parade on Wednesday was that Mr. Khan stood aloof and apart from Gen. Bajwa, though they shared the same stage.
Both Mr. Khan’s allies, who have now joined the chorus of party dissidents in announcing that they will vote against his Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) government, would have been watching. It looks like the first PTI Prime Minister is on his way out because he has fallen out of favour with Gen. Bajwa. Dissidents and allies would have walked along with Mr. Khan had Gen. Bajwa’s blessings remained with the Prime Minister.
In 1999, when this writer reported on the October 12 coup from Islamabad, there was no private television to discuss the nuances of how Army chief Pervez Musharraf and Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif behaved with each other.
But there were perceptive analysts warning that the “stallions in Rawalpindi” were getting restless and that Gen. Musharraf was not about to put in his papers and go home like his immediate predecessor Gen. Jehangir Karamat.
Proof that the stallions were indeed restless came when an American official very publicly warned in 1999 against a “coup” in Pakistan following meetings with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s younger brother, Shehbaz Sharif, now in the running to replace Mr. Imran Khan if the opportunity were to arise.
Unlike in 1999, when Gen. Musharraf chose to take power and rule the country directly, he took the title of “Chief Executive”, Gen. Zia-ul-Haq ran the show as “Chief Martial Law Administrator”. The Army as an institution is loath to rule directly; it prefers to manage and guide civilian governments.
In a twist of history, the play of numbers in the current National Assembly allows the Army to manoeuvre a Prime Minister out of power through the parliamentary route. In the past, Army coups, pressure by the President, and the judicial route have had to be used.
After the elections in 1988, Benazir Bhutto (1990 & 1996) and Nawaz Sharif (1993, 1999 & 2017) were not permitted by the Army and powerful Presidents, acting in concert with the Army, from completing their terms as prime minister — Mr. Sharif’s 2017 ejection from office came following a Supreme Court order. Now, it would appear, Mr. Khan could join the likes of Mr. Sharif and the late Benazir Bhutto.
Pakistan’s democracy suffers from a fatal flaw, which is the all-powerful Army and its vested interests that don’t allow a democracy, warts and all, to function. Civilian leaders are also guilty of seeking support from Army chiefs to clamber up the power route, but in time the permanent establishment tires of them.
Junior generals and extensions haven’t helped Pakistani prime ministers complete their term. It’s clearly time that the rules of the game are rewritten to cut the Army and its chiefs down to size if Pakistan is to avoid the embarrassment of having a prime minister hold office at the pleasure of its top general.
amit.b@thehindu.co.in
