Title: Civil Military Relationship: Pakistan and India in Comparison
Abstract: IntroductionThe threat of military intervention in the political life of a country has been a recurring feature in history. From ancient Greece to the end of the twentieth century, military coup or threat of intervention has been regular phenomenon against a constituted government. And military was deemed as a legitimate pressure group, capable of playing a positive role in the socio-political transformation of the newly created peripheral states (Janowitz, 1964).In developing countries particularly those with colonial history, military grew the knack of intervention in internal politics being the savior of the country. Finer (1988.p.2) recollected that out of 28 countries created between 1917 and 1955, thirteen countries suffered military coups and the pattern military intervention became the norm in the developing countries. Moreover, according to Koonings and Kruijt (2002, p.10) values derived from prevailing religious or ideological paradigms (Christianity, Islam, nationalism, socialism) are invoked to lend 'higher support' to the intervention.After World War II, decolonization and national independence movements witnessed an increase in the role of the military in the Developing World. More specifically, the military was generally the strongest institution in a new state due to the former colonial powers' monetary and training assistance. According to Koonings and Kruijt (2002), amidst the conduct of national affairs, military often considers intervention in situation of crisis: failure of governance or legitimacy of the political regime, severe socio-economic problems, internal conflicts or violent upheavals.Civil-military relations can be understood more broadly as the connection pattern between the Armed Forces of a state as an institution, the government, and other sectors of society which has relevance. Immediately after partition, both India and Pakistan faced the security dilemma and monumental tasks of internal state building and shared organizational culture from the same colonial army. Both emerged as poor multiethnic societies in the wake of a shared experience, but Civil-Military relations of the two countries took altogether different paths within a single decade after the 1947 partition.Since Independence, Pakistan's military held control of power for over 30 years (58 to 71, 1977 to 1988 and 1999 to 2008) even while not in power it largely dominated the various strategic decision making bodies. Pakistan's military intervention in domestic politics can be attributed to factors like the fragility of political base and constant infighting for power, external and internal threats spectrum and military's obsession for power. On the contrary, Indian Army remained subservient to strong civilian control. Robust Indian institutional framework had always resisted the Army's intrusion in Politics by keeping a firm bureaucratic and political oversight over military affairs. It largely remained stable with intermittent period of bitterness, rancor and even antipathy particularly in the episodes of 1962 India China war, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi regimes. Moreover, despite multiple protracted insurgencies, India civilian supremacy has not faltered. Therefore, need arises for systematic analysis of both the casesto determine the various causes and contributing factors by drawing comparisons as well as ascertaining the theoretical foundation of such institutional behavior pattern.Theoretical PerspectiveIn elaborating Civil Military relations, it is very important how military mindset perceives the human nature and power phenomena. The military mindset underscores that man is weak, evil, and irrational and human nature has inherent greed and power hungry attitude. Donnelly (2000) argues that for realists, power is the variable which is understood in the realm of military prowess, signifying the power can only be preserved and enhanced through military means. Military culture emboldens the perceptions of power maximization. …
Publication Year: 2016
Publication Date: 2016-01-01
Language: en
Type: article
Access and Citation
Cited By Count: 2
AI Researcher Chatbot
Get quick answers to your questions about the article from our AI researcher chatbot