By Agha Iqrar Haroon
Islamabad, Pakistan: Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Syed Asim Munir while addressing the Parliamentary Committee on National Security on Tuesday rightfully asked the parliamentarians and the civil governments how long the gaps in governance would be filled by the blood of Pakistan’s armed forces? This is the same question this writer has been raising for a long but has yet to receive an appropriate answer.
The failure of governance is the foremost crisis Pakistan is facing. In the financial year 2024-25, total government spending in Pakistan was estimated to be Rs. 26,315 billion, and total government revenue is estimated to be Rs. 17,815 billion, leaving a budget deficit of Rs. 8,500 billion. A report published in October 2023 claims that Pakistan is spending over 8 trillion (PKR) on civil servants, encompassing 1.92 million employees, pension payments, and numerous perks and privileges. The study, titled ‘Lifetime Cost of Public Servants,’ was conducted by the Pakistan Institute of Development Economics (Pide), and that revealed the cost of paying employees amounts to about PKR 3 trillion, while pensions cost approximately PKR 1.5 trillion. Additionally, project workers, personnel in government entities, and other organizations contribute approximately PKR 2.5 trillion to the total cost while the military’s wages and salaries account for roughly PKR 1 trillion.
“Over 90 percent of terrorism incidents took place in civilian areas during the last three years but every time the cost of collapsed civil authority and administration was paid by the men in uniform”
The governance is the responsibility of civilian governments that are run through civil bureaucracy and judiciary but in Pakistan, both prefer to ask the public to solve their problems without looking at the governing tools. If you do not have clean drinking water, you should buy bottled water. If you have a law and order situation or a high crime rate in your neighborhood, you should get the service of private security guards. If your children want better qualifications, you should send them to expensive private schools. If you want better health care, you should opt for private hospitals and clinics. If you have some legal contradiction with someone, you should go for mutual arbitrations (Punchait). This is the public side of the story. If you have a crisis such as a flood, an earthquake, an attack of locusts on crops, the hijacking of a bus or train, or any other sensitive situation such as security management in civilian areas, then you get the answer “We have Pakistan Army to handle the situation”. Over 90 percent of terrorism incidents took place in civilian areas during the last three years but every time the cost of collapsed civil authority and administration, was paid by the men in uniform.
COAS General Syed Asim Munir fairly raised the issue in the Security Committee that Pakistan needs to strengthen its governance and solidify itself as a hard state. I am sure that even 10 percent of politicians sitting over there could know what a hard state means. They only know that Pakistan is run through Statutory Regulatory Orders (SROs) where every law and rule is fluid and can be changed by the will of the bureaucrats and the politicians. The basic principle that governs the state is persistence which is lacking in Pakistan and any government such as the PTI government can revert the security policy by the will of the prime minister and can invite terrorists back to the country. This is the brutal reality of Pakistan which has already paid enough for being a “soft state” where the writ of the state is a waxed-nose and terrorist group, social groups, politicians, and even illegal foreigners such as Afghans living in Pakistan are twisting this waxed-nose.
Since the concept of the modern state arose from the Greeks, it has been testified by history that only hard states could survive. One should remember that the great philosopher Socrates drank the cup of poison to surrender himself to the State’s decision. However, he had an opportunity to skip the death as his students were ready to pay the penalty and buy his release. Socrates said that since his state had found him guilty of impiety against the gods of Athens and corrupting the youth by teaching them to think for themselves, now he must obey the State and accept the death sentence. Socrates believed that the “State must be respected and followed”. Everybody knew his state’s decision was inappropriate but the great philosopher showed respect for the ruling of the state with his life.
In political philosophy the concept of “hard state” refers to a protocol or system where the state is maintained persistently (decisions, announcements, rules, etc), exercises significant power, often through the use of coercion and control, to maintain its authority and enforce its policies. In simple words, the hard state does not compromise on its writ and announcement once decisions have already been taken.
The hard state exerts strong influence, often through military might, economic dominance, or a combination of both. It is a state that can impose its will (laws) on citizens, has a centralized government with a high degree of control over its territory, a well-functioning legal system, military capabilities to project power and deter potential threats, and economic power that allows to exert influence through trade, investment, and financial leverage. While the concept of “soft state’ refers to a state that relies more on persuasion, legitimacy, and cooperation to achieve its goals, with a weak or fragmented government and limited capacity to enforce its policies, relies more on informal institutions and networks to maintain order and stability. Soft states focus on public support to maintain their authority instead of the rule of law. The concept of hard and soft states has been relevant to political philosophy for ages as it defines the nature of power, legitimacy, and the role of the state in society. In simple words, the hard state does not run through political agendas and does not compromise the rule of law to please social/political groups rather it straightforwardly follows the rule of persistence.
This debate about what kind of state Pakistan should be has never been encouraged but this is the first time this critical issue has been raised not less than by the chief of Pakistan’s military. This debate does not relate only to the security of the country but rather to the very existence of the country. A soft state prefers to share its powers with the public to let the public solve their issues while a hard state takes responsibility for the governance so it does not suit bureaucracy and the politicians who are habitual of shunning their responsibilities to the public or the Army. Will both (bureaucracy and the politicians) take the message of COAS Gen Asim Munir seriously? The time will answer this question.
Disclaimer:
The views and opinions expressed in this article/Opinion/Comment are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the DND Thought Center and Dispatch News Desk (DND). Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of the DND Thought Center and Dispatch News Desk News.
