Military Rule in Pakistan: Consequences for Democratization Processes
Pakistan's endless struggle towards genuine democratic governance reeks of a narrative more about political puppetry rather than a heartwarming story of political development. Despite the country being initially conceived as a republican state by its creators in 1947, Pakistan has repeatedly failed to establish a genuinely democratic system. The main culprit behind this persistent failure is none other than the Pakistani military. Over numerous decades, it has wormed its way into the core of political power, continually undercutting civilian leadership and weakening democratic institutions within.
Currently, Pakistan operates more like a puppet regime—a thin civilian administration that masks a deeply entrenched military establishment. When the public's frustration with this setup mounts, the military regularly demonstrates its capacity to rebrand itself as the savior of national security. It pulls out its worn-out playbook of recurring narratives, like Indian aggression, internal subversion, or foreign conspiracies, often amplified through compliant media and affiliated non-state actors, to justify its lordly position. This was evident when Army Chief General Asim Munir started using political dog-whistles ahead of the April 22 Pahalgam attack targeting tourists in Jammu and Kashmir. The expected aggressive Indian response was perfect fodder for the military elite to rally public support.
The military-dominated approach to governance could not be more unlike the political ideals of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Pakistan's founding father, who imagined an Islamic republic based on democratic principles, institutional integrity, and socio-political equality. Ironically, in his address to the 5th and 6th Ack Ack Regiments of the Pakistan Army—formations previously part of the British Indian Army—on 21st February 1948, Jinnah implored the military to uphold the values of "Islamic democracy, Islamic social justice, and the equality of manhood" within the geographical boundaries of the newly established state.
Unfortunately, Jinnah's vision was quickly derailed by the very institution he aimed to reorient. While his inspirational speech to the Constituent Assembly remains celebrated as a clear expression of his ideological vision for Pakistan, it was largely disregarded by the Pakistan Army, whose inexorable encroachment into the political sphere gradually eroded the constitutional values championed by Jinnah. This drift towards military-controlled governance began disconcertingly within Pakistan's first decade, thereby sabotaging the democratic aspirations that had initially driven the post-colonial nation-building effort.
It was this gradual consolidation of dictatorial tendencies—evident in the persistent erosion of constitutionalism and civilian authority—that culminated in the full-scale military coup of 1958. In this initial constitutional breakdown, President Iskandar Mirza conspired with General Ayub Khan to annul the 1956 Constitution, thereby dismantling the fragile democratic framework. Ironically, Mirza was soon deposed by the very military machinery he had empowered, ushering in a prolonged period of authoritarian military rule. This foundational fracture not only cemented the military's hegemonic position within Pakistan's political system but also triggered a cycle of systemic instability that eventually led to the state's fragmentation with the secession of East Pakistan and the creation of Bangladesh in 1971.
Since that time, the military's hold has only tightened. Over the years, it has steadily extended its influence—not only within the political realm but also deep into the country's economic structures. The regime of General Zia-ul-Haq in the 1980s serves as a defining example. His tenure was characterized not only by the expansion of military authority but also by a forceful Islamization drive that transformed Pakistan's societal landscape and further solidified the military's role as an ideological arbiter.
By 2020, the Pakistan military's economic empire had metamorphosed into a vast, multisector corporate entity with an approximate value of $20 billion. Widely recognized for its pervasive presence across the economic landscape, the military's commercial and industrial reach spans the production of essential goods, such as sewing needles and bottled water, as well as major infrastructural projects, such as roads and property development. A 2016 submission to the Pakistani Senate revealed that the armed forces oversee more than 50 business enterprises, including ventures like Askari Cement, Askari Bank, Fauji Meat, Askari Sugar Mills, shopping centers, and residential housing schemes. These operations are primarily managed through four institutional bodies: the Fauji Foundation, Bahria Foundation, Shaheen Foundation, and the Army Welfare Trust (AWT).
The protection and preservation of this extensive politico-economic apparatus has become a top institutional priority for the military establishment. As a result, the continuation of its hegemonic control over civilian governance is no longer justifiable solely through conventional security arguments, but is now inherently tied to the safeguarding of its substantial material interests and ideological sway—often to the detriment of democratic consolidation and civilian supremacy.
The long-term impact of this militarized political framework has been the continuous undermining of civilian authority, which has continuously struggled to achieve independent legitimacy or institutional permanence within Pakistan's governance system. As a result, any civilian political figure whose rise poses a threat to the entrenched dominance of the military establishment is intermittently sidelined through coercive or extrajudicial measures. A prime example is the judicial execution of Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in 1979—a politically motivated act following his removal in the 1977 military coup—triggered by his growing popular support and increasing resistance to military oversight.
This historical pattern echoes in the ongoing punitive campaign against former Prime Minister Imran Khan, whose current imprisonment is generally viewed as retribution for his bold defiance of the military's entrenched influence within the political sphere. These recurring patterns of repression underscore the military's persistent reluctance to political independence and its structural compulsion to preserve hegemonic supremacy over democratic institutions.
These structural imperatives cumulatively sustain the Pakistan Army's ongoing opposition to any meaningful process of democratic consolidation, thereby consolidating its tyrannical control over the state machinery. Consequently, the system is not designed for democracy; instead, it operates primarily for containment. The persistence of this civil-military imbalance is not incidental; rather, it is systematically upheld through a complex interplay of institutional self-preservation, economic interests, and ideological dominance. Civilian institutions are explicitly allowed to operate only to the extent that they do not challenge the primacy of the military. This is not governance; instead, it amounts to institutionalized tyranny masquerading as democracy. Ultimately, breaking this cycle demands more than temporary outrage or symbolic acts of defiance. Removing the military from the political sphere requires a farmore ambitious approach: a steadfast, organized, and credible political movement—one capable of confronting both the ideological and material underpinnings of military rule. Until such a movement emerges, Pakistan will continue to grapple with a state of managed democracy, with its citizens condemned to a system that neither represents nor empowers them.
- The Pakistani military's hegemony in the sector of policy-and-legislation, politics, and general-news, often undermining the civilian leadership and weakening democratic institutions, has reconfigured Pakistan into a puppet regime.
- In the cement of war-and-conflicts narratives, crime-and-justice issues, and political puppetry, the Pakistani military justifies its lordly position, continually undercutting the democratic aspirations envisioned by Muhammad Ali Jinnah.
- Jinnah's vision of an Islamic republic based on democratic principles, institutional integrity, and socio-political equality has been continuously undermined by the deeply entrenched military establishment, starting from the initial decade of Pakistan's formation.
- The Pakistani military's economic empowerment, worth approximately $20 billion, has reconfigured it into a vast, multisector corporate entity, with operations ranging from sewing needles to major infrastructural projects.
- The protection and preservation of this extensive politico-economic apparatus is a top institutional priority for the military establishment, thereby justifying the continuation of its hegemonic control over civilian governance, often to the detriment of democratic consolidation and civilian supremacy.
