Daily Times

A column in the Washington Post by Joshua Kurlantzick titled, ‘The Return of the Men in Green’ khaki in our case, caught my attention. It outlines how militaries are once again politically ascendant in many countries across the world, from outright dictatorships in Egypt to increasing power and legitimacy from Brazil to Myanmar and from Pakistan to Indonesia. The irony is that each of these countries have painful memories of military rule. In many of these countries, military rule was over thrown with considerable sacrifices by civil society. Nevertheless, backed by the middle and upper classes, the militaries in each of these countries are making their way back into the corridors of power. Furthermore, it is not as if this ascendency is taking place behind the scenes. In Pakistan for example, the role of the military in the recent media blackout of peaceful movements like the Pakhtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM) and other political developments are the worst kept secrets in the land.

The demonisation of any voices of dissent as foreign backed is a hackneyed yet insidious ploy to delegitimise them. Many have written — if not necessarily been allowed to publish — their views on the recent developments. Thanks to social media however, a great many people have been exposed to the views of insightful columnists like Babar Sattar and Mosharraf Zaidi. This exposure could not have been achieved if their articles had made their way into the pages of mainstream newspapers. What is more interesting to me in the present situation is the role of the security state in the social milieu within which, the securitisation of political life finds succour.

Militaries across the world, throughout history have been purveyors of violence. They may try to reinvent themselves as humanitarians and nation builders but in their genus they have to be violent — otherwise the postal service could be just as good a state institution for nation building

Pakistani society is faced with many contradictions and challenges, not the least of which is the denial of basic human and constitutional right to life, liberty, dignity and freedom. But what is more concerning and urgent to my mind is the increasing gap between the rich and the poor; the wholesale commitment to capitalist free market development that worsens poverty and inequality, and the culture of gender discrimination, which is also being widened by this free market. Afterall, women and transgender persons are much more likely to be poor, vulnerable and be denied access to livelihoods. Just the fact that 49 percent of children in Pakistan are malnourished is an indicative statistic here. One can bet that if children don’t get enough to eat, their mothers almost certainly don’t get enough to eat. The fathers probably don’t get enough either, but we know from research that men get preferential treatment at the dinner table.

In the above state of affairs, the relative power and privilege of the middle and upper classes is predicated upon the stable operation of the market system. It must not be destabilised by the pesky demands for distributive justice by the vast majority of impoverished Pakistanis. So how to retain a system that delivers for few at the expense of soul searing labour of the many? No prizes for guessing the answer.

Militaries across the world, throughout history have been purveyors of violence. They may try to reinvent themselves as humanitarians, nation builders, strategic guardians or ideologues but in their genus they have to be violent — otherwise the postal service could be just as good a state institution for nation building. Militaries also tend to be conservative institutions with a monochromatic view of the polities they serve. They have to. If called upon to make the ultimate sacrifice of life in the service of the polity, contemplation of the variegated realities of the polities they serve, or questioning their fundamental mission, is not conducive to them doing their job.

It is little wonder that there is a strategic convergence between the military and the upper and middle classes’ social conservatism, need for stability, and a stake in the preservation of the system. It is also not surprising that militaries across Thailand, Indonesia, Egypt, Turkey, Brazil, Chile and Pakistan to name a few, have had the middle and the upper classes as their constituency. Even in India — a cosmetic democracy — the military is increasingly a critical instrument of the state used to brutally suppress any working class dissent, from Naxalites in Bihar and Jharkhand to other insurgencies in Assam, Nagaland and of course Kashmir. In fact, the Indian military has an overwhelming influence in conducting governance in such spaces, especially Kashmir.

The upshot is that authoritarian middle class dominated political movements invariably cede governance space to the militaries in the name of nationalism and efficient governance. Just recall the PML-N’s use of the military for everything from monitoring schools, to electricity meters to the census. So why shouldn’t the military appropriate that space, and then some? As Shakespeare wrote: The fault lies, dear Brutus, not in our stars. But in ourselves, that we are underlings.

The writer is a reader in Politics and Environment at the Department of Geography, King’s College, London. His research includes water resources, hazards and development geography. He also publishes and teaches on critical geographies of violence and terror

Published in Daily Times, April 19^th 2018.