Pakistan Army – An Army That Owns A Country

An army that owns a country

Every country has an army to defend itself against its foes, but Pakistan has an army that owns Pakistan and rules its people under the garb of democracy. Here we would like to bring to our reader’s notice how the army of our unstable neighbor called Pakistan runs its financial affairs and builds its assets.

To understand the current situation, it is critical to understand Pakistan’s historical backdrop. Since its founding in 1947, the country has been subjected to several military coups. The military has been involved in politics in both direct and indirect ways, through coups and martial law.

Pakistan has been ruled by dictators for the majority of its history since its independence. One may tell by looking at how long an elected administration or elected head of state has been in power. No elected Prime Minister has served his full five-year tenure. And only twice in the country’s history, has an elected government served a 5-year term.

Pakistan’s unique geopolitical situation, particularly about India and the unstable in Afghanistan, exacerbates its national security issues. The military frequently claims that political insecurity hampers effective decision-making, which could jeopardize national security.

As a result, in times of political crisis, the military acts as a stabilizing factor, intervening to restore order and protect security, albeit at the expense of democratic procedures.

ISI – The Dreaded Intelligence Wing of Pak Army 

The army ensures that no party receives a clear mandate to create a majority government through its intelligence organization, ISI.

In other words, the army ensures that it should be in a position to destabilize the elected government if it believes it is not fulfilling its goal. It has ousted many elected leaders, and imprisoned and even executed one populist leader.

The ISI has penetrated the judicial, political, and bureaucratic system so deeply that any and every move by members of these organizations is reported and scrutinized by the ISI.

The retired army officers have admitted on numerous occasions to how the ISI stage manages the electoral process and deputation of bureaucrats and judges. 

The Lt. General Rank officer heads the ISI as Director General and he reports directly to the Army Chief. The ISI carries out kidnappings, and torture of political opponents, army critics, and media reporters. It’s a state within a state and in a way, it’s an autonomous body within the Pakistan Army. 

There is a long list of missing personnel belonging to the provinces of Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. It is alleged that these men were kidnapped by the ISI. They are either murdered or unjustly detained by the ISI.

The Human Rights group continues to highlight the issue of disappearing individuals at every international forum, but the administrations in Pakistan have done nothing and just paid lip service.

What Does the Pak Army Stand to Gain From Political Upheaval?

The question is, what function does the political turmoil serve for the Pakistan Army? The explanation is that Political insecurity is frequently used by the military to protect its economic interests and ensure that its business operations remain unaffected and profitable regardless of the prevailing government. The Pakistani military is one of several armed forces throughout the world that are involved in business ventures.

The military’s intervention in politics is motivated primarily by the maintenance of its institutional interests. Pakistan’s armed forces are not only a security apparatus but also an important component of the country’s economy. The military has built a massive economic empire with numerous endeavors ranging from real estate to corporate enterprises.

The Pakistan Army should keep the political instability pot boiling to avoid accountability. The army does not want a stable and strong government to come to power and later questions how the army conducts its financial affairs.

Also, the Pakistan Army’s political involvement gives strategic power in setting foreign policy. Ties with the United States and China, in particular, are critical. The military can influence diplomatic and military assistance by presenting itself as a crucial actor in the region, assuring a flow of resources that bolsters its capabilities.

Furthermore, a politically unstable Pakistan empowers the military to exercise influence over critical issues, notably those relating to defense and security, and shape the country’s overseas relationships to its liking.

Interestingly, public support for military interventions is common, especially during periods of civilian government corruption or incompetence. As a valued institution in Pakistan, the military utilizes public opinion to justify its engagement, casting it as a measure to protect the nation’s interests against corrupt or inept civilian leadership. This public impression gives the military credibility, allowing them to pursue their political involvement without encountering widespread opposition.

Pak Army’s Business Interests

The Pakistan Army’s financial empire is valued at 1200 billion rupees, with military-controlled welfare foundations involved in everything from banking, insurance, leasing, and real estate to private security, education, airlines, cargo services, knitwear, and significant agri-based sectors.

Because they employ state assets, these enterprises incur additional costs for the government. Several commercial operations of the four welfare foundations, the Fauji Foundation, Army Welfare Trust (AWT), Bahria Foundation, and Shaheen Foundation, have been audited by Pakistan’s auditor-general, and use state money without reimbursing the government.

The military’s highest command, however, maintains that these are entirely private sector businesses and are not subject to government accountability procedures and, as a result, have expanded as part of the military’s hidden economy.

The military economy is divided into three different yet interrelated tiers. The most apparent element is welfare foundations. These four foundations are military subsidiaries, and the connection is obvious. All foundations, in general, use the parent services’ emblems, and managerial responsibility is delegated to the relevant service headquarters.

The Fauji Foundation, on the other hand, is a tri-service body run by the Ministry of Defense, with a mechanism of reinvesting revenues in the welfare budgets of the three services. These financial stakes account for around 9 to 10% of private sector assets.

Because of the armed forces’ direct or indirect involvement in the economy, as well as their parallel control of power politics, they have access to privileged information, allowing two welfare organizations, the AWT and the Fauji Foundation, to become two of the country’s greatest corporate conglomerates.

These business groups have benefited from tax breaks as well as access to critical economic data. The Fauji Foundation, for example, was tax-exempt until the 1960s, and the AWT was tax-exempt until 1993 when it was taxed during Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s first term. Even back then, the trust paid less in taxes than the Shaheen and Bahria Foundations. That’s the end of the army’s political clout.

The military as a serious economic actor competing with other domestic economic players is a phenomenon that is most widespread in the developing world, particularly in countries suffering from political underdevelopment.

The industrialized world’s armed forces, such as those in the United States, France, and the United Kingdom, play an important economic role as well. They typically rely on civilian players to exploit resources in other nations rather than competing within.

As such, the Chinese PLA, Thai, Pakistani, and Burmese armed forces, as well as the Iranian Hezbollah militia, rely directly on their political prominence to exploit resources at home. Militaries in weak regimes, in particular, are lured to engage in commercial operations for a variety of reasons ranging from soldier welfare to technological advancement.

Military forces have historically been involved in commercial ventures for a variety of reasons. Until it was defeated during World War II, the German military, for example, was heavily involved in business endeavors. However, direct involvement in economic endeavors in the post-Cold War era is primarily observed in emerging countries.

It’s also common in countries where militaries were directly involved in nation-building or served as people’s armies, such as China, Indonesia, and several Latin and South American countries. Military-in-business is not a popular concept among operational/professional militaries. Of course, there are certain exceptions, such as Pakistan and Turkey.

Finally, these are not the types of missions that should be undertaken by a professional force. After all, it was the Chinese’s concern for increasing or sustaining military professionalism that compelled the armed forces to withdraw. Other restrictions were also imposed.

Conclusion

The benefits of political turbulence for the Pakistan Army are multifaceted, including the maintenance of institutional interests, national security concerns, strategic leverage in foreign policy, and public support. However, this interference comes at the expense of democratic values, civilian government, and the nation’s general stability.

To ensure Pakistan’s future stability and prosperity, a balance must be struck between a powerful, professional military and an effective, transparent democratic system in which civilian institutions can operate independently of one another, making sure the country’s advancement on both political and socioeconomic fronts.

Click here for more on the Pak Army’s power

Click here for more on Pak Army’s Commercial Activities