Since its creation, the National Security Committee (NSC) has only met six times till July 2016, even though Pakistan has had more than its fair share of security-related challenges, according to a report released by Pildat on Wednesday.
Prime Minister has instead chosen to interact directly with the Chief of Army Staff, which has not only undermined the entire process of institutionalised consultation but also the office of the Federal Minister of Defence as well as the National Security Advisors, the Pildat report titled State of Civil-Military Relations in Pakistan, June 01, 2015-July 31, 2016, including the third year of the current government said.
The report highlights that Prime Minister and CoAS have apparently preferred doing business through one-on-one meetings since General Raheel Sharif's appointment in November 2013 till July 2016. Out of a total of 99 meetings, 37 were held as one-on-one interactions versus six meetings of NSC in three years. It increasingly appears that the official consultation and institutionalised decision-making at the officially designated forum is not a priority.
Pakistan continued without a full-time Defence Minister even during the third year of the current government. Khawaja Asif, the Federal Minister for Water and Power, was given the additional charge for the Ministry of Defence in November 2013 and given the heavy agenda his original Ministry of Water and Power carries to solve the electric power shortage crisis, it is hardly plausible that he can devote a decent amount of time to the Ministry of Defence.
Khawaja Asif is hardly the person to build bridges between the civilian government and the Armed Forces. Khawaja Asif has been anything but effective as the Defence Minister and the choice of appointing him may also have contributed to this ineffectiveness. From June 01, 2015 to July 31, 2016, the Premier met the CoAS 29 times while only two meetings of the NSC were held; 10 of these meetings (ie 34 percent of the total times they met) were one-on-one interactions.
Federal Minister in-charge for Defence, Khawaja Muhammad Asif, MNA, was present in only six of these meetings (21 percent of the total times the PM and the CoAS met). On the other hand the National Security Advisor to the Prime Minister [before October 22, 2015, Sartaj Aziz, and then Lieutenant General Nasser Khan Janjua (Retd) was present in 10 of these meetings (34 percent of the total meetings held between the PM and the CoAS.
Looking at civil-military relations in Pakistan as the federal government completes three years in office, it appears as if the Military leadership has established itself as the final arbiter on national security, with the elected government relegated to either an auxiliary role, or a parallel national security regime. Although the mandate for final decisions on national security resides with the elected government, it is seen to be exercised by the Military as Pakistan moves further away from a constitutional equation on civil-military relations. A perception has persisted, especially post-Dharna in 2014, that this authority was wrested away from the elected government, the period of June 2015-July 2016 has made evident that the situation remains unchanged.
Perhaps the PML-N-led federal government's biggest failure has been its inability to institutionalise a consultative decision-making process on national security despite the creation of the NSC in 2013 completes with a permanent secretariat. Failure to formulate a comprehensive National Security Policy in three years in office; the policy was to be drafted by the National Security Division, under the guidance of the NSC.
The Military leadership continues to feel that the final onus of deciding 'national interest' is on them. As a result, at times, instead of giving their input and then leaving the matter to the elected leadership of the country, they insist on their interpretation of the national interest relating to issues such as relations with India, Afghanistan, Iran and the US and the security policy.
Similarly, Pildat believes that the elected government has not been elected as a monarchy and it should follow a consultative system of decision-making especially on the questions relating to the national security and supreme national interest.
Comments
Comments are closed.