Express Tribune: By Khalid Ahmad: Even Maulana Fazlur Rehman, who should be committed to permanent jihad under Islam, thinks that Pakistan has been damaged by the label of “national security state”.

I can’t find a better exposition of the national security state than what General KM Arif wrote in his book Khaki Shadows: Pakistan 1947-1997 (OUP 2001): “Most Pakistanis perceive a threat to their national security from a numerically superior and hegemonic India. The role played by India in 1971 strengthens their thinking. India desires a subservient Pakistan, too weak to defend herself and too fragile to pursue a foreign policy independent of the regional big brother. She wants to be the master of her own destiny but denies this right to her neighbours in South Asia. This raises doubts about her reliability and intentions.

“It is seldom comfortable for a weak country to live with a large and aggressive neighbour…. Pakistan’s location — proximity to the Gulf, Central Asia and South Asia — provides her with great geostrategic importance. Given internal unity, national cohesion and economic stability, this advantage can be a force multiplier.” (p.350)

What is ignored in the above statement are the finer points of the thesis. For example, who is the revisionist in the proposition? If India is the status quo power, then its power projection is for deterrencerather than aggression. It doesn’t want to change the map. Why does Pakistan end up attacking India?

More;