The persistence of praetorianism reflects not just military ambition but civilian fragility.*
Analyse Pakistan’s civil–military trajectory to evaluate whether democratic consolidation is possible without fundamental institutional rebalancing.

Question

PocketIAS · Accepted Answer

Pakistan’s political trajectory demonstrates entrenched praetorianism:
- Military interventions often stem from both ambition and civilian institutional fragility.
- Historic coups from Ayub Khan (1958) to Pervez Musharraf (1999) show the armed forces’ decisive role during political instability.
Civilian fragility is reflected in:
- Weak political parties with limited internal democracy and policy coherence.
- Compromised judiciary and deficient parliamentary oversight.
- Electoral volatility and governance deficits creating vacuums exploited by the military.
- Constitutional provisions (e.g., Eighth Amendment) institutionalizing civilian dependence on the military.
Contemporary manifestations of praetorian influence:
- Creation of the Chief of Defence Force post concentrating military authority.
- Bureaucratic-military coordination limiting civilian policy autonomy.
- Civil-military power asymmetry undermining democratic consolidation.
Requirements for democratic consolidation:
- Strengthen parliamentary oversight and judicial independence.
- Reform political parties for internal democracy and stable policymaking.
- Establish clear civil-military boundaries through constitutional and institutional reforms.
- Enhance transparency and accountability mechanisms to reduce military leverage over civilian governance.
Implications:
- Without fundamental rebalancing, democratic processes remain constrained, largely ceremonial, and vulnerable to military interventions.
- Sustainable democracy depends on institutionalizing civilian supremacy, resilient governance, and separation of powers.

✍️ Practice Mode

Write. Evaluate. Improve. Repeat.

The model answer is ready.

Comments (0)