The Expanding Grip of Pakistan’s Military on Its Economy: Questions That Demand Answers
Examining the Intersection of Power, Economy, and Democracy in Pakistan
The recent developments in Pakistan’s economic and political landscape highlight a troubling trend: the increasing entanglement of the country’s military in civilian economic affairs. While proponents argue that this involvement is a necessary intervention to stabilize the economy, critics point to a growing imbalance in power dynamics, raising questions about transparency, accountability, and the long-term implications for democracy and economic health.
Pakistan’s military has historically played a dominant role in the nation’s politics, but recent years have seen it extend its influence deep into the economic sphere. From leading the Special Investment Facilitation Council (SIFC) to spearheading major projects such as the controversial Rs200 billion canal initiative, the military’s footprint is unmistakable. These projects, ostensibly aimed at boosting investment and ensuring economic stability, are often led by serving or retired officers. For instance, the SIFC, co-led by Army Chief General Asim Munir, has taken charge of initiatives ranging from tourism development in the north to exploiting mineral resources along the Afghan border.
Supporters of this model argue that the military’s involvement cuts through bureaucratic red tape and instills confidence in foreign investors. However, this justification warrants closer scrutiny. Are these claims of efficiency and stability merely a cover for consolidating the military’s economic power? Moreover, what safeguards exist to ensure that the benefits of such projects are equitably distributed among Pakistan’s 240 million citizens?
The canal project in Sindh exemplifies the challenges of the military’s economic agenda. Protesters in the province have decried the initiative as a threat to local livelihoods, with fears of water diversion creating widespread unrest. Sindh’s ruling Pakistan People’s Party faces a precarious choice: resist the military-backed project or risk alienating its voter base and empowering more extreme factions.
This unrest is not confined to Sindh. Across Pakistan, citizens are growing increasingly disillusioned with the government’s failure to address their economic woes. Inflation, which peaked at nearly 40% in mid-2023, remains a pressing concern, despite recent signs of stabilization. The government’s reliance on the military to implement contentious reforms, such as tax hikes and subsidy removals, has only exacerbated public dissatisfaction. What does this growing reliance on the military mean for Pakistan’s democratic institutions and civilian governance?
The military’s heavy-handed approach has also unsettled investors. Reports of renegotiations over energy contracts, including threats to terminate agreements, have raised concerns about the rule of law and the predictability of doing business in Pakistan. A letter from the German embassy, questioning the “unusual manner” of such negotiations, underscores the potential long-term damage to Pakistan’s investment climate.
As Pakistan grapples with a slow-growing economy and a burgeoning workforce, the military’s economic interventions have yet to yield the promised results. The IMF bailout and fiscal measures, such as increased taxes and reduced subsidies, have stabilized the immediate crisis, but structural issues remain unaddressed. Will the military’s involvement in economic decision-making perpetuate a cycle of short-term fixes at the expense of sustainable growth?
Beyond the economic realm, the military’s tightening grip has profound implications for civil liberties and political freedoms. Thousands of members of Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf party have faced military trials, a practice widely criticized as unconstitutional. Simultaneously, the government has intensified its control over social media, curbing dissent and limiting public discourse. How does this erosion of democratic norms reconcile with the government’s claims of pursuing economic and political stability?
The military’s economic and political dominance is symptomatic of deeper structural issues. For decades, Pakistan’s ruling elites have prioritized short-term survival over long-term reform. The current government’s close alignment with the military reflects a fragile coalition intent on maintaining power rather than addressing systemic challenges. As political analyst Azeema Cheema notes, this dynamic risks exacerbating inequality, with elites consolidating resources while ordinary citizens bear the brunt of economic hardship.
What mechanisms are in place to ensure transparency and accountability in military-led economic projects?
How can Pakistan balance the need for political stability with the preservation of democratic values?
What steps can be taken to rebuild investor confidence and establish a predictable business environment?
Is the military’s increasing involvement in economic affairs a sustainable solution or a recipe for long-term instability?
Pakistan’s challenges are undoubtedly complex, but the military’s expanding role in the economy raises more questions than it answers. While proponents may highlight short-term gains, the long-term costs to democracy, civil liberties, and economic equity cannot be ignored. As Pakistan navigates this critical juncture, it is imperative for journalists, policymakers, and citizens alike to demand accountability and advocate for a governance model that prioritizes the collective well-being of all Pakistanis.
Reference: