IN Pakistan’s turbulent political history, the role of institutions — especially the military — has been a recurring theme.
No analysis of the state’s evolution is complete without acknowledging the Pakistan Army’s significant footprint in national affairs. However, in a telling and categorical statement on June 27, 2025, Director General Inter-Services Public Relations (DG ISPR), Lt Gen Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry, issued what is perhaps the clearest official assertion yet: “The Pakistan Army has nothing to do with politics.” This declaration did not emerge in a vacuum. It follows a consistent pattern of public messaging from the military leadership under Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir, whose tenure has seen a marked shift in the Army’s outward posture. From the aftermath of the May 9, 2023 riots to the latest civil-military interactions, the institution has adopted a visibly restrained role, steering clear of overt political engagement. The timing is also significant. With Pakistan’s democratic system tested by successive waves of instability, accusations of interference, and a deteriorating trust deficit among political players, the military’s unambiguous distancing from politics offers a much-needed institutional reset.
Observers note that the military’s posture under Field Marshal Asim Munir has not only been rhetorical but has also reflected in actions. There has been no visible manipulation of electoral outcomes, no mid-term engineering, and no overt signaling favoring one political faction over another. For a country where even whispers of the establishment’s “invisible hand” could stir political tempests, this retreat — if sustained — is monumental. More importantly, senior officers have emphasized the need to “let politicians resolve political issues.” This deference to civilian supremacy, echoed in DG ISPR’s briefing, is a norm in functioning democracies but has historically remained elusive in Pakistan. Pakistan’s post-independence narrative has been punctuated by periods of military rule — Ayub Khan (1958), Yahya Khan (1969), Zia-ul-Haq (1977), and Pervez Musharraf (1999). Each era, though initially justified as corrective interventions, left behind institutional distortions and deepened the civilian-military imbalance. Even in democratic interludes, the specter of military influence loomed large — from policy nudges behind closed doors to orchestrated political alignments in the guise of “national interest.” The result has been a fragile democratic order, often discredited from within and vulnerable to extra-constitutional arbitrations. This is why the current declaration matters. It seeks to break not just a pattern of interference, but a mindset — one that sees the military as the ultimate arbitrator of power, even in civilian domains.
Since assuming command, Field Marshal Asim Munir has emerged as a figure committed to institutional discipline and constitutional boundaries. He has articulated, both in private meetings and public forums, the importance of rule-based governance and civilian ownership of political processes. This doctrine of restraint stands in contrast to his predecessors who, at times, projected the Army as a parallel center of authority. Instead of media trials, leaks, or political realignments engineered through “soft interventions,” Asim Munir’s leadership has embraced operational focus — counter-terrorism, border security, and international diplomacy. This change is further reflected in the tone of ISPR communications, which now emphasize constitutionalism, national cohesion, and institutional neutrality. One of the gravest costs of past military involvement in politics has been the erosion of trust — both domestically and internationally. Within the country, political parties have often sought patronage instead of public support. This undermines democratic development and cultivates a culture of dependency and opportunism. Internationally, Pakistan’s credibility has frequently suffered due to civil-military friction, stalled transitions, and allegations of rigged mandates. In contrast, a disengaged and apolitical military can offer stability, reassure global partners, and encourage long-term institutional development. It is in this context that the June 27 statement becomes critical — not as an isolated press note, but as a reaffirmation of a new strategic outlook.
Nevertheless, the burden of democratic consolidation does not rest on the military alone. Political actors must rise above factionalism, personal vendettas, and short-term gains. Governance must be about service delivery, not merely slogans. Electoral reforms, institutional strengthening, and transparent accountability mechanisms are essential pillars of the same democratic edifice. Civil society, too, must shed the temptation of calling upon the establishment whenever political disputes arise. Media, intelligentsia, and public forums must foster democratic norms, not fuel polarizations that open the door for non-democratic remedies. The Pakistan Army’s declared withdrawal from political domains is an opportunity — but it requires the political class, media, and civil society — to respect this institutional reset and contribute to the strengthening of democratic norms. Skeptics may question whether this declaration marks a lasting transformation or merely a well-timed rhetorical manoeuvre. Yet, the clarity, consistency, and timing of the DG ISPR’s statement — coupled with the visibly restrained posture of the Army under Field Marshal Asim Munir — offer grounds for cautious optimism. If upheld in practice, this shift could redefine civil-military relations in Pakistan, laying the foundation for a stable, constitutional, and forward-looking democracy. But such a vision demands vigilance, not just from the military, but from every stakeholder in the national fabric. The time has come to abandon conspiracies, cease scapegoating, and embrace a political culture where responsibility is not deflected but owned. Only then will the Pakistan Army’s disengagement from politics be seen not as an exception, but as the new norm.
—The writer is a Supreme Court lawyer and former member & Chairman Standing Committee of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council. Islamabad
