Pakistan’s recent election results have shown a clear disillusionment with the military’s influence, but behind the scenes, the army is poised to retain and even expand its control, particularly in foreign policy, security, and the economy. The upcoming government, led by Shehbaz Sharif, is expected to be a mere figurehead, with the military making the most critical decisions. This consolidation of power comes at a challenging time for Pakistan, with severe inflation, a heavy debt burden, and the need for an IMF bailout. Many observers fear that a government propped up by the military will struggle to address these pressing issues effectively.
In Pakistan, while the military may have more credibility than politicians, it has historically lacked a strong grasp of what needs to be done. Pakistan’s military and Sharif’s party did not respond to a request for comment. In 2022, the military admitted to interfering in the country’s politics but pledged not to do so again. Last year, interim Prime Minister Anwaar-ul-Haq Kakar did not rule out future intervention due to the weakness of civilian institutions. Pakistan’s two old-guard political parties, controlled by the Sharif and Bhutto clans, agreed last week to form a government after an inconclusive election on Feb. 8. The elected lawmakers will convene on February 29 for the first session of the National Assembly, where former premier Shehbaz Sharif is expected to become prime minister. This move sidelines former premier Imran Khan, who fell out of favor with the military and ended up in jail. His party colleagues ran as independents and won the most seats but fell short of a majority. This outcome is seen as a rebuke of the military’s attempts to sideline Khan and influence the election.
The new coalition regime “will be entirely reliant on the goodwill of the military to be able to stay in place,” said Omar Warraich, a political commentator and special advisor at Open Society Foundations, an organization that gives grants in support of civil society. The army can easily bring it down if it disagrees on policy, he said.
That has been the story for much of Pakistan’s history since independence in 1947. Khan himself, for instance, was widely seen as backed by the generals when he came to power in 2018. But the relationship soured when the former cricketer tried to influence military appointments, leading to his ouster. Shehbaz was anointed as his successor. His brother Nawaz, a three-time former premier, also had a history of being backed and then deposed by the military, including once in a coup.
Shehbaz has been conciliatory with the military, publicly praising army chief Asim Munir. During his tenure, Shehbaz’s government passed two bills to give the military more power. One bill criminalized criticism of the armed forces, while the other gave security forces unlimited power to arrest individuals they deemed a threat. Pakistan established a Special Investment Facilitation Council in June, during Shehbaz’s term, to promote foreign investments and spur growth. One of the council’s members is army chief Munir. Its immediate goal has been to increase foreign direct investment to $5 billion, but no major deals have been signed yet.
The Economist Intelligence Unit’s 2023 Democracy Index, released earlier this month, downgraded Pakistan to an “authoritarian regime” from a “hybrid regime.”
India expects Pakistan’s military to play a more pivotal role due to the fractured mandate, making it impossible for any individual leader to turn against the army, according to an official familiar with the matter. They do not rule out peace overtures with India after new governments settle in both countries. India’s elections are scheduled for later this year.
Some in Pakistan see the military’s heavy-handed role as a positive. “Whenever we’ve had a military government, decision-making is easier. So the economic indicators are at times better,” said Omar Mahmood Hayat, a retired military lieutenant general and chairman of Unity Foods Ltd., a Pakistani food manufacturer, citing the economy under former military dictator Pervez Musharraf.
Musharraf ruled from 1999 until 2008 and oversaw an economy that fared better than other elected governments, according to the misery index by Bloomberg Economics, which looks at unemployment and inflation rates. Musharraf was favored by Western allies. His tenure, which largely coincided with the worst years of the War on Terror, saw a healthy inflow of dollars into Pakistan for combating terrorism.
One question is how the public will respond to the new government after voters delivered a rebuke to the status quo by voting for Khan’s loyalists. Supporters of Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf party took to the streets last weekend to protest alleged vote-rigging.
“Definitely the message is that people are not happy with their intervention,” Ayesha Siddiqa, a political scientist and senior fellow at King’s College London, said of the army.
Shehbaz’s brother, Nawaz, was widely expected to become the new prime minister, with the backing of the army, after he returned from exile in London and was acquitted of corruption charges.
But Shehbaz became the military’s choice, according to Mohammad Waseem, a political science professor at Lahore University of Management Sciences.
“He is a great compromiser,” Waseem said. “He will try to stabilize the situation by giving and taking during critical moments.”
Still, brokering an agreement with the IMF will for Sharif — and the military behind him – require accepting tough conditions from the multilateral lender, which are likely to anger the public even more.
The military may be more powerful than ever, but it has never faced a harder task.
“The economic crisis has now become a national security issue,” Warraich said. “If this economic turnaround doesn’t work, it can easily all be put on Shehbaz Sharif and he could be dispensed with.”
