[Today, Pakistan stands at the brink of financial insolvency, plagued by political instability, lawlessness, and social unrest. The system is so deeply entrenched in corruption and inefficiency that only a revolution—led by the people themselves—can bring about meaningful change….] By Syed Atiq ul Hassan
The military is often considered the cornerstone of a nation’s sovereignty and security, entrusted with the protection of its people and borders. It is an institution that commands respect and admiration from the public. In Pakistan, this reverence for the armed forces has historically been no different. The people of Pakistan have held their military in high esteem, placing their faith in its role as the nation’s protector. However, behind this façade of national pride lies an unsettling reality—Pakistan’s military, from its inception, has not only been an instrument of defence but also a tool influenced and manipulated by foreign powers, particularly the British, whose imperial legacy continues to haunt the nation.
When Pakistan was carved out of British India in 1947, the foundations of its military were laid under British tutelage. British (or English from Australia) officers held key positions in Pakistan’s newly formed army, and even the country’s premier intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), was moulded under the same influence. For several years after independence, British generals served as the heads of Pakistan’s armed forces, ensuring that the young nation’s military remained aligned with British interests.
At the time, Pakistan’s civilian leadership and its people, particularly in West Pakistan, were politically inexperienced. There was little understanding of the need to build robust democratic institutions that could safeguard the future of the country. The priority should have been to keep the military as a professional institution, separate from state affairs.
Unfortunately, this vision never materialized. Instead, in 1951, General Ayub Khan was appointed the first native Army Chief, and, in a telling sign of things to come, he also assumed the role of Défense Minister—a position of dual power that allowed the military to meddle directly in civilian administration. This critical moment marked the beginning of the army’s growing influence over Pakistan’s political landscape.
The consequences of this entanglement became glaringly evident over the next few decades. In 1957, amid political instability and unrest in East Pakistan, an emergency was declared, largely orchestrated by General Ayub Khan, who was already positioning himself for greater control. The tipping point came in 1958 when General Ayub Khan deposed President Iskander Mirza in a bloodless coup, ushering in the first martial law in Pakistan’s history. This event set the stage for a series of military takeovers and interventions that would persist for decades, deeply embedding the military into the governance of Pakistan.
Under military rule, democracy in Pakistan was reduced to a façade. The army nurtured a class of politicians who operated under its influence, creating a pseudo-democratic system that was anything, but representative of the people’s will. Elections were manipulated, political opposition was crushed, and the constitution was often disregarded or suspended. This pattern of governance has led to long-term instability, with martial law being imposed whenever the public voiced demands for their rights or when political movements gained momentum.
The military’s disregard for constitutional norms became most evident during the secession of East Pakistan in 1971. The military’s heavy-handed response to political demands in the region culminated in the dismemberment of the country, with East Pakistan emerging as the independent state of Bangladesh. This tragic event was a direct result of the military’s inability to recognize the legitimate aspirations of the people, combined with a lack of political foresight and democratic engagement.
Even today, echoes of 1971 resonate in parts of Pakistan. In Balochistan, separatist sentiments are on the rise, fuelled by decades of neglect, repression, and exploitation. In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, the growing disenchantment with the central government’s policies and military operations has led to increasing frustration among the Pashtun population. If these grievances are not addressed, there is a very real possibility that these regions, too, could one day demand independence, further fragmenting the country.
Similarly, the people of Karachi, Pakistan’s largest metropolis, may appear quiet on the surface, but beneath lies deep-seated frustration and pain, reaching a boiling point. Many followers of Altaf Hussain, once the dominant political voice of the Muhajir community, are now regrouping and quietly organizing. There is growing sentiment among these groups for the reassertion of their demands, with some even advocating for the separation of Karachi from Sindh, viewing it as the only viable path to securing their political and social rights.
The calls for Sindhu_Desh in interior Sindh is also gaining momentum, driven by growing disillusionment with the current PPP government. Many perceive the Sindh Government of PPP as a mere puppet of the military, with Asif Zardari seen by some as a President installed by military influence rather than popular mandate.
The root of these crises lies in the military’s persistent interference in civilian affairs and its failure to grasp the ideological foundations of Pakistan as envisioned by Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Jinnah’s vision for Pakistan was of a democratic, inclusive state, where civil institutions would hold power, and the military would remain a professional institution confined to defending the country. Unfortunately, this vision was abandoned as the military tightened its grip on power.
Today, Pakistan stands at the brink of financial insolvency, plagued by political instability, lawlessness, and social unrest. The system is so deeply entrenched in corruption and inefficiency that only a revolution—led by the people themselves—can bring about meaningful change. The current political leadership is divided and lacks the capacity to unite the nation. However, there remains one figure who holds the potential to rally the masses and restore a semblance of unity: Imran Khan.
Imran Khan, once a cricketing hero, has become a political leader with widespread support across Pakistan’s provinces. His popularity transcends ethnic and regional divides, making him a rare unifying force in a fractured country. Yet, the military establishment, driven by its own interests and unwilling to relinquish control, continues to view him as a threat. By imprisoning Khan and attempting to suppress his movement, the military is only deepening the divisions within the country. Should this persecution continue, it may lead to even greater unrest and possibly the further disintegration of the country. The military must recognize that the key to Pakistan’s survival lies in restoring true democracy, where the rule of law prevails, and the people’s voices are heard. If the military continues its current path, the consequences for Pakistan will be dire. The only way forward is for the military to retreat from politics and allow civilian institutions to take the lead. Only then can Pakistan hope to emerge from its current crisis and build a future based on the democratic principles envisioned by its founders.