Security framework
FOR most of its existence, Pakistan’s national security interests have been defined as protecting the country from India. During the last two decades however, factors such as internal discord epitomised by violent religious and secessionist movements, extremism, economic woes, climate change and, most recently, Covid-19 have challenged the traditional understanding of threats to national security.
This was the primary topic of discussion during the Islamabad Dialogue organised by the National Security Division (NSD). The event featured keynote speeches by the prime minister and army chief and included several current and former state officials, academics and experts. SAPM on National Security Moeed Yusuf outlined the key tenets of a comprehensive national security framework that is worth discussing.
The framework emphasises economic security as the key guarantor of other elements of national power — defence and deterrence, foreign policy and diplomacy and national cohesion. Increasing the national resource pie, it says, is key to stronger defence capability and meeting human security needs that include food security, water security and public health. It suggests leveraging Pakistan’s geographic location for economic growth by focusing on regional trade, connectivity and peace.
These ideas are worth supporting. NSD must be applauded for initiating a debate on this topic and opening up space for critical debate. In the spirit of taking this important discussion forward, the following points are put forth for consideration.
Elite capture and jobless growth are key hurdles.
First, human dignity, equal opportunities and inclusive development must be at the centre of any discussion on economic security. An uncritical focus on economic growth without meaningful expansion in the state’s redistributive outlays can result in greater inequality through further concentration of wealth in fewer hands, widening existing social divisions. The agenda must go beyond social safety nets and ensure a more equal society through targeted infrastructure development, high-quality universal health and education and affirmative action to create greater opportunities for marginalised communities along gender, ethnic, religious and demographic lines in both public and private sectors.
The World Bank report titled Pakistan@100 points to elite capture and jobless growth as key impediments to realising the nation’s true potential. A shift from indirect to proportional direct taxation and from supporting inefficient oligarchies (such as sugar industry) to SMEs and import replacement industries is important. Special attention must be paid to uplifting sub-national regions where extreme poverty overlaps with ethnic or religious fault lines. At the strategic level therefore, this should be denoted as ‘economic inclusion and growth’ rather than mere (macro) economic security.
Second is the need for political stability and inclusion. Without settled rules of the game and consensus among all political players to abide by them, none of the objectives outlined by any national policy can be achieved. The peculiar nature of Pakistani polity requires greater consensus building and acceptance of a split mandate given by a diverse electorate.
In this regard, the government has shown little political acumen and large-heartedness. The nature of challenges faced by the country necessitates strengthened democratic processes, inclusive decision-making platforms, constitutionalism and consensus among political players beyond just the ruling coalition with a thin majority.
Lastly, one would have to see whether the proposed policy paves the way for a greater role of the security community in various social sector fields or whether space can be created for actors in these realms to inform the security agenda. The security apparatus has now expanded its footprint in areas such as development (the National Development Council and CPEC Authority), health (the NCOC), criminal justice (JITs), disaster management (NDMA) among others, and at state-owned enterprises, with mixed results.
Given the power dynamics, a balance must be struck. A narrow approach to security may affect the impetus and muscle required to push reforms in diverse areas but this should not mean subjugating these to an exclusive security lens. Public representatives must be at the centre of policy formulation along with the civil-military bureaucracy and technocrats. A perception of sidelined politicians and a demoralised civil bureaucracy would hamper efforts towards meaningful consensus building and impede policy implementation.
One hopes that diverse opinions inspired by such an unprecedented and rigorous policy discussion on national security will be taken seriously. This is a joint effort towards a national cause and must be supported irrespective of partisan considerations.
The writer was lead author and head of the technical team that formulated the National Internal Security Policy 2018.
Published in Dawn, March 28th, 2021