XVIII

State and national interest

           
   
By Dr Moonis Ahmar | 3/23/2017 12:00:00 AM

NATIONAL interest is the most misunderstood and controversial term in Pakistan. As the country is
commemorating 77th anniversary of the proclamation of Lahore Resolution, it is time to ponder on why
state version of national interest tends to be parochial and how the pursuance of non-traditional
approach on national interest is imperative to effectively deal with issues which divide and polarise the
country.

Like many post-colonial states, Pakistan is faced with the predicament of state`s assertion of national
interest and the crisis which is created by identifying vital and supreme interests of the country in
contradiction with the interests of majority of people. What is national interest and how is it perceived
by the state actors in Pakistan since its inception as an independent state? Why state is unable to
redefine national interest in consonance with the interests of people rather than the interests of the
elites? How national interest, if redefined, can promote social and human development and transform
Pakistan from a security to a welfare state? These are the questions which are raised by those who
consider state`s interpretation of national interest devoid of reason and prudence.

Hans J. Morgenthau, a noted political scientist in his essay, `The Primacy of National Interest` argues
that, `It is not only a political necessity, but also a moral duty for a nation to always follow in its dealings
with other nations but one guiding star, one standard of thought, one rule for action the national
interest.` According to Merriam Webster dictionary, `national interest is the interest of a nation as a
whole held to be an independent entity separate from the interests of subordinate areas or groups and
also of other nations or supranational groups.` As mentioned by Martin Griffiths and Terry
O`Callaghan,in Key concepts in International Relations, `The concept is usually used in two related ways.
On one hand, the word interest implies a need that has, by some standard of jurisdiction, attained the
status of an acceptable claim on behalf of the state.

On the other hand, the national interest is also used to describe and support particular policies. The
problem is how to determine the criteria that can establish a correspondence between the national
interests expressed as a principle and the sorts of policies by which it is advanced.` According to Mark R.
Amstutzin his book International Conflict and Cooperation, `National Interest, a concept is rooted in a
country`s dominant values and orientations and, in particular, in the nature and character of
nationalism and ideology of the state. Because national interests define the fundamental wants of
states, they provide not only a broad vision and direction to society but a foundation for identifying the
more specific and concrete national goals.

Furthermore, according to Graham Evans and Jeffrey Newnhaum in The Penguin Dictionary of
International Relations, `National Interest is an analytical tool identifying the goals or objectives of
foreign policy and as an all-embracing concept of political discourse and specifically to justify particular
XVIII

policy preferences. In both senses it refers to the basic determinants that guide state policy in relation
to the external environment. It applies only to sovereign states and relates specifically to foreign policy:
the internal variety usually being characterised as the public interest.

The debate on national interest centres around four major dimensions. First, the traditional notion of
national interest refers to state security paradigm in which the emphasis and focus is on protecting the
country`s territorial borders, integrity and sovereignty. In order to ensure state-centric national interest,
the priority is given to substantial military buildup and the diversion of resources from development to
defence.

State-centric national interest to a large extent tends to shape Pakistan`s foreign and domestic policies
while neglecting social and human development. The placement of Islamic ideology as a pillar in
national interest is also a source of controversy. Should Pakistan continue to assert itself as an
ideological state while disregarding sectarian schism and the role of religious minorities? Owen Bennett
Jones in his book Pakistan: Eye of the Storm (Yale University Press, 2002) rightly argues that, `Many of
the men who led the Muslim League, Muhammad Ali Jinnah included, never envisaged the creation of a
state in which Islam would provide the framework for all political activity. Like most of his followers,
Muhammad Ali Jinnah was a modernist. His educational background owed more to Oxbridge than
Deoband. Jinnah, meanwhile, viewed most of the Ulema as ignorant, power hungry, and often corrupt,
theocrats`.

How far state-centric national interest is logical depends on the nature of state. In an authoritarian
state, parochial and inward notion of national interest shapes the perceptions of people because the
lack of democracy provides no room for dissent.

But, if the state is enlightened and democratic, state narrative of national interest is challenged by a
counter narrative. Those not subscribing to state centric ideology based primarily on religion and
security, thought process and policies are termed as non-conformists and against the interests of the
country. The amalgamation of state-centric threat perception and the security concerns of those at the
helm of affairs created a dichotomy in Pakistan`s strategic and security policies, thus, causing a lot of
confusion about the very concept of national interest.

Second, various regimes coming to power in the last 70 years failed to innovate and redefine national
interests on pragmatic grounds.

For instance, it was never the priority of Pakistan`s security establishment to think in terms of focussing
on eradicating major security threats faced by the country ranging from social and economic
backwardness to bad governance, corruption, nepotism and the fragility of rule of law. The level of
insecurity is deepened among the majority of the people of Pakistan because of poverty, low quality of
life, illiteracy, marginalisation of vulnerable segments of society like women, minorities and children.

Some of the issues, which although highly contested by those opposing state-centric narrative of
national interest, relate to the launching of military operation in the then East Pakistan, the use of
military to quell insurgency in Balochistan and violence in Sindh; grievances of smaller provinces visà-vis
XVIII

injustices caused by the Punjab dominated military and civil bureaucracy. State narrative shaping
national interest about foreign policy issues like relations with India, Afghanistan and the United States
were equated with patriotism and loyalty with the country. Third, most of the civilian, military and
quasi-military regimes of Pakistan seldom encouraged debate to redefine national interest according to
the changed national, regional and international situations. Opaque nature of national interests
generated more and more confusion among people and relevant stakeholders. Lack of proper
awareness and knowledge about formulating national interest on pragmatic lines further compounded
crisis in Pakistan`s national security narrative because with meagre thought process on first
understanding and then analysing different dimensions of national interest accentuated the level of
confusion. Crisis in civil-military relations also raised questions and doubts about national interest
narrative because on some matters, the lack of equation between the two may lead to contradicting
narratives. Seldom, there is any effort made by the civilian regimes to challenge the state-centric
national interests because of their weaknesses and fragility.

Finally, the gap in state and societal version of national interest is a major predicament for Pakistan
because the issues faced by the majority of the people of the country are seldom categorised as
national interests. For the 200 million people of Pakistan, national interest should centre around social,
economic and human development; ensuring human security and rights; the rule of law and a viable
justice system; dealing with environmental issues which cause deforestation; spread of diseases and
scarcity of water and energy.

From any standpoint, national interest means interests of nation as a whole and not interests of the
privileged classes. The interpretation of national interest in case of Pakistan has much to do with the
nature of state. Over developed state and under-developed society provides space to thoughts and
ideas which reflect a mindset of state actors who are unresponsive and unreceptive to the reality of
unresolved issues which cause crisis, chaos, conflict and violence in society. The age old nexus between
feudal-military-bureaucratic elite has managed to sustain the dominant narrative about national
interests which serve their privileged status and benefits.

Unfortunately, political parties and civil society groups, which were to provide a counter narrative of
national interests, are either divided or weak. In their rank and file also, there is no dearth of people
who support the state narrative of national interest. If the national interest shaped by state actors
representing military and bureaucratic establishment mindset doesn`t match with the ground realities
and only serve a handful of people having control over the reins of power the responsibility for not
providing a counter narrative of national interests also rests with political parties and civil society
groups. Furthermore, even in case of political parties, there is lack of democratic process and tolerance
in their rank and file which provides an opportunity to non-political forces to weaken political process
and impose their own brand of national interests on people.

How national interest can be redefined and what are the impediments in this regard? Ground realities
depicting the state and society of Pakistan provides marginal hope for redefining national interests
because of two main reasons. First, as long as the culture of patronisation, dearth of intellectual
discourse at the state level to logically understand issues plaguing the country remains, age old
narrative of national interest would continue to dominate the national scene and deny any scope for
XVIII

challenging policies which undermine socio, economic and political predicament of people.

Second,as long as there is the tendency and practice to depict interests of elite as national interest, one
cannot expect any transformation in the mindset of those who consider any deviation from a set
pattern relating to national discourse a threat to their interests. Is it wise on the state of Pakistan to
adhere to its national interest referring to strategic ties with Saudi Arabia,denying India space in
Afghanistan, depending on foreign aid, relying on China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) for country`s
economic development and prosperity? Redefining national interest would require giving weight age to
matters and issues directly concerned with the survival of the people of Pakistan. Protecting
environment, preventing deforestation, conserving energy, water and food resources, eradicating
corruption, nepotism, adhering to proper work ethics, ensuring the rule of law, efficient and affordable
justice system and guaranteeing access to good quality education can surely be termed as interests vital
for the majority of the people of the country.

National security, territorial integrity, sovereignty, protecting national assets from external attack and
aggression are undoubtedly crucial but such vital interests of Pakistan would remain fragile and
vulnerable unless the domestic fault lines dealing with political chaos, economic and social
backwardness, extremism, violence and terrorism are also addressed.

It should be Pakistan`s national interest to empower the vulnerable segments of society, particularly
women, youths and children. Furthermore, Pakistan will be better off if its national interest also
focusses on transforming the country as a welfare, egalitarian, enlightened and tolerant state instead of
being viewed in the world as a dangerous and an insecure place riddled with extremism, violence,
radicalisation of youth, intolerance and terrorism. It should be the vital interest on the part of state to
pursue a policy of self-reliance instead of being dependent on foreign aid and adding to the country`s
national debt. Till the time mindset of those who play a leading role in shaping Pakistan`s national
interest changes, there is little hope of following a non-traditional approach on providing a counter
narrative on matters of national security and interest. And, national interest must not be only limited to
the domain of foreign policy but critical and crucial issues of human survival mentioned above must
become a core of Pakistan`s national interest. The writer is a Meritorious Professor of International
Relations at the University of Karachi.