S. Haider Mehdi
Pakistan’s crisis is often framed as a failure of politics: corrupt politicians, weak parties, dynastic rule. This framing is incomplete and convenient.
It allows the most powerful institution—the military—in the country to remain analytically untouchable.
The deeper problem is structural: a military culture that rewards obedience without legality and power without accountability.
The Myth of the “Good Soldier”
A common refrain within Pakistan’s military ecosystem is that “99% of the army consists of good, God-fearing people.”
This assertion is emotionally comforting but analytically hollow. Moral intent is irrelevant when actions repeatedly violate constitutional order.
Institutions are judged not by intentions but by outcomes.
For over seven decades, Pakistan’s outcomes are unambiguous:
These outcomes were not produced by one man, one rank, or in one decade. They were produced by institutional compliance.
Obedience as a Political Weapon
Military obedience is often portrayed as a neutral professional virtue. In reality, obedience is politically consequential. When an institution monopolizes coercive force, obedience becomes the mechanism through which illegality is operationalized.
These acts require tens of thousands of individuals executing unlawful directives, knowingly.
The Excuse of Helplessness
The most corrosive idea within Pakistan’s military culture is not aggression, but helplessness.
Officers and soldiers routinely claim they disagree with unlawful actions but are “compelled” by discipline, unity of command, or professional obligation.
This claim collapses under both law and ethics.
International military law, including the Nuremberg Principles, establishes that following unlawful orders is not a defense.
Constitutional oaths bind soldiers to the state, not to individuals.
Helplessness is not a legal reality. It is a moral alibi.
The absence of accountability is not accidental. It is systemic.
No meaningful precedent exists in Pakistan where senior, mid-level or junior military personnel have been punished for crimes against civilians or the Constitution.
This absence creates a predictable behavioral outcome: risk-free illegality. Where punishment is impossible, abuse becomes routine.
The insistence on blaming “a few bad generals” is itself a mechanism of denial. Institutions function through collective action. Without compliance across ranks, authoritarian control is impossible.
This does not mean equal guilt, but it does mean shared responsibility.
The Question Pakistan Must Answer
Pakistan does not lack brave citizens, capable lawyers, or principled journalists. What it lacks is an institution willing to accept limits on its power.
The central question is therefore unavoidable:
Can a constitutional republic survive when its most powerful institution places obedience above legality and loyalty above law?
Until this question is answered honestly, Pakistan’s crises will recycle, faces will change, uniforms will remain, and the people will continue to pay the price.
Unless, of course, the people witness a few thousand constitutional violators, abrogators, law breakers, whether in military uniform or civilians, hang for their crimes, under Constitutional provisions.
Pakistan army chief Asim Munir is not satisfied with elevating himself to the rank of field marshal without any military achievements. Using...
The army gets itchy fingers whenever there is political turmoil in Pakistan. Will the current impasse lead to another martial law?
