Syed Qamar Afzal Rizvi
TRADITIONALLY speaking, the very concept of national security has classically been taken into account by connoting the preservation of sovereignty, territorial integrity and internal stability with the focus on the coercive power of the state. In today’s chantingly complex regional and interdependent global scenario, faced with many non-traditional threats like hybrid warfare pandemics, climate change, and ideological warfare need be seen in a more holistic manner. Such an all-encompassing view of national security demands that the determinant of security is not just the manifestation of the coercive elements of state power but on the demonstration of its comprehensive national power with the latter being a composite of many factors across all facets of national life largely redefined by the dynamics including national leadership — if really quantified could help in developing a national security index which in comparative terms could serve as an all-out indicator of the relative security of a state vis -a-vis its peers. Though Pakistan’s defence is insurmountable, we must remember Quaid-i-Azam‘s precept: “The Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. in this imperfect world, invite aggression from others.’’
It is to be understood that the links between economics, stability and security were systematically defined differently before the Cold War, and yet today their respective dynamics seem adjusted to consecutive stages of international relations. This variance resulted in different security and economic models entailed by the growing imperatives. We rightly note that in the past, the security model was intrinsically based on balanced confrontation during the era of bipolarity in the Cold War while arguing the pivot of power-supremacy between superpowers and their allies. And obviously, this was the case both in a multi-polar and bipolar world. Currently, security is largely based on interdependence and cooperation between states — doctrinally enhanced via globalisation, liberalisation and established institutional structures. Truly, economics in the past was significantly based on a national parameter, and to a large extent self-sufficient model, which naturally excluded the possibilities of significant external cooperation.
Regional Security Complex Theory (RSCT) strategically combines the paradigm characterising an outside-in and inside-out analysis by distinguishing between superpowers, great powers that transcend two or more regions and regional powers whose sphere of action largely contained within a single RSCT. RSCT primarily focuses on security interdependence negative (conflict formation) or positive (security regime, security community). It uses structure at the regional level (inclusive of boundaries, anarchy-hierarchy, power polarity, discourses of amity and enmity- securitization and discretization) both as a benchmark to mark significant change and as a basis for identifying the most likely pattern of evolution. South Asian region consists of seven countries: Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. This region is important centre for Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainaism, Buddhism and Islam. Former Democrat President of United States Bill Clinton described South Asia as the most dangerous place on Earth. Since independence, most of the South Asian nations remain mired in vicious cycle of poverty, deprivation and underdevelopment. This region rightly represents one and a half billion people or one quarter of the world’s population living in extreme poverty and are classified as falling below the poverty line. And yet the region remains at the bottom of world social and human development indicators.
When we discuss the case of Pakistan in terms of its emerging state feature as a security democratic state, we have to rightly seek that its organic protection against external competition or threat was and is considered to be one of the tools of state economic policy. And irrefutably, security now depends to a larger extent than ever before on internal rather than external factors. Consequently, the inherent lack of an external enemy could rather be considered in specific conditions as one of its features, which on its own could be regarded as destabilising. And most significantly, keeping in view today’s dynamics, the security culture is going to be influenced by the ongoing conflict dynamics via religious-cum-cultural conflicts. And likewise, it may be concluded: Human resourcesË human capital Ë human development Ë economic development Ë economic prosperity Ë national security. The role of the Pakistan security establishment cannot be hibernated from the ongoing changing security complex of the South Asian region. South Asian region at the same time is a single subcontinent which is separated from other parts of Asia by mountains in the North and water (the Arabian Sea, Bay of Bengal and the Indian Ocean) in the South. This region/regional security complex was formed on the basis of a unique civilization, after the end of British colonial raj.
The basic causes behind the current displacement are political instability, risks of armed conflict, lack of resources, and risky flow of refugee via trans-border passages in the region. There also exist extra-regional refugee flows: refugees from Tibet come to India, from Afghanistan – to Pakistan, from Burma – to Bangladesh, certainly that incite extra-regional tensions. India has extensively waged hybrid war against Pakistan to destabilize it, weaken the writ of the state and mar its international credibility. The response to this kind of warfare by state and non-state actors demands totally new thinking and approach, different from the perspective of military preparedness and embracing the outlook of national preparedness for the evolving threats.
In this backdrop, Pakistan as a security-cum-democratic state has an inevitable need of growing nexus between civil and military institution. Pakistan cannot afford any de-harmonisation in its state functionaries. The institutional stability is key to national integrity and empowerment that in no way be compromised. In the face of underlying security-democratic challenges Pakistan’s security establishment managers, as well as the political leaders and the heads of various state institutions need to exhibit wisdom, maturity and mutual tolerance so make the functioning of the state in a smooth manner. As to pilot the right direction of the ship of the state towards stability and harmony. The various state institutions have to work within their prescribed constitutional limits. This is the only panacea to heal the ills of state affairs Pakistan is confronted today to counter the challenges of strengthening democracy, promoting political stability, accelerating GDP growth rate, enhancing economic well-being, and safeguarding national security.
—The writer, an independent ‘IR’ researcher-cum-analyst based in Pakistan, is member of European Consortium for Political Research Standing Group on IR, Critical Peace & Conflict Studies, also a member of Washington Foreign Law Society and European Society of International Law.
