Interpreting the National Security Policy Document of Pakistan

Interpreting the National Security Policy: How Much Of It Is Old Wine In A New Bottle?

Prof. Ijaz Khan

Friday Times - 19 January 2021Interpreting the National Security Policy Document

Prof. Ijaz Khan

Former Chairman and Professor

Department of International Relations

University of Peshawar

Documenting National Security Policy is a good step. Documenting helps to know and understand it better, thus making it easier to analyze and discuss it. Though, the language of the National Security Policy document of Pakistan shared publicly is futuristic, implying change, however, it does not claim to be a new or changed policy and reading it confirms it is not. Though, it uses some new terms and phrases to describe it. However, the same language and phrases read carefully shows there is neither any change nor any intentions to change. At best one can see tactical adjustments. Expecting change without change in the political context or Strategic Culture is futile. 

The document claims to take a ‘Comprehensive Security’ Approach.  In the 1970s, the term ‘Comprehensive Security’ came as a conceptual response to the changing international system. It referred to both broadening, meaning inclusion of non-military issues, and deepening, referring to inclusion of domestic concerns in the concept of security. We started hearing of ‘human security’ focusing on the person of individual rather than the geography of the state. Barry Buzan, a British professor, wrote of securitisation — referring to the broadening/expansion of the security through inclusion of governance, economy and socio-economic elements. This meant that in the calculus of state security, one must include much more than tanks, fighter planes and bombs. The document does talk of all these aspects of Comprehensive Security. The problem is it does so without any change in the primacy of traditional security. 

Comprehensive Security in democratic states furthers democratization of decision-making by increasing the role of non-security segments on security issues, along with political control. Where the security establishment dominates decision-making, like in Pakistan, it expands its control in fields hitherto left to the civilians. The document claims to be result of wide consultations. However, we know political parties or parliament was not a part of this consultation. It was not even presented in the parliament after being written, let alone debated there. The document was authored by National Security Division after consultations with some independent scholars and Civil Society members, whose identity is not known. It also discussions in Universities, but mentions only National Defense University, a fully owned and managed Armed Forces institution. 

Due to limitation of space, this essay just gives an overview of the document, with the help of some selected terms and phrases, showing why it fails to be a comprehensive security approach. The document considers traditional military security as the primary concern and thus emphasizes it centrality. Rather than treating the non-military elements of security at par with military elements and the need to secure people as much important, if not more, it treats them as supportive and required for strong military, required for territorial security from military threats posed by (a rising Hindutva) India. There term cost effective is used to present the case for military preparedness. There is nothing to show what is meant by ‘Cost Effective’. Though there was no need for spelling it out in a policy document. But, a policy approach based on the concept of ‘Comprehensive Security’ will aim for ‘Cost Effective’ by a balance between what is allocated for military expenses and for ‘Human Development. The current tilt is heavily towards military. Future implementations actions (Budget) will tell how much this tilt has been corrected.

The document acknowledges the diversity of Pakistan, however, the policy continues to deal with it as State of Pakistan has always dealt with it. Same is true of acknowledgement of the terrorist threat. The words used are to differentiate between ‘reconcilable and non-reconcilable’ along with an ‘inclusive approach’ tells the thinking between the lines .The distinction should be between those who articulate their views on rights and wrongs, present policy alternatives and different strategies for resolution of issues or complain and peacefully protest for/ against what they consider to be just or unjust and those who use unconstitutional violent means to further their views or demands. There may be some foreign elements among the later too. However, the terms irreconcilables and reconcilable implies insistence on all agreeing on State Narratives.

  The intention to carry out development activities, so that different ethnicities or  people of geographic areas, are not exploited by foreign agents shows a continuation of policy, educated by a non-democratic, centrist and elitist mindset. This negates the claimed inclusivist approach. Inclusive approach means, including the marginalized in decision making and not just concerning them which should be their exclusive domain, but in decisions concerning collective issues too. The smaller ethnicities are not people of colonies and so should be accepted as sharing the burdens and bounties of the state. Inclusion does not mean just giving them benefits, but letting them be a part of both good and bad. In early 2021, a consultative meeting was convened by the office of Moeed Yosaf at University of Peshawar, for discussing Afghanistan (whether that was part of the National Security Policy Documentation was not mentioned). Just discussing Afghanistan or former FATA or Terrorism with Pashtun academics is not including them in decision making. Inclusion would require inviting and considering their views on economic policy, broader Foreign Policy as well as other common State level policies/ concerns (to ser the record straight this is the approach of the main stream Pakistani democrats and Liberals too). 

Maintaining India as the traditional military threat (increased due to Hindutvaisation), even if correct and justifies military preparedness, the policy to deal with it, by denying Afghanistan (even under the control of supposedly friendly Taliban) and India to connect through its territory and at least one very important factor for supporting Taliban in Afghanistan being stopping any Indian influence negates the claimed policy of seeking security in connectivity and can be justified only through a traditional security and geopolitical approach. This also continues using Pakistan’s location as of geopolitical significance and not as that of a geo economic significance or ‘economic hub’ as claimed by the document.

A change of policy only results from change of perceptions; perceptions change when those whose perceptions count are changed. Democratic decision making by including by un included in decision making and thus enabling decision making that introduces the diversity of which all states are made in the process, inclusive. This changes perceptions and thus policies based on them. 

 

 

 

National Security Policy

·      The security of our land, air, and sea borders along with space and cyber domains is paramount. Pakistan is pursuing ‘open and secure borders’ with respect to ease  of movement, economic activity, and linkages with overall plans for economic connectivity. The recent war against terrorism has highlighted the role of military, paramilitary, and Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs). LEAs have taken on an expanded role in urban cities and far-flung rural areas.  P 24

·      With a regressive and dangerous ideology gripping the collective conscience in our immediate neighbourhood, the prospects of violent conflict have grown immensely. The possibility of use of force by the adversary as a deliberate policy choice cannot be ruled out Hybrid threats against Pakistan originate from states and their proxies as well as from non-state actors. Pakistan will adopt a holistic, interconnected whole-of-nation approach to neutralise attempts to undermine Pakistan’s security and stability through hybrid warfare. P 24

·      Policy Objectives: Defend Pakistan’s territorial integrity at all costs. Deter any aggression by maintaining a cost-effective and adaptive military focused on  modernisation and optimisation of force structures to ensure adequate conventional capability and maintain full spectrum deterrence within the precincts of credible minimum nuclear deterrence, without getting involved in an arms race. P.26

·      Fringe violent sub-nationalist tendencies have been exploited by hostile intelligence agencies that have provided support and sanctuary to subversive elements. The ideological undercurrent for violent sub-nationalisms exploits socio-economic disparities and governance gaps. Pakistan will adopt a four-pronged policy of engagement: separating reconcilables from irreconcilables; cutting off recruitment; constricting financial sources; and pursuing targeted socio-economic policies to address governance-related concerns in regions where violent sub-nationalist elements operate. P30

·      Pakistan is a diverse nation comprising various ethnicities, religious beliefs, sects, and languages. Extremism and radicalisation on the basis of ethnicity or religion pose a challenge to our society. The exploitation and manipulation of ethnic, religious, and sectarian lines through violent extremist ideologies cannot be allowed. P.31

·      Great power competition and regional pivots are defining the race over resources and influence. Traditional regionalism that once provided an alternative mechanism for cooperation is giving way to issue-based partnerships. P.34

·      Pakistan has adopted a dynamic and self-confident approach to a fast-changing world order. This requires bolstering traditional political diplomacy while refocusing our energies on engagement under new realities. Economic diplomacy in Pakistan’s context requires leveraging political relations for economic gains while building new economic partnerships to in turn support our political and strategic interests. p. 34

·      Pakistan has adopted a dynamic and self-confident approach to a fast-changing  world order. This requires bolstering traditional political diplomacy while refocusing our energies on engagement under new realities. Economic diplomacy in Pakistan’s context requires leveraging political relations for economic gains while building new economic partnerships to in turn support our political and strategic interests. As trade and economic connectivity gain importance in a more connected world, Pakistan must ensure a greater focus on economic diplomacy with human resource that has the right skill set to capitalise on economic opportunities across the world. Our geo-economically pivotal location affords Pakistan the ability to offer itself as a melting pot of regional and global economic interests through connectivity P 34. initiatives. This remains a priority and its success requires regional peace and stability to which Pakistan remains fully committed p.35

·      Pakistan’s location at the cross-roads of historic confluence provides unique opportunities amidst regional and global competition, especially as a hub for connecting important economic and resource-rich regions. Historical, ethnic, and religious ties to Pakistan’s immediate west create externalities wherein peace and stability have a positive influence on internal security. Towards the immediate east, bilateral ties have been stymied as a consequence of the unresolved Kashmir dispute and India’s hegemonic designs. Pakistan remains committed to normalisation of relations with its neighbours based on mutual respect, sovereign equality, and a collective effort to find pathways for conflict resolution with the belief that shared economic opportunities are cornerstones for achieving prosperity in Pakistan and the region. Pakistan also maintains mutually beneficial relationships with all major powers and will further these based on commonality of interests. P.35

·      Jammu and Kashmir

o   A just and peaceful resolution of the Jammu and Kashmir dispute remains a vital national security interest for Pakistan. India’s illegal and unilateral actions of August 2019 have been rejected by the people of Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK). Indian occupation forces continue to undertake human rights abuses and oppression through war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocidal acts in IIOJK. In addition, India continues to create false propaganda around the Kashmiri resistance to hide its illegal actions. Pakistan remains steadfast in its moral, diplomatic, political, and legal support to the people of Kashmir until they achieve their right to self-determination guaranteed by the international community as per UN resolutions p. 35

·      Afghanistan

o   Pakistan and Afghanistan share historical ties. Pakistan remains committed to facilitating and supporting peace and stability in Afghanistan in close collaboration with the international community through addressing economic, humanitarian, and security issues. Afghanistan’s potential as a gateway for economic connectivity with Central Asian states is a key driver for Pakistan’s support for peace in Afghanistan p. 36

·      China

o   Pakistan’s deep-rooted historic ties with China are driven by shared interests and mutual understanding. Bilateral relations continue to expand based on trust and strategic convergence. Pakistan will continue to strengthen this relationship across all areas of mutual engagement. As a project of national importance, China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) enjoys national consensus. It is redefining regional connectivity and providing impetus to Pakistan’s economy with the potential to jump-start domestic growth, alleviate poverty, and improve regional connectivity. Pakistan welcomes Foreign Direct Investment in CPEC-related and other Special Economic Zones from interested countries P. 36

·      India

o   Pakistan, under its policy of peace at home and abroad, wishes to improve its relationship with India. A just and peaceful resolution of the Jammu and Kashmir dispute remains at the core of our bilateral relationship. The rise of Hindutva-driven politics in India is deeply concerning and impacts Pakistan’s immediate security. The political exploitation of a policy of belligerence towards Pakistan by India’s leadership has led to the threat of military adventurism and non-contact warfare to our immediate east. Growing Indian arms build-up, facilitated by access to advanced technologies and exceptions in the non-proliferation rules, is a matter of concern for Pakistan. Besides impacting regional stability, such policies of exceptionalism also undermine the global non-proliferation regime. India’s pursuit of unilateral policy action p36 - on outstanding issues are attempts to impose one-sided solutions that can have far reaching negative consequences for regional stability. India is also consistently engaged in an effort to spread disinformation targeting Pakistan. Pakistan continues to believe in resolving all outstanding issues through dialogue; however, recent Indian actions remain significant hurdles in this direction.

·      Iran

o   Pakistan enjoys historical and religious ties with Iran. As neighbours, Pakistan and Iran continue to share interests in border management and regional peace and stability. Improving intelligence sharing and patrolling of border areas will have a positive effect on bilateral ties.

·      United States

·      Pakistan and the United States share a long history of bilateral cooperation. 

·      Pakistan does not subscribe to ‘camp politics’. We believe that our continued 

·      37

·      United States

o   cooperation with the United States will remain critical for regional peace and stability. We seek to diversify this relationship through mutually beneficial engagements. Communicating Pakistan’s concerns to policy makers in Washington while seeking to broaden our partnership beyond a narrow counter-terrorism focus will be a priority. Pakistan will continue to seek areas of convergence with the United States in trade, investment, connectivity, energy, counter-terrorism, security, and intelligence cooperation. P. 38

·      Central Asia and Russia

o   Pakistan’s geo-economic pivot is focused on enhancing trade and economic ties through connectivity that links Central Asia to our warm waters. Under ‘Vision Central Asia’, Pakistan is working towards actualising agreements on energy and transit with the Central Asian Republics. Pakistan is committed to reimagining its partnership with Russia in energy, defence cooperation, and investment. The relationship is already witnessing a positive trajectory and Pakistan will continue to strive to maximise mutual gains. Russia, Central Asian countries, and Pakistan are also important partners in our shared objectives of peace and stability in Afghanistan.