Pakistan’s 2024 elections were supposed to mark a step forward for the country’s fragile democracy. Instead, they became a familiar exercise in managed politics. Originally delayed, the polls were finally held on February 8, 2024, under a cloud of allegations: a sweeping pre-poll crackdown on the country’s most popular party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI); mass arrests of senior leaders and thousands of workers; and the extraordinary step of removing the PTI’s name and election symbol from the ballot.
Election day itself was marred by internet and mobile service shutdowns. Voters still turned out in significant numbers, but unexplained delays in tabulating results and discrepancies in vote counts deepened suspicions of manipulation. Behind it all lay the familiar hand of Pakistan’s powerful military, propping up the parties it favors and sidelining those it does not.
What was striking this time was not just the brazenness of the interference, but also the muted reaction from Washington. The Biden administration remained conspicuously silent in the weeks before the polls, even as signs of manipulation mounted. The day after the vote, the State Department offered a cautious acknowledgment of “concerns about allegations of fraud,” urging that claims of interference be investigated. Members of Congress, however, took a stronger stance. Thirty-one lawmakers signed a letter in late February urging the administration to withhold recognition of the new government until credible investigations determined whether the election had been rigged.
This divergence is telling. For decades, U.S. administrations have declared democracy to be central to their foreign policy. Yet when it comes to Pakistan, Washington’s silence reflects something deeper than disinterest — it reflects the true nature of the U.S.–Pakistan relationship.
The Military: Washington’s Partner of Choice
Since the Cold War, America’s closest ties in Pakistan have not been with its civilian governments but with its military. From General Ayub Khan in the 1960s, who offered U.S. bases near Peshawar for surveillance of the Soviet Union, to General Zia-ul-Haq in the 1980s during the Afghan jihad, and General Pervez Musharraf in the 2000s as the “war on terror” ally, the pattern has been clear: the Pentagon and Pakistan’s generals speak the same language.
At critical moments, the Soviet-Afghan war, the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the subsequent counter-terrorism partnership worth $23 billion in security aid — the Pakistani military was Washington’s go-to institution. American officials have long justified this reliance by citing Pakistan’s fragility and the fear that its nuclear arsenal could fall into the wrong hands. The army, for its part, presents itself as the country’s only competent institution, a narrative U.S. policymakers have largely internalized.
But this dependence has been costly. The military’s pursuit of “strategic depth” in Afghanistan — offering sanctuary to the Taliban even as it took U.S. counter-terrorism aid — undermined both America’s war and Pakistan’s own security. Today, the Pakistani Taliban have re-emerged as a lethal threat, launching attacks from Afghan sanctuaries against Pakistan itself.
Silence on Democracy, Noise on Security
Even as Washington has criticized Pakistan’s double game in Afghanistan, the military remains its indispensable partner. Civilian governments come and go — often weak, corrupt, or unstable — but the generals endure, ensuring continuity in U.S.–Pakistan relations.
That dynamic remains unchanged. While civilian leaders in Islamabad struggle for relevance, Pakistan’s army chief has been building a direct channel with Washington:
-
December 2023 – The army chief’s first official U.S. visit included meetings with Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Deputy NSA Jonathan Finer, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Charles Q. Brown. Counterterrorism and regional security dominated the agenda. His visit was treated as business as usual. He returned to the U.S. twice more in 2025, reinforcing the message: regardless of Pakistan’s political turmoil, the military remains America’s main interlocutor.
-
June 2025 – A landmark five-day trip, including a White House luncheon with Donald Trump, unprecedented for a serving Pakistan Army chief. Talks covered trade, energy, artificial intelligence, and defense. He also engaged CENTCOM leadership and U.S. military officials.
-
August 2025 – The army chief returned for a second visit within weeks, attending the CENTCOM commander’s retirement ceremony in Tampa, meeting U.S. military brass, and addressing the Pakistani diaspora, calling his engagements a “new dimension in Pak-U.S. ties.”
Such warmth helps explain Washington’s reticence over Pakistan’s deeply flawed elections. America still calculates that its interests — counterterrorism, regional stability, and nuclear security — are best safeguarded by a cooperative Pakistan Army, not by messy civilian politics.
Against that backdrop, the Biden administration’s soft touch on Pakistan’s flawed 2024 election seemed less surprising. Washington was far more vocal after the 2018 election, when the playing field was tilted against Nawaz Sharif’s PML-N — but at least all parties were allowed to contest under their symbols. By contrast, in 2024, PTI was effectively erased from the ballot, yet the U.S. response was notably restrained.
A Missed Opportunity
For the sake of Pakistan’s democracy — and America’s credibility — Washington must do better. By deferring to Pakistan’s Election Commission or judiciary, institutions widely seen as complicit in the military’s designs, the U.S. risks legitimizing authoritarian engineering. A firmer American stance could begin to change the military’s calculations, since it derives international legitimacy from U.S. recognition and support.
In 2024, Pakistani voters demonstrated their faith in democracy by turning out in large numbers despite repression and intimidation. But they were once again forced to play within boundaries drawn by the military establishment. By staying largely silent, the Biden administration missed an opportunity to stand with them.
It should not make the same mistake again.
References: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/pakistans-democracy-its-military-and-america/
No comments:
Post a Comment