ISLAMABAD, Dec 11: Speakers at a discussion here on Tuesday attempted to contextualise the dominant role of the military not just in internal politics, but also within South Asia.

The discussion “Civil-military relations and policy implications” was part of the Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI)’s two-day conference titled ‘Sustainable development in South Asia: shaping the future’, which started here on Tuesday.

Dr Bishnu Upreti, a political analyst, said: “In post-conflict societies, military control by civilians is often not possible.”

He was discussing the fragile balance of power in Nepal.

In India, a close relationship between economic growth and military spending, and a policy of ‘strategic restraint’, had limited extra-constitutional power and control of the defence institution, said scholar Sunil Dasgupta. This has certainly not been the case in Pakistan.

Regional geo-politics, such as the oft-quoted threat to the East, Afghans wars, and subsequent Nato/Isaf invasion have been considered the imperative reasons for military engagement in affairs of the state.

The military has expanded its role from the fighting arm of the state, to shaping foreign and financial policies, and has even attempted to control the parameters of religious and cultural debate (such as during Ziaul Haq’s marital law years).

In an attempt to define the Pakistani military, former director general ISPR Athar Abbas stated that “highly disciplined, egalitarian and merit-based selection” was a reason for the institution’s success over its national counterparts. “The military has no objection in asserting civilian control, he added, but “weakness will invite aggression.” Employed beyond its limits, the military does not want the system to derail.

“There are no neat divisions between civilian and military affairs,” Ejaz Haider, senior adviser at SDPI, acknowledged but through an intricate negotiation process “it is important to create a consensus on what the rule of the game, or state institutions, should be.”

The constant flux in these rules have weakened state structures, but recent judicial activism and parliamentary debate on national security meant that the civilian-military balance could tilt in favour of democratic control.

“While the military is important to maintain order of the state, it has acted as an imperial institution that considers itself above society,” argued Ilhan Niaz, a professor at Quaid-i-Azam University.

However, for Niaz, “sub-rational decision making” based on caste and biraderi lines had exacerbated cleavages in the state, “challenging meritocracy and inducting criminals” into the political process.

The role of the security apparatus in Pakistan is closely linked to the flow of foreign aid, in particular, US assistance, said Ali Cheema, a political-economist at Lums. The political elite or national wealth holders were not bearing the cost of military expenditures, Cheema said.

According to his analysis, the fiscal compact of state institutions had never been constructed, and political parties were highly regionalised, creating further fragmentation in the political base.

The tax to GDP ratio was “virtually flat,” and until the political elite itself paid for its security, a possibility of civilian control would not be likely.

The debate, highly academic in its nature, was useful in understanding the fragile nature of political and economic power.

The war on extremism and militancy (and subsequent bilateral relationship with United States) has only perpetuated the need of the military in administering the challenges confronting the state.

Furthermore, the military has come under fire not just for seizing the space of governance, but violently controlling nationalist movements that have escalated from demanding rights to suggesting secession, such as in Balochistan.

The case of missing persons in Balochistan has highlighted the extra-constitutional role of intelligence and military agencies, despite the cover of democracy in the centre.

In addition, the discourse on civil-military relations has come back to the stage with recent judgments passed on the Asghar Khan case, demanding trial of former generals for rigging elections.

So while the policy implications of civilian-military relations remain vital as ever, it is difficult to predict whether in political and legal terms this shift is possible or taking place.

Another session, “Public financing of education in Pakistan: estimating gaps and future costs” was organised by Action Aid.

Hamza Abbas, a research analyst from the SDPI, presented a report aimed to understand the financial gaps in meeting the set goals for primary education with regards to Education for All (EFA) and Millennium Development Goals (MDG). “Although there is a lack of latest data on the state of education, statistics suggest that there are more than 10 million children out of school in Pakistan,” he said. Gender disparity in the education sector is also a menace that needs to be dealt with.

According to the statistics, the net enrollment rate (NER) in primary schools in Pakistan dropped from 57 per cent in 2008-09 to 56 per cent in 2010-11.

The provinces of Sindh and Balochistan particularly present a dismal picture in this regard.

The speaker suggested that the government should allocate a greater part of the budget for primary education in order to achieve its intended goals as per EFA and MDG. He added that the government needed to introduce laws for universal and compulsory education.

Zohair Zaidi, programme officer from Oxfam GB, highlighted the issues faced in regard to foreign aid flow to the education sector.

He suggested debt swap as a viable solution to the debt servicing. He also added that the civil society needed to play its part in persuading the donors and the government to fully implement their aid effectiveness commitments.