Beyond Borders: Rethinking Pakistan’s National Security in a Global Context

The Puzzle of Pakistan’s National Security: Perspectives, Debates and Contestations

Concepts deemed ‘contested’ are often susceptible to diverse interpretations due to the absence of a universally accepted definition (Heywood, 2015). Within the field of IR, national security stands as one such concept. While traditionally focusing on military strength and territorial protection, Buzan et al. (1998) expanded the understanding by introducing securitisation and emphasising the interconnectedness of national security with economic, environmental and human dimensions. Realists prioritise military power, liberals emphasise human rights and international cooperation, and constructivists underscore the socially constructed nature of security. As implicitly observed in the reviewed books, integrating these perspectives bring forth a comprehensive analysis of Pakistan’s security challenges. The contestability of national security fosters complexity and intellectual inquiry, reflecting its fluid and subjective nature. Pakistan’s security landscape, influenced by historical legacies and regional and global power dynamics, necessitates holistic and context-specific analyses. The studies unravel the complexities by embracing the contestability intrinsic to security, going beyond oversimplified explanations. Moreover, Pakistan’s security calculus is intricately linked to its history and geopolitical standing. The relationship with India evokes power dynamics and hegemonic discourses, constructing binary oppositions that shape strategic considerations. However, the books challenge and deconstruct these binaries, revealing the fluid and contingent nature of identity and security discourses. The interplay of power, representation and knowledge production perpetuates a dichotomy that amplifies perceived threats and insecurities. By critically engaging with this notion, the studies uncover interconnections, shared histories and the influence of external actors, adding layers of complexity to the security discourse.

Having said this, Shahid Hussain Bukhari’s Pakistan’s Security, and the India–US Strategic Partnership: Nuclear Politics and Security Competition, Arshad Ali’s Pakistan’s National Security Approach and Post-Cold War Security: Uneasy Co-existence and M. R. Izarali and D. Ahlawat’s edited volume Terrorism, Security and Development in South Asia: National, Regional and Global Implications are significant contributions to the scholarship on Pakistan’s security. Although there is some overlap in the themes covered, each book approaches the subject from a distinct angle and offers fresh perspectives. The authors engage in the cartography of security, terrorism and development discourses. They use non-Western vantage points and provide a profound examination of the intricate predicaments that South Asia as a region faces, with a specific emphasis on Pakistan. Bukhari’s book is an in-depth look at how the strategic alliance between India and the United States has affected Pakistan’s security. He makes a convincing argument for Pakistan to adopt a more proactive and diversified approach to national security (pp. 206–207). Meanwhile, Ali examines the Pakistan’s national security approach in the post-Cold War era. He explores what he calls an ‘uneasy co-existence’ between Pakistan’s strategic imperatives and global security concerns. This exploration leads him to contend that Pakistan has become more insecure in the post-Cold War era despite being a national security state (p. 12). Besides, he examines how Pakistan has navigated the changing security landscape since the end of the Cold War and delivers a sobering assessment of its challenges in the contemporary era. The edited volume by Izarali and Ahlawat is a brilliant take on the antecedents and trajectories of terrorism, security and development in South Asia. The volume offers various country-specific perspectives on South Asia’s security challenges, including regional and global implications. It highlights the ways in which terrorism and security threats intersect with developmental challenges and how they pose a threat to regional and global stability (2021, pp. 23–173).

These studies demonstrate sharp discernment of South Asia’s complex security challenges. Bukhari and Ali base their writing on realism. They underscore the balance of power as the critical driver of Pakistan’s approach to national security. They also view Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal as a hedge against India and contend that this strategy has stoked tensions between the two nations and contributed to the arms race (Ali, 2021, p. 172; Bukhari, 2021, p. 96). Further, they argue that the arms build-up has taken resources away from social and economic development. This realist perspective presents a bleak outlook for Pakistan’s national security and offers a sobering assessment of its challenges. In contrast, Izarali and Ahlawat’s liberal perspective underscores the significance of addressing socio-economic factors in the pursuit of security (2021, p. 8). Being based in Pakistan and having conducted extensive fieldwork for their doctoral dissertations, which they later developed into these books, they possess a unique positionality that enables them to provide a nuanced and detailed analysis of Pakistan’s national security. As insiders to Pakistani society, the authors deeply understand its culture, history and politics. In doing so, they add depth to their research by drawing on local knowledge and sources. Their studies also challenge the dominant Western-centric discourse on terrorism and security.

Bukhari examines security challenges in Pakistan through the lens of local sources, narratives and regional scholarship. That way, the author challenges the dominant Western narratives that have traditionally shaped the global conversation on security. In their studies, the authors go beyond mere critique and actively contextualise theories and models developed in the Western academic tradition within the South Asian context. They shed light on the weaknesses of Western-centric approaches to understanding security issues in non-Western contexts and emphasise, though implicitly, the need for producing more inclusive and decolonised knowledge. Ali critically examines the historical experiences that influence the national security approach of Pakistan. By highlighting the contested nature of security and its subjective interpretation, the author challenges the often myopic and Eurocentric approach to analysing security issues. The books also contribute to a broader discourse that seeks to disrupt the power dynamics inherent in the traditional global conversation on security. They demonstrate how South Asian security challenges extend beyond conventional paradigms, encompassing issues such as poverty, terrorism and political instability. Moreover, they explore how shifting geopolitical dynamics and the emergence of non-state actors have further complicated the security landscape in the region. By situating their analysis within the South Asian context, the authors not only reveal the limitations of Western-centric theories but also highlight the interconnections between various dimensions of security. For instance, Ahlawat and Izarali explore the intricate linkages between national security, economic development and environmental sustainability. By examining how these dimensions intersect and influence each other, the author provides a nuanced understanding of security challenges that goes beyond reductionist explanations. Although the books under review bear disparate titles, they collectively contribute to an intricate narrative regarding Pakistan’s national security. Each work elucidates the following aspects of the enigmatic nature of Pakistan’s security milieu, a sentiment well encapsulated by ‘uneasy co-existence’.

Caught in the Trap: Pakistan’s Praetorian Dilemma and National Security

The influence of the military in Pakistan’s political and security spheres is a long-standing issue that goes back to its independence in 1947. This phenomenon, known as the praetorian trap, is a recurring pattern in South Asia, highlighting the region’s complex dynamics of civil–military relations. While Pakistan is a notable case study, other South Asian countries like Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka have also grappled with the struggle for civilian supremacy over the military. However, the manifestation and impact of military influence differ across time and space, resulting in variations in the level of democratic consolidation achieved. In Pakistan, the historical trajectory has witnessed the dominant role of the military establishment in shaping the country’s political landscape and governance structures. This entrenched dominance impedes democratic consolidation and associated norms and practices, mainly influenced by the protracted conflict with India and the ongoing war on terror. Scholars such as Siddiqa (2007), Jalal (1990) and Fair (2014) argue that it leads to the erosion of democratic institutions and perpetuates authoritarian rule.

The books under review enrich the already extensive literature on Pakistan’s civil–military nexus, offering valuable insights into the power dynamics and ideological foundations that shape this trap. They also enlighten the readers on the ongoing tussle for influence between military and civilian institutions, deeply embedded within Pakistan’s historical narrative. These texts shed light on the complex criss-cross of politics, hegemony and defiance when analysed through the Saidian lens. Pakistan’s past is shadowed by the military’s authoritative presence, often relegating civilian entities to a subsidiary role. This dominance significantly dictates policy making, underscoring the essence of the nation’s civil–military interface. Nevertheless, these studies overlook a thorough exploration of the ideological underpinnings at the heart of this narrative. Notably, the friction between security concerns and democratic ideals takes centre stage. Protracted disputes with India and an unending war on terror have brought national security to the forefront at the expense of democratic practices. This transition is an obstacle to what Diamond (1999) often calls democratic consolidation. Moreover, a deep dive into historical experiences demands an unravelling of the ideological fabric-another aspect these studies fall short of addressing. Pakistan’s split from India, remnants of colonial rule and regional geopolitical intricacies shape the country’s identity and security perceptions. These historical constructs form the ideological scaffold for the civil–military dialogue, guiding views on external threats and perpetuating the military’s position as the protector of national interests. Nationalism and patriotism also take centre stage in shaping this dialogue. The military skilfully projects itself as the defender of national integrity and security, using affect ¹ (Rashid, 2020) management to elicit public support. This strategic manoeuvre strengthens the military’s prominence in the civil–military interface. In addition, economic factors and the convoluted military–industrial complex cement this predicament (Ali, 2021, p. 6). Military involvement in the economy, such as in extensive economic enterprises, creates an entrenched interest in maintaining institutional dominance (Jalal, 1990). This blend of economic drivers and power dynamics informs resource distribution, determines budget priorities and amplifies the military’s stake in governance. It thus fortifies its position in the civil–military interface (Siddiqa, 2007).

Ali’s analysis unravels the intricate role of discursive practices in shaping Pakistan’s security situation. His study underscores the intersection of power, economics and nuclear proliferation, deeply embedded in discourses constructed by the military–industrial complex. The discourse surrounding Pakistan’s nuclear program is a prime example. While it is often framed as a necessary deterrent against existential threats, a critical deconstruction suggests a tool for consolidating the military’s political and economic power. In this light, the narrative of national security transforms from a passive reflection of objective reality into an active instrument for shaping reality according to the establishment’s interests. These discursive practices exert a broader influence, crafting narratives that shape the sociopolitical climate and drive public opinion and policy decisions. The result is a self-perpetuating cycle of discourse and power dynamics that prompts us to question the real beneficiaries of these security narratives and their effect on Pakistan’s security reality. Ali’s work delves into these practices within Pakistan’s military–industrial complex, exploring their role in legitimising the fusion of military and economic interests. They manifest in framing defence expenditure as indispensable, using strategic terminology to gain public support for military spending and normalising the allocation of significant resources to the military. In essence, Ali’s analysis urges us to reconsider how discourse constructs social reality, power dynamics and ideological structures and how this, in turn, impacts the overall functioning and dominance of the military–industrial complex. His examination of Pakistan’s national security approach in the post-Cold War era also unearths the tensions between strategic imperatives and the imperatives of social and economic development. By unpacking the inherent contradictions and the legacy of coloniality within the military establishment, he reveals the systemic obstacles that hinder democratic consolidation and perpetuates Pakistan’s dependence on military-centric governance. Bukhari’s exploration of Pakistan’s security narrative in the context of the India–US strategic partnership also exposes the intricate web of power relations and the mechanisms through which dominant discourses marginalise democratic institutions. It lays bare the unquestioned authority of the military, overshadowing alternative voices and impeding the emergence of a more inclusive political landscape.

Despite offering valuable insights into Pakistan’s civil–military relations, the reviewed books fall short in addressing significant socio-economic transformations. These changes have birthed alternative social power structures, challenging military hegemony and hybrid subjectivities that fuse religious beliefs with liberal lifestyles. The books overlook these dynamics, which disrupt traditional power hierarchies and contest military dominance. Diverse social groups, including civil society organisations and marginalised communities, have emerged as significant actors demanding political influence, reshaping the civil–military relationship landscape. Moreover, the books fail to account for the rise of hybrid subjectivities that blend religious convictions and liberal ideals. This blend introduces complexity into civil–military relations, challenging conventional binary oppositions in the field. The neglect of these transformative elements overlooks crucial aspects of Pakistan’s national security landscape. Recognising these changes is essential to understanding the intricate civil–military relations and broader sociopolitical context, ultimately necessary for devising effective, inclusive national security strategies.

Pakistan’s in(Security) Conundrum and the Paradox of Uneasy Coexistence

The paradox of ‘uneasy co-existence’ emerges as an important leitmotif that reverberates across the studies under review. It emerges as a compelling thread that weaves through the fabric of Pakistan’s security challenges. This paradox encapsulates the intricate interplay of divergent forces, engendering a state of delicate equilibrium and palpable tension within Pakistan’s security landscape. At its core, it embodies the inherent contradictions that arise from Pakistan’s concerted efforts to fortify its security apparatus. Paradoxically, the same strategies employed to safeguard the nation’s well-being often contribute to heightened vulnerability and an enduring sense of insecurity. Despite Pakistan’s possession of nuclear weapons, it remains ensnared in a web of internal and external threats, perpetuating an unyielding conundrum and an ever-evolving security predicament. It also captures the enigmatic dialectic between Pakistan’s competing security imperatives. The pursuit of specific security measures, driven by a gamut of factors, can inadvertently erode the overall fabric of security and stability. For example, the strategic employment of Islamist militants as instruments of foreign policy has engendered a disconcerting backlash, with these groups turning their sights inward, targeting the very foundations of the state. Thus, an intricate ‘jihad paradox’, as described by Kapur and Ganguly (2012), unfolds whereby the pursuit of enhanced security unwittingly fosters its undoing.

Through a critical examination of Pakistan’s nuclear deterrence and its intersection with the India–US strategic partnership, Bukhari sheds light on the external forces that influence Pakistan’s security calculus. He also elucidates that the paradox emerges from the interplay of internal and external factors, where the very strategies adopted to enhance security have inadvertently undermined it. Bukhari unveils the intricate dance between global politics and regional security by navigating the intricacies of alliances and power dynamics. Ali also supports this contention in that this paradox stems from the state’s strategic imperatives, whereby certain militant groups are supported or tolerated when they align with Pakistan’s interests, while others that pose a direct threat to the state are condemned. This strategic tightrope walk has perpetuated an intricate interplay between the government, military and intelligence agencies, wherein extensive support has historically been extended to anti-India terrorist groups like Lashker-e-Toiba and others operating from Pakistan, aimed at targeting Indian military installations in Jammu and Kashmir. By excavating the layers of historical contradictions and complex identities, Ali urges us to confront the haunting ghosts of the past that continue to haunt Pakistan’s path towards harmonious coexistence. He also contends that Pakistan’s military establishment has historically given precedence to its interests over those of the state. As a result, it has created what Siddiqa (2007) calls a ‘security state’ whereby the military dominates decision-making and perpetuates a culture of secrecy and censorship. Lastly, he asserts that Pakistan’s military has a vested interest in perpetuating a sense of insecurity and vulnerability to justify its outsized role in politics and society.

On the contrary, Izarali and Ahlawat’s work opens a window into the intricate interplay between terrorism, security and development (2021, pp. 157–174). They invite us to examine the web of internal challenges perpetuating the uneasy coexistence paradox by delving into the socio-economic factors that fuel extremism and undermine stability. Their critical lens forces us to question the prevailing narratives and address the deep-rooted socio-economic disparities that fuel insecurity. In weaving these voices together, they add to a rich tapestry of perspectives that illuminate the complexities of Pakistan’s security landscape. Moreover, non-state actors add another layer to Pakistan’s paradoxical dynamics. These actors, operating outside traditional state control, possess significant influence and resources, challenging the state’s authority and legitimacy. They operate with varying agendas, ranging from religious fundamentalism to separatist movements, and have the potential to disrupt the established order. Their existence highlights the intricate interplay between state and non-state actors, as well as the blurred boundaries that contribute to Pakistan’s security conundrum. The paradox of uneasy coexistence in Pakistan’s security landscape reveals a complex tapestry of intertwined dynamics. Pakistan’s endeavours to fortify its security apparatus are met with intricate contradictions, engendering a delicate balance between preservation and vulnerability.

Pakistan’s National Security and the India–US Strategic Partnership

According to Bukhari, the burgeoning partnership between India and the United States characterised as a convergence of interests and strategic goals, carries significant implications for Pakistan’s security calculus and the broader regional dynamics. At the core of this analysis lies the central question of power dynamics. Bukhari argues that the India–US strategic alliance is driven by pragmatic considerations of realpolitik and shared strategic objectives. Consequently, this evolving partnership can potentially disrupt the delicate balance of power in the region (Bukhari, 2021, p. 171). The resulting power asymmetry challenges established notions of balance of power and raise concerns about the repercussions for Pakistan’s security posture.

Nevertheless, beyond raw power dynamics, the ideological motivations underpinning this partnership demand closer scrutiny, which Bukhari avoids probably because of his theoretical leanings towards realism. The alignment between India and the United States, seemingly rooted in shared democratic values and counter-terrorism objectives, carries broader ideological implications. It intertwines geopolitical ambitions and the exercise of influence in the region. Within this context, we must scrutinise the specific areas of cooperation between India and the United States that directly affect Pakistan’s security. The nuclear dimension assumes particular significance, as the India–US nuclear deal engenders a transformation in India’s nuclear capabilities (Bukhari, 2021, pp. 91–113). The augmentation of India’s nuclear stockpile through this agreement raises pertinent questions about deterrence dynamics, strategic stability and the delicate balance of power in South Asia. Moreover, the defence collaborations between India and the United States, encompassing joint military exercises, arms sales and technology transfers, further complicate the security landscape. As India embarks on a trajectory of military modernisation, bolstered by access to advanced weaponry and cutting-edge technology, Pakistan is compelled to recalibrate its defence strategies in response. The resulting arms race dynamics, combined with the complex historical context of rivalry and territorial disputes, introduce heightened levels of uncertainty and potential destabilisation in the region. However, as we navigate this complex terrain, Bukhari cautions us to remain attuned to the potential risks and challenges inherent in the India–US strategic partnership. The pursuit of power transition, embodied in the partnership’s trajectory, tends to exacerbate existing tensions and rivalries. The region becomes a stage for geopolitical manoeuvring and spheres of influence, with Pakistan caught in the crosscurrents of changing power dynamics. The delicate task is to discern whether this partnership contributes to a cooperative security framework that fosters stability or intensifies the prevailing security dilemmas.

Bukhari challenges the conventional wisdom that attributes the conflicting situation solely to the theories of balance of power and power transition. He identifies the transformative force of the ‘element of change’ as the true catalyst behind this complexity (2021, p. 42). By questioning the adequacy of these traditional concepts, he ventures into uncharted territory, presenting a creative idea of ‘virtual balancing’. In this paradigm, he posits that balance transcends a rigid and fixed state and encompasses a dynamic and adaptable equilibrium that is rational and stable (Bukhari, 2021, p. 44). Bukhari’s departure from established theories manifests a sophisticated understanding of power dynamics and geopolitical shifts. His conceptual framework acknowledges the ongoing interplay between stability and change, necessitating strategic adaptations to emerging challenges. This focus illuminates change as a catalyst, unsettling power structures and demanding innovative solutions for equilibrium. Virtual balancing provokes a reconsideration of conventional assumptions and calls into question the capacity of traditional theories to encapsulate nuanced power relations. This critique necessitates a re-evaluation of the complexity of IR, with an emphasis on the subtle interactions of actors, power dynamics and their implications for Pakistan’s security in the India–US strategic partnership context. Bukhari’s adoption of this alternative framework underlines the necessity for critical evaluation of prevailing paradigms and encourages the embrace of fresh perspectives. His intellectual boldness pushes beyond traditional thinking, allowing for a nuanced understanding of power, change and equilibrium.

Conclusion

This review illustrates the intricate web of challenges that define Pakistan’s security landscape. Central to this is the military’s significant role in national policymaking, which has inadvertently cemented a praetorian trap, undermining democratic evolution and socio-economic progression. Further complicating matters is the enduring India–Pakistan rivalry, amplified by India’s strategic partnership with the United States, shaping Pakistan’s security policies and influencing regional dynamics. Non-state actors, primarily militant groups, introduce additional volatility, challenging the conventional security paradigm. Theoretical frameworks, such as the balance of power and power transition theories, are inadequate in encapsulating these complexities, underscoring the need for interdisciplinary scholarship combining sociology, anthropology and other fields. This would enable a comprehensive understanding of the social, cultural and historical factors at play in Pakistan’s security paradigm.