Why and how is sovereignty compromised?
The writer is former Dean Faculty of Social Science, University of Karachi and can be reached at amoons@hotmail.com
Few days before his government was removed by a vote of no-confidence in April, the then Prime Minister Imran Khan asserted that: “The people are always the strongest defenders of a country’s sovereignty and democracy. It is the people who must come out and defend against this latest and biggest assault on Pakistan’s sovereignty and democracy by a foreign power through local collaborators — our Mir Jafars & Mir Sadiqs.”
When a state is weak and fragile, its sovereignty is always compromised. Geopolitical and geo-strategic edge of a state with frail economy and chaotic political discourse cannot ensure respect and recognition at the international level. That is exactly what is the ground reality as far as Pakistan is concerned, a fact which is repeatedly narrated by PTI Chairman Imran Khan in his political speeches and statements in the last six months.
Why and how is a state’s sovereignty compromised and what are the essential characteristics of freedom which a country must possess in order to survive and rise in today’s world with dignity?
According to Key Concepts in International Relations by Martin Griffiths and Terry O’ Callaghan: “Sovereignty flows from the recognition of the legitimacy of some central governing power and not the acceptance of the moral or legal validity of the acts carried out by the central authority.” Several political scientists and philosophers defined sovereignty in terms of authority exercised by a state to make and implement decisions independently and without any coercion. If such criteria about the exercise of sovereignty is taken into account then no state is sovereign in in the real sense. Every state is dependent and has to compromise on its sovereignty in order to safeguard its security and economic interests. Yet, if a state is economically on dole and politically fragmented, it fails to prevent foreign intervention, particularly when the elites lack courage, take ownership of their country and is willing to mortgage their resources and assets.
Viewed in the context of Pakistan, since its inception as a new state on August 14, 1947, the issue of sovereignty remains critical. Mortgaging the country’s sovereignty by joining the Western alliance system and agreeing to serve American interests during the Cold War days, the elites of Pakistan were least mindful about the price of becoming a ‘frontline state’ or to be part of the US-led war on terror. When the elites compromised on their country’s sovereignty by agreeing to terms and conditions of IMF, World Bank, Asian Development Bank and ‘friendly’ countries to seek loans in order to prevent economic default, the very respect of the country was gone.
When Imran Khan asserts that Pakistan must reclaim its sovereignty and should have authority to make and implement decisions independently, his rhetoric is full of contradictions because he compromised while he was in power when he came under Saudi pressure and declined to participate in the Kuala Lumpur conference of four Islamic states. Was any attempt made during his four years in power to mitigate his country’s dependence on foreign powers and international financial institutions? Now after being removed from power, he is trying to build a narrative that his ouster was an international conspiracy and Pakistan’s sovereignty is under threat under the PMLN-led coalition government.
How and why the sovereignty of Pakistan has been compromised needs to be analysed from three angles.
First, foreign powers take advantage of fragile economic and political situation of a country and in that case they use local elements that are ready to be used for their own vested interests. When the interests of foreign powers and their local collaborators click, the stage is set for unleashing a ‘great game’ with a purpose to severely weaken the country’s ability to protect its national interests and sovereignty. There are countless examples to prove that since the assassination of Pakistan’s first Prime Minister, Liaquat Ali Khan, in 1951, no credible investigation has been carried out over the conspiracy that split Pakistan in 1971, overthrow of the Zulfikar Ali Bhutto government in July 1977; the death of President Zia-ul Haq in an air crash in August 1988; Kargil operation of 1999; and Operation Jerimino of May 2011 carried out by the US Navy Seals that breached the sovereignty of Pakistan by killing Osama bin Laden. How was it possible to damage the country’s interests without local collaboration with foreign masters? Lack of integrity, lust for power, wealth and indifference to critical domestic issues on the part of the elites of Pakistan made it easy for foreign powers to play their dangerous game of weakening the country.
Second, why and how sovereignty is compromised is not difficult to gauge when the country’s foreign exchange reserve stand at a meager $7.5 billion; foreign and local debt has touched an unbearable $150 billion; trade gap has risen to $35 billion; economic growth rate had dipped around 2%; and the country needs $45 billion worth of financing in FY23 to avoid a default. Other issues like political chaos, social disharmony, extremism and violence have also weakened Pakistan forcing it to compromise on its sovereignty. A country with only liabilities and few assets cannot salvage its sovereignty from external and internal conspiracies and Pakistan’s perennial predicament is the nexus between foreign and domestic elements that leave no opportunity to weaken the country’s national security and force it to compromise on its sovereignty. Those at the helm are sovereign enough to exploit and suppress their own people rather than using power for their wellbeing.
Finally, there is no hardcore evidence to prove that the mother of all conspiracies is to reduce Pakistan to a fragile and failing state by compromising its nuclear assets. As the only nuclear state in the Muslim world, Pakistan has been a target of those external forces that are not willing to accept its nuclear arsenal as a deterrent. Taking advantage of its economic predicament and domestic political infighting, those forces consider it as a rare opportunity to take possession of Pakistan’s nuclear assets arguing that the threat of seizure of power by Islamic extremists must be prevented by all means. Depriving Pakistan of its nuclear arsenal as a result of a deal of several billion dollars would be the end of the country’s sovereignty. When President Joseph Biden at a fundraising speech in California a few days back raised questions about the safety of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, the die was cast and reflected transforming ambitions of some powerful external forces into a reality. It is a moment of truth for the so-called custodians of Pakistan’s sovereignty.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 6th, 2022.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.