The Deep State Puzzle

Political developments or transition of power in Pakistan have always generated keen interest in India. It’s not just the umbilical cord. The western neighbourhood is intrinsically linked to India’s strategic and security interests. India is closely watching Wednesday’s election in Pakistan where the military has seized power several times since independence in 1947, and directly ruled for almost half the country’s history. 

In the initial years after the Partition, Pakistan grew by adopting a liberal economy. So much so that South Korea, Singapore, Malaysia and some other countries used to send their envoys to study and learn how to progress in a short period of time. Seoul, in fact, copied its second five-year plan to achieve economic development. But Pakistan was held up later, because of wars and frequent political interruptions.

While India succeeded to mould itself into a stable and democratic Union, Pakistan miserably failed in politics for want of a strong, secular and farsighted leader. Just two civilian governments in Pakistan have completed their tenure of five years over the past seven decades. 

The failure of democracy could also be attributed to a negligible middle-class population, which forms the backbone of multi-party parliamentary democracies. As much as 21.36 per cent of India’s 130 crore population belongs to the middle class. It’s share in Pakistan’s 25 crore population is only 6.8 per cent.  

The Army’s frequent taking over of the government can also be attributed to the fact that the country has a large base of soldiers — one per cent of total the population.  The share in India is a mere 0.136 per cent. 

A significant feature of the July 25 national election is a triangular contest among the governing Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) led by Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, former President Asif Ali Zardari’s Pakistan Peoples’ Party (PPP), and cricketer-turned politician Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI).  

The entry of a third force, PTI, has caused anxious moments in India’s security circles. Though Imran has been a player in the past elections, he was never a formidable contender for the PM’s post. 

Even in times of hostility, Pakistan watchers in India maintained contacts with PML-N, PPP and even religious figures like Jamiat Ulema-e Islam president Maulana Fazl-ur-Rehman. But PTI, except Imran’s cricketing side, has been a political and strategic puzzle.

The Army’s alleged encouragement to proscribed outfits like Hafiz Saeed’s Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) to join the political mainstream has raised concerns in New Delhi as well as in Washington. 

JuD is a front for Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), the terror outfit behind the 2008 Mumbai attacks. The UN Security Council’s updated list of terrorists and militant groups has 139 entries from Pakistan alone, including LeT. 

JuD floated a political party, Milli Muslim League (MML), as soon as the election was announced. But when the Election Commission refused to register MML, JuD candidates entered the fray via Allah O Akbar Tehreek (AAT), a defunct, but registered political party.  

Rana Banerji, expert on Pakistan affairs, says the development has both positive and negative consequences for India. He believes that it may help Pakistan’s Army rein in its proxies by giving them a non-lethal domestic role. “Enabling ‘non-state actors’ or ‘good terrorists’ to gain a toehold in Punjab politics could serve a dual purpose for the Army, ostensibly absolving them from a perceived ‘terrorist’ image while helping fragment the vote,” says Banerji, who has served as Special Secretary in the Cabinet Secretariat. 

But there are many who see JuD candidates as a threat to peace. American political scientist C Christine Fair argues that despite their political mainstreaming, JuD/LeT will likely remain valuable to their masters in the Army and intelligence community. “They may, eschew violence within Pakistan, but their execution of lethal attacks externally cannot be ruled out,” she says.

Bombings on political rallies have shattered the relative peace of Pakistan’s general election campaign. The Army will deploy about 371,000 troops on election day, almost three times the number in 2013.

There is also a growing economic instability in the country. The new government will have to urgently resolve a currency crisis that threatens to put the brakes on the economy.

Dr Ashok K Behuria, Fellow and Coordinator, South Asia Centre, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA), believes that while PTI has emerged as a formidable player luring urban youth, PML-N’s prowess cannot be discounted. He says that PML-N and its jailed leader has managed to put up a brave fight in the face of the judicial and political reverses. The ousted Prime Minister and his heir apparent, daughter Maryam, were convicted of corruption and jailed earlier this month.   

“There is also a perception that PTI’s upward mobility can be ascribed to the establishment (may call it Deep State; Sharif called it Invisible Hand), which seems viscerally opposed to PML-N and its leadership,” Behuria says. Irrespective of the opinion poll results, it will be premature to write off PML-N, he says. In the event of a hung house — the most likely scenario — PML-N will be in a better position to form a post-poll alliance with PPP and parties smaller than PTI, he says. 

According to Sushant Sareen, Senior Fellow at the Observer Research Foundation, the election will be a contest between the ability of the military establishment (commonly referred to as ‘miltablishment’ to engineer electoral outcomes and the resilience of arguably Pakistan’s largest political party — PML-N — to hold on to its voters and constituencies. Many leaders are deserting the party mid-stream. 

PTI also has its share of problems. Like India’s Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), it has divisions within its ranks and has a machinery, more atone to street protests rather than electoral politics. Experts here are puzzled at zero anti-India rant in campaign. Except PTI, no other player has even mentioned Kashmir. 

Sareen argues there was more or less consensus among all political players on policies towards India, so they felt no need to make it an electoral issue. But he reminds that Sharif had to suffer and is being taunted for being too friendly to India and PM Narendra Modi.

THE PUSH

• Army’s help to banned outfits JuD to fight the poll has worried India and US. 
   
• JuD floated a party called MML as soon as the election was announced. 
   
• It finally fielded candidates via a defunct outfit, Allah-O-Akbar Tehreek.