From ‘Strategic Depth’ to ‘Riyasat-e-Madinah’
Pakistan’s national identity has been a subject of differing opinions, debates and resolutions since the very inception of the Pakistan Movement. As it is observed the national identity of a state is crucial in devising domestic and foreign policies, which are reflective of the state’s national interests. It is the national identity which provides the adhesive binding for the people to become a nation and stand together, based on language, religion, mythology, historical memories, common ancestry and culture. It also helps the nation to define, position and align herself with the shared interests of the regional and international powers. No state or nation can survive too long without a clear and well-defined national identity. Amid the volte-faces of the post 9/11 world, one of the biggest challenges for Pakistan today is to redefine Pakistan’s national identity and subsequently, the formulation of a clear and effective national security strategy.
Unfortunately, Pakistan doesn’t have a ‘formal’ national security strategy to achieve its long term domestic and foreign policy objectives. For instance, unlike the United States National Security Strategy (NSS) Report that outlines the major national security concerns of the United States and how the administration plans to deal with them, Pakistan does not have a formal national security strategy or even a formal national defense policy. To make matters further complex, there is not even a consensus on the national identity of the state. In 1947, when the Indian subcontinent was partitioned into East Pakistan, India and West Pakistan the British Raj carved the east wing and the west wing of Pakistan on the Muslim majority basis with a distance of 2,208 km between them. Pakistan’s founding father, Mohammed Ali Jinnah, addressed both in favor of an independent-sovereign based on a distinctly Islamic identity and a modern secular state. Hence, it’s been over 70 years since the creation of Pakistan, that a debate over Pakistan state’s ideology is still ongoing. Therefore, in the context of Pakistan’s national identity we need to dig deep into Pakistan’s grand behavior, actions, habits and norms since 1947.
Even after departure of the great powers from the region, Pakistan continued advancing its strategic depth policy linked with the spirit of Muslim brotherhood beyond its geographical borders
Right from the beginning, Pakistan turned towards the United States for economic and military assistance. As a newly independent state with a fragile economy and under-equipped military, Pakistan was deeply dependent on assistance from the great powers and their institutions. Due to its geopolitical and strategic significance, US too, found a willing ally in Pakistan to “strictly keep an eye on the activities of Soviet Union”. In the Cold War era, Pakistan sided with the United States against the Soviet Union, unlike India, who pursued its formally declared policy of non-alignment. In 1979 when the Soviet forces invaded Afghanistan, Pakistan’s military regime under the dictatorship of Gen. Zia ul Haq articulated the “Strategic Depth” doctrine, seeking to prevent encirclement by India and a Soviet-backed Afghanistan.
Later, Pakistan’s strategic depth doctrine assisted US-led western countries to defeat the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Even after departure of the great powers from the region, Pakistan continued advancing its strategic depth policy linked with the spirit of Muslim brotherhood beyond its geographical borders. This created the Taliban movement in the tribal areas of Pakistan bordering Afghanistan that eventually brought the Taliban in power there. This strategic depth was very much synced with a strong Muslim national identity as suggested by proponents of Pakistan an ideological Islamic state.
However, two decades later, when US-led coalition invaded Afghanistan and once again Pakistan joined in. This time Gen. Pervez Musharraf adopted a “Pakistan First” strategy to support the US-led “War on Terror”. Suddenly, the state’s narrative that had been supportive of the Taliban and religious elements in and outside was abandoned. Despite decades of acceptance and following of Pakistan’s Muslim national identity, Pakistani state started to distance itself from the concept of common Muslim brotherhood and one Ummah. Additionally, on the pressure of the United Sates, Pakistan began to crackdown on allegedly its own created and supported religious extremists’ groups. This left a majority of the Pakistani nation and government officials wondering who the actually are?
Lately, a new populist party’s leader and the head of the Pakistani government, PM Imran Khan, has urged the nation to not to give up on its ideology. As a role model PM Imran Khan who is Western educated, and has lived most of his life in the West started to appear in a traditional Shalwar-Kameez, occasionally a Shirvani and frequently in a thick-soled Peshawari chappal and more recently carrying a wooden Tasbih, piously coiled around his right hand all the time. Whether he’s on a state visit abroad, hosting a reception in Islamabad or attending a meeting with the IMF’s chief, PM Khan is seen projecting and promoting its government’s new policy of Pakistan as an Islamic welfare state; much like the proverbial Riyasat-e-Madinah.
However, he seems to be the only one, who’s been whole-heartedly acting on it. Ironically, all his cabinet ministers and government officials seem either ignorant or do not want to follow his lead on an important strategic paradigm shift, regarding the state’s newly reinforced national identity. Recently, PM Khan has reiterated his resolve, while addressing a gathering on laying the foundation stone of Al-Qadir University for ‘spiritual’ and Super-scientific studies, to make “Pakistan an Islamic welfare state, as per the model of Riyasat-e-Madinah”.
Earlier, during a state visit to the Islamic Republic of Iran, he made a statement about the need for ‘new’ Pakistan to have a revolution like Iran’s, during a joint press briefing with the Iranian President Hassan Rouhani. Interestingly he has also hosted the Iranian nemesis, Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman, who (informally) called himself an ambassador of Pakistan in Saudi Arabia. It is yet to be determined how far Pakistan is willing to go in dealing with an increasingly dangerous situation unfolding in the Persian Gulf, between Iran, whose revolutionary spirit PM Khan openly admired, and the forces representing the Anglo-American hegemonic interests, with whom Pakistan is tied in a loveless marriage.
It appears that throughout its history, Pakistan has been pursuing a reactionary national security strategy – ignoring the national identity – to adjust as per the need of great powers, specifically the United States. Without giving a heed to the national identity whether it was the “Strategic Depth” or the “Pakistan First” doctrine, Pakistan adjusted (or at least it tried) its behavior, actions, institutional and social factors according to regional and global geopolitical situation. Though Pakistan provided substantial assistance, including ports, airbases, and ground lines of control, to the US war in Afghanistan, in exchange for military and civilian aid, Pakistan never completely abandoned its support of the Afghan Taliban. This dual policy of support of both the sides in the conflict, has resulted in confusion and chaos within the state apparatus as well as in the public discourse on national identity. A national identity discourse should be well-thought out and pondered upon by all stakeholders of the state and in Government before it is rolled out. Once a consensus is reached, Islamic or secular, the government should clearly communicate it to everyone at all levels of society, so that there’s no ambiguity left regarding the national identity whatsoever. Moreover, it’s all but possible to create or replicate a model of Riyasat-e-Madinah with the IMF bailouts, Saudi and Chinese loans and American weapons and fighter jets.