Asia
Pakistan's army chief renewed
Stand by your man
Jul 28th 2010, 10:06 by S.S. | ISLAMABAD
Would this be a bad time to ask for a re-appointment?
THAT there is a history of co-operation between Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and the Taliban who are overrunning Afghanistan really should not come as a shock to anyone who has been paying attention over the years. It was the ISI after all who first saw the Taliban burst from Spin Boldak across Kandahar province back in 1994. It was only under extraordinary pressure from America, following September 11th 2001, that Pakistan’s army turned on its protégé, and then only half-heartedly.
What is more shocking, looking back over the week before the WikiLeak, is to see America throwing its support behind the man who has been running Pakistan’s Afghanistan policy.
On July 22nd General Ashfaq Kayani became the first of Pakistan’s army chiefs ever to have his tenure extended by a civilian government. News of his re-appointment made barely a ripple in America, even since Monday’s dump of ISI-incriminating material. And yet General Kayani has been personally overseeing Pakistan’s attempt to stitch up a political deal between the government in Kabul and Afghanistan’s Taliban. Moreover he was the chief of the ISI from 2004 to 2007, the very period in which the Taliban staged its spectacular comeback.
America’s foreign policy establishment would not have been caught off guard, though it has chosen not to broadcast its support for the general. On her Asian whirlwind Hillary Clinton spent a day with Pakistan’s power elite, arriving on July 18th and leaving on the 19th. By the 22nd she was in Hanoi, talking about all sorts of national security issues: military co-operation with Vietnam; long-term commitments to South Korea; upgrading ties with Indonesia’s army; etc. But not another word for America’s man in Pakistan, whose term is suddenly set to outlast that of the president, Asif Zardari.
Most citizens in most democracies cannot name their country’s highest-ranking military officer. As in many other ways, Pakistan’s democracy is exceptional. When the elected prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gillani, made a late-night televised address to announce that he had extended General Kayani, Pakistanis knew whereof he spoke. He had been due to retire in November upon serving out a first three-year term. It was expected that General Kayani might last a little longer, but his appointment for another full term came as a shock. Never before had one of Pakistan’s intermittent democratically elected governments prolonged the service of an army chief—not even by a day.
More than half of Pakistan’s short history has transpired under the cloud of one or another military ruler. The most recent period, under General Pervez Musharraf, was brought to an end in early 2008 with the election of Mr Gillani’s government. Even during relatively sunny periods of democratic rule, the army has directed the action from the shadows, manipulating political processes to serve its own ends.
General Kayani, widely respected as a soldier, leads an armed force reckoned to be the world’s sixth-largest, with over 600,000 men under his command and the country’s nuclear arsenal under his watch.
Mr Gillani explained during his address that the war Pakistan is fighting against its own, home-grown variety of Taliban demands continuity in the army’s command. But this reasoning poses an ominous question: is no other general in the country’s vast officer class capable of leading the campaign? The army lauds itself as the country’s foremost institution—Pakistan’s only meritocracy, it is often called—but to hear the civilian government tell it, the military leadership appears to be lacking in depth.
At any rate, the decision to grant General Kayani another three years does not seem to have been the government’s choice in the first place. Instead, the army itself pushed it, with help from America’s military command, which is enamoured by a particular Pakistani general, not for the first time. More than anything else, this episode seems to expose the fact that whoever is in government, ultimate power continues to sit with the army and its allies.
General Kayani has done more than many to keep the army out of politics and clean of its habits of dirty trickery. But if the principal is fine, the principle rankles. No that anyone is surprised to see it demonstrated, yet again, that the country’s foreign and domestic-security policies are run by the army. But now the next three years promise to deepen the trend, by entrenching the army’s chief.
The reaction in Pakistan has been muted, with normally lively commentators and politicians either speaking in favour of the move or keeping quiet. Nawaz Sharif, who is known to have opposed the extension, has not said a word publicly.
Democracy in Pakistan is still in its infancy. Three more years of General Kayani is in way like a sugary treat. In the short-term the decision to extend his stint should buy some stability in civil-military relations. But in the longer view, it is simply no good for the prospects of elected rule.
In this blog, our Asia correspondents and our Banyan columnist provide comment and analysis on Asia's political and cultural landscape. The blog takes its name from the Banyan tree, under which Buddha attained enlightenment and Gujarati merchants used to conduct business.
Advertisement
- Analects | China
- Americas view | The Americas
- Babbage | Science and technology
- Bagehot's notebook | British politics
- Banyan | Asia
- Baobab | Africa
- Blighty | Britain
- Buttonwood's notebook | Financial markets
- Charlemagne's notebook | European politics
- Clausewitz | Defence, security and diplomacy
- Democracy in America | American politics
- Eastern approaches | Ex-communist Europe
- Elysée | France’s presidential election
- Free exchange | Economics
- Game theory | Sports
- Graphic detail | Charts, maps and infographics
- Gulliver | Business travel
- Johnson | Language
- Leviathan | Public policy
- Lexington's notebook | American politics
- Newsbook | News analysis
- Prospero | Books, arts and culture
- Schumpeter | Business and management
Most commented
- The euro crisis: The Greek run
- Brazil’s economy: A bull diminished
- Gay marriage: North Carolina begs the question too
- Russia and NATO: Rethink the reset
- Greek politics: Slouching towards the drachma
- The euro in crisis: Groping towards Grexit
- Renouncing citizenship: Did Eduardo Saverin do anything wrong?
- Nationalism online: Backfired
- The euro crisis: Going, going, gone?
- Greece and the euro: Exodus, chapter 1
Over the past five days
Most recommended
- The euro crisis: The Greek run
- Renouncing citizenship: Did Eduardo Saverin do anything wrong?
- Greek politics: Slouching towards the drachma
- The euro in crisis: Groping towards Grexit
- The euro crisis: Going, going, gone?
- Brazil’s economy: A bull diminished
- Rival versions of capitalism: The endangered public company
- Poverty: The audacity of hope
- Daily chart: Top flights
- Jacob Zuma: Portrait of a president
Over the past seven days
Advertisement
Readers' comments
The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.
Sort:
Kiyani's so called 600,000 strong armed forces sit atop a wobbly and impoverished economy that has bleak prospects for sustainable growth. And yes it may be, numerically the 6th largest in the world but in this case size really does not matter much. Case in point - it has suffered devastating losses at the hands of Indian armed forces over tha past several decades. Loss of the Saichen glacier in Kashmir is the latest example in terms of their weakness.
The Pakistani Intelligence service is in cahoots with the army and continues to support the Islamic radicals while getting US support for their help, ostensibly, in the war against the radicals. Such actions are destroying it's credibility with the West and this will ensure the continuation of their irrelevancy in international and economic arenas. Add to that the daily violence from Islamic radicals within it's boundaries, that in turn ensures and perpepuates economic weakness and backwardness by suppressing the good works of the productive and sane portion of the population.
Pakistan today is truly a glittering example of a slowly but surely failing state. However, there is a way out of this predicament and it involves great leadership, lofty vision and personal and political integrity - all elements that are currently lacking. God help us all.
What is newsworthy in this news. Generals in Pakistani army retire only if they do not become Presidents or Marshal Law Administrators. Once he becomes president (Always backed by USA) he retires when he wants or when USA thinks that he needs to be removed.
What is newsworthy in this news. Generals in Pakistani army retire only if they do not become Presidents or Marshal Law Administrators. Once he becomes president (Always backed by USA) he retires when he wants or when USA thinks that he needs to be removed.
The extension of 3 years which is given to General Ashfaq Pervez Kyani in regard to his role which he has played in combating terrorism is highly unjustified and has become controversial as well and will further aggravate the situation. I strongly believe General Pervez Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani has miserably failed in containing terrorists in North West Frontier of Pakistan. There seems no well planned strategy from the Army Chief rather look likes he is obeying his masters just in order to secure his coveted status. If murdering and slaughtering of brave and courageous Pakistani jawans and officers is the only way of containing terrorism than I think General Ashfaq Pervez Kyani should resign from his post in the best interest of the country.
In Pakistan, the state exists to secure the interests of Pak Feudal Army - ISI military-business elite.
By consuming more than twenty five percent of the annual budget THIS
colonial entity has a perpetual interest in perpetuating conflict.
It is time that PAKISTAN is broken up to break the cycle of conflict.
If Soviet Union break up could be managed, what is so sacrosanct about
PA(R)Kistan?
Most probably US-Pakistan relationship is one of the cornerstone of US Strategy in the region. That remain unchanged inspite of change in Whitehouse. This was quite evident during the attrocities committed by Pakistan Military on the unarmed people of the then East Pakistan resulting in the creation of Bangladesh. During this period even though the American people were against arming of the brutal army in Pakistan United States kept on helping them.
The US is playing with a time bomb in Pakistan and it does not know when it will explode.
The US fears that making Pakistan army unhappy will increase the possibility of a terror attack on US soil, and keeping it happy will increase the attacks on US in AfPak.
What it is does not foresee is what will the Taliban do when there are no Americans in AfPak, they will take a ticket to US.
Nothing to see here. Things are back to normal in Pakistan after a brief respite of what, 1 year. I have no clue as to why US should look at Pakistan as a ally in the war on terror. Pakistan is not a democracy, is highly corrupt and from wikileaks, we now know they are involved in supporting taliban and has been supporting and aiding terrorism in India. At least Iran is not two faced about dealing with rest of the world.
In the past two decades prime ministers and their governments have been sacked in Pakistan on four occasions; ostensibly on charges of corruption. Corrupt they may have been, but their dismissals always took place when the PM's appeared to be 'over stepping' its line of authority over issues involving foreign and/or military policy.
The Pakistani generals will never brook interference in what they perceive to be their 'patriotic' and powerful domain.
Horrendously venal corruption has taken hold of Pakistan in its firm grip. From the presidency down to a simple street sweeper, everyone (politicians, bureaucrats, generals, policemen, journalists, businessmen, doctors and accountants) will take whatever whenever any opportunity presents itself. There are of course exceptions but they remain an impoverished minority.
The dismissal of a government on charges of corruption can done be almost at anytime. What the present motely crew running the government know is that that they can stash as much ill-gotten loot as they want provided they do not challenge the army's authority.
The extension granted to Kayani means that Zardari and Co have also been given a reprieve for the time being, provided they continue to 'behave' themselves.