Asim Munir - Field Marshal forever: Pakistan's enduring cycle of military dominance

The elevation of General Asim Munir to Field Marshal is a moment of profound consequence for Pakistan a rare, symbolic act that reverberates through every layer of the nation's civil-military fabric. As only the second such appointment in Pakistan's history, Munir's promotion is far more than a ceremonial flourish. It is the latest chapter in a recurring national drama: the military's ascent to unassailable power, the marginalization of civilian authority, and the persistent struggle to realize the promise of democratic governance.

To truly understand the magnitude of Munir's rise and its implications, we must examine the enduring legacies of Field Marshal Ayub Khan and General Pervez Musharraf, whose shadows still loom over Pakistan's institutions, politics, and regional posture.

Ayub Khan: Blueprint of Military Rule

Ayub Khan's 1958 coup was a foundational moment for Pakistan's political order. As Chief Martial Law Administrator, Ayub quickly sidelined President Iskander Mirza and consolidated power, later self-appointing as Field Marshal in 1959. This act, as noted by historian Ayesha Jalal, "institutionalized the military's claim to ultimate authority in Pakistan's polity."

Ayub's era brought economic modernization and strategic alliances with the United States and China, but at the cost of democratic freedoms and federal balance. His 'basic democracies' system, described by the International Crisis Group as "a façade for centralized control," marginalized genuine political participation. The inconclusive 1965 war with India and growing economic inequalities eroded Ayub's legitimacy, culminating in the 1968–69 protests.

As Jalal observes, "Ayub's paradox was progress without participation a legacy that haunts Pakistan to this day." As Stephen P. Cohen, renowned South Asia scholar at Brookings, once remarked, "Pakistan's military has always seen itself as the ultimate guardian of the state, often at the expense of democratic development."

Musharraf: The Technocrat General

General Pervez Musharraf's 1999 coup echoed Ayub's script, combining military command with the presidency and leveraging the Supreme Court's 'doctrine of necessity' for legitimacy. Musharraf's era saw economic liberalization and media expansion, yet his reforms were, as Dr. Shuja Nawaz of the Atlantic Council writes, "ultimately superficial, designed to sustain military dominance under a veneer of civilianization."

Internationally, Musharraf's post-9/11 alliance with the United States brought resources and stature, but domestically, he failed to address deep-rooted grievances or build sustainable democratic institutions. The 2007 emergency, the sacking of Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, and the crackdown on civil society triggered mass protests and his eventual resignation.

Dr. C. Christine Fair of Georgetown University notes, "Musharraf's attempt to blend military rule with democratic facades only deepened Pakistan's institutional crisis, setting the stage for further cycles of instability." The lessons are clear: legal and economic engineering cannot substitute for genuine democratic renewal. As Bruce Riedel of the Brookings Institution has observed, "Musharraf's rule was a classic example of the perils of military engagement in politics short-term stability, long-term decay."

Munir's Elevation: Continuity and Consequence

General Asim Munir's appointment as Field Marshal, sanctioned by the civilian government but shaped by military calculus, is deeply reminiscent of both Ayub and Musharraf's maneuvers. It comes at a time of political uncertainty, military setbacks in confrontations with India, and rising nationalist sentiment. The move grants Munir effective immunity from retirement and legal challenges, echoing the constitutional protections Ayub and Musharraf secured for themselves.

As Dr. Husain Haqqani, former Pakistani ambassador to the US, remarks, "The Field Marshal rank is not just a personal accolade; it is a shield against accountability and a signal of the military's unbroken supremacy." As Anatol Lieven, author and senior fellow at the Quincy Institute, adds, "The Pakistani military's ability to reinvent itself and maintain primacy is unrivaled in the region, but this comes at the cost of institutional balance and democratic evolution."

This lifetime appointment disrupts the army's established succession model, freezing the promotion ladder for senior commanders and risking internal discontent and factionalism. Analysts at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) warn that "over-centralization of command may ensure short-term stability but undermines long-term cohesion and professionalism."

The likely elevation of trusted deputies, such as ISI chief Lieutenant General Malik, further consolidates power at the top, mirroring the reliance on loyalists seen under Ayub and Musharraf. As Dr. Marvin Weinbaum, director for Afghanistan and Pakistan Studies at the Middle East Institute, notes, "The Pakistani military's internal dynamics are often as volatile as its external challenges, especially when traditional succession is disrupted."

The Narrative Machine: Manufactured Triumphs and Public Perception

A hallmark of military rule in Pakistan has been the construction of powerful public narratives. Ayub's post-1965 war propaganda, Musharraf's 'enlightened moderation,' and now Munir's narrative of victory against India all serve to legitimize the military's role, even in the face of setbacks. Gallup Pakistan reports that an overwhelming majority of the public believes in the army's triumph, a testament to the enduring power of controlled media and nationalist messaging. Yet, as Michael Kugelman of the Wilson Center cautions, "Such popularity is ephemeral military regimes often enjoy a honeymoon, but the underlying grievances do not disappear." As Dr. Maleeha Lodhi, former Pakistani ambassador to the UN, has pointed out, "Narratives can shape perceptions, but they cannot erase realities on the ground. Sooner or later, the truth asserts itself."

The sidelining of Imran Khan, allegedly through international financial deals and legal pressure, mirrors the tactics used by both Ayub and Musharraf to neutralize political rivals. However, history shows that repression breeds resistance. The 1969 revolt, driven by East Pakistan, demonstrated the limits of authoritarian control.

Today, with East Pakistan gone, the potential for nationwide revolt is reduced, but the underlying grievances economic inequality, lack of political representation, and human rights abuses remain as potent as ever. As Dr. Aqil Shah of the University of Oklahoma notes, "The military's dominance may mute dissent temporarily, but it cannot resolve the contradictions at the heart of Pakistan's polity." As Christophe Jaffrelot, senior research fellow at CERI-Sciences Po, Paris, states, "Pakistan's military has mastered the art of crisis management, but not crisis resolution."

Regional and Strategic Implications

Munir's promotion and the consolidation of military power have significant implications for Pakistan's regional posture, especially its relationship with India. The narrative of a clear-cut victory against India, despite evidence to the contrary, serves domestic purposes but complicates prospects for meaningful dialogue and conflict resolution. The International Crisis Group warns that "militarized narratives increase the risk of escalation and undermine the prospects for peace and stability in South Asia."

Moreover, the entanglement of Pakistan's internal politics with global financial and geopolitical interests as seen in the alleged cryptocurrency deal involving the Trump family adds another layer of complexity and vulnerability. As Dr. Daniel Markey of Johns Hopkins University observes, "Pakistan's internal power struggles are increasingly intertwined with external actors, raising the stakes for both domestic stability and regional security." As Ashley J. Tellis of the Carnegie Endowment remarks, "The militarization of national narratives in South Asia perpetuates a security dilemma that is difficult to escape."

Prescriptions for Pakistan's Future

The historical record from Ayub to Musharraf, and now Munir, offers clear prescriptions for breaking the cycle of military dominance, although this appears difficultowing to obvious reasonsand histtorical imperatives themselves:

Restore Civilian Oversight: Genuine democratic renewal and robust institutional reforms are essential. As Dr. Moeed Yusuf, former National Security Adviser, asserts, "No state can progress when its institutions are locked in a perpetual contest for supremacy. Pakistan's future depends on learning from its past, not repeating it." As Dr. Robert Hathaway, former director of the Asia Program at the Wilson Center, notes, "Civilian institutions must be empowered to check the military's reach for Pakistan to achieve sustainable governance."

Merit-Based Succession: The army should return to a predictable, meritocratic promotion system to prevent factionalism and ensure professionalism. As the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) notes, "Professional militaries thrive on clear rules and depersonalized leadership transitions." As Dr. Shaun Gregory of Durham University adds, "The health of Pakistan's military as an institution is inseparable from the predictability and integrity of its internal processes."

Address Public Grievances: Economic reform, political inclusion, and the protection of civil liberties are vital for long-term stability. Ignoring the root causes of discontent only postpones inevitable crises. Dr. Huma Yusuf, writing for the Carnegie Endowment, argues, "Sustainable stability in Pakistan will require addressing the socioeconomic drivers of unrest, not just managing its symptoms." As Dr. Kamal Munir of Cambridge University states, "Economic justice and inclusive governance are the only real antidotes to recurring cycles of unrest."

Pursue Regional Diplomacy: Sustained engagement with India and neighboring countries, rather than reliance on manufactured narratives of military triumph, is crucial for peace and prosperity. As the United States Institute of Peace observes, "Lasting peace in South Asia depends on dialogue and mutual accommodation, not zero-sum posturing." As Dr. Gareth Price of Chatham House emphasizes, "Constructive regional diplomacy is the only viable path to breaking the logjam of perpetual insecurity."

Prognosis and Future Scenarios

The elevation of Asim Munir to Field Marshal, coming on the heels of a high-stakes confrontation with India and amid deepening civil-military tensions, sets the stage for a future defined by both heightened military dominance and significant uncertainty. International observers, such as Michael Kugelman of the Wilson Center, caution that "Munir's promotion signals a consolidation of power that could further sideline civilian institutions and entrench the military's primacy in Pakistan's governance."

The precedent of Ayub Khan's and Musharraf's tenures suggests that such centralization often breeds internal dissent within the ranks and risks fostering factionalism, especially as senior officers see their own career prospects blocked. Moreover, the perception of Munir as the architect of Pakistan's response to India despite strategic setbacks has bolstered his public image in the short term, but as Dr. Shuja Nawaz notes, "manufactured narratives of victory are rarely sustainable in the face of economic hardship and public discontent."

Looking ahead, several scenarios emerge. If Munir leverages his enhanced stature to pursue genuine reforms, restore a semblance of civilian-military balance, and engage constructively with India, Pakistan could see a period of relative stability and diplomatic progress. However, if the promotion is used to shield the military from accountability and suppress political opposition as many analysts fear the result may be increased authoritarianism, further erosion of democratic norms, and a cycle of resistance and repression reminiscent of past strongman eras.

The international community, including the United States and China, will watch closely, as Pakistan's trajectory under Munir will impact not only regional security but also the broader balance of power in South Asia. As Dr. Husain Haqqani puts it, "Pakistan now stands at a crossroads—whether it moves toward institutional equilibrium or deeper into the shadow of military absolutism will shape its destiny for years to come."

Beyond the Shadow of Strongmen

General Asim Munir's elevation to Field Marshal is not merely a personal milestone; it is a test of whether Pakistan can finally escape the shadow of Ayub, Musharraf, and the cycles of military absolutism that have defined its history. The world, and Pakistan's own people, will judge whether this moment marks a genuine new beginning or yet another turn of the old wheel. The stakes for Pakistan's democracy, its institutions, and the stability of South Asia could not be higher.

As Dr. C. Christine Fair reminds us, "Pakistan's stability hinges on the strength of its institutions, not the charisma or longevity of its generals." The lessons of history are unambiguous: the concentration of power in the hands of a single military leader, no matter how capable, cannot substitute for the hard work of building resilient, inclusive, and accountable institutions. The International Crisis Group concludes, "Pakistan's long-term stability will depend not on the fortunes of individual generals, but on the country's ability to restore equilibrium between its civil and military spheres." As Dr. Stephen Tankel of American University puts it, "The challenge for Pakistan is to move from a politics of personalities to a politics of institutions."

The path forward requires courage, vision, and a willingness to embrace change not just at the top, but throughout the fabric of society. Only then can Pakistan hope to transcend the cycles of its past and build a future worthy of its people's aspirations. The eyes of the world and history are watching.

[Major General Dr Dilawar Singh is an Indian Army veteran who has led the Indian Army's Financial Management, training and research divisions introducing numerous initiatives therein. He is the Senior Vice President of the Global Economist Forum AO ECOSOC, United Nations and The Co President of the Global Development Bank.]