Fortress under invisible assault

Pakistan today is choking not only under an incalculable policy lapse (read: betrayal) but also facing a multi-pronged economic warfare that many in Pakistan believe is being waged by its arch-rival. The country is reeling from internal incompetence and indifference to national interests as well as an external assault through proxies, like never before.

Little did those in power realise that decades of political hostility — rooted in the Kashmir dispute — and recurring military stand-offs actually gave birth to a stealthy but lethal war as a harsher punitive measure i.e. a protracted, shadowy war of economic sabotage.

Now, there are two ways to look at the consequences. For Pakistan's present day rulers, including the Chief of Defence Forces (CDF), Asim Munir, the May 7 Maarka-i-Haq victory, fortified Pakistan's image as an unconquerable stronghold, much like Austria's legendary Hohensalzburg Fortress, which resisted military capture for a thousand years.

The CDF links further fortification with modernising defence forces i.e. mastering technologies (cyberspace, electromagnetic spectrum, use of outer space, AI, information operations and quantum technologies). No two opinions about the criticality of technologies as the drivers of progress and shields against enemies; but as things stand today, our most serious vulnerability arises — not from military inferiority — but from internal socio-economic erosion.

Yet, the most potent threat to this stems - not from visible military aggression — but partly also from a systematic economic espionage warfare designed to cripple Pakistan internally.

This doctrine can be traced to strategic writings such as Geo-Politics of South Asian Covert Action, associated with figures like B Raman, former deputy chief of RAW, or recommendations by National Security Advisor Ajit Doval, also former RAW chief. These writings propose a shift from conventional conflict to destabilisation from within — pressuring the military-bureaucratic structure, fracturing institutions and undermining economic lifelines.

The strategy's toolkit includes psychological warfare, disinformation and targeted disruption of financial hubs like Karachi, critical communication corridors and symbolic infrastructure such as dams. The goal is not territorial destruction but institutional chaos — forcing Pakistan to fight internal fires while India maintains diplomatic composure. Proxy terrorism via sub-nationalist groups is an essential element of this strategy.

Not that the external factors triggered the socio-economic decay in Pakistan but weaknesses, incompetence and absence of long-term vision served as the fault-lines for external actors.

Suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) also stemmed from the same shift in India's strategic calculus. According to critics, the push to revise the IWT did not originate abroad but from Pakistani "climate change experts" who, since 2013, advocated for revisions without a sufficient grasp of hydrology or international water law. This decade-long campaign, many argue, inadvertently provided justification for India's suspension of the treaty on April 23, 2025 — an act viewed by some as a decisive move in economic warfare.

Pakistan, once an exporter of cotton, now spends over $2 billion annually to import it. Analysts argue that commentary by prominent Pakistani voices — which some call the work of a "Desi Lawrence" — turned cotton into a climate villain. Heatwaves, pests, rainfall shifts and water-use concerns were spotlighted until many districts shifted to sugarcane, one of the most water-intensive crops.

Pakistan thus abandoned a crop aligned with its industrial base in favour of one that drains aquifers and yields minimal export value. Meanwhile, cotton production in Indian states such as Rajasthan, East Punjab and Gujarat surged. Was climate change truly selective? Or did Pakistan fall into a trap of misdiagnosis and misdirection?

As for energy, today, the power sector carries nearly $40 billion in circular debt, while LNG imports, estimated around $50 billion, have drained foreign reserves. Had Pakistan proceeded with the hydropower pipeline of the 1990s, the nation could have met peak demand with clean, inexpensive hydropower.

What sharpened the damage, many argue, was regulatory capture. Quiet but potent influence allegedly seeped into institutions such as NEPRA and OGRA, where small decisions — tariff shifts, procurement delays, environmental objections, licensing pauses — had outsized national consequences. None of these actions was dramatic; collectively, they were devastating. What entered as "advice" became policy itself — an invisible hand steering the nation into vulnerability.

External manipulation is one thing but internal shortcomings and local conflicts — be it short-sighted power or water strategies or the sub-nationalist grievances (Baloch, Pashtoon) or relations with Afghanistan over issues such as terrorism — do offer the hunting ground to the enemy. And an enemy would be stupid not to exploit those fault-lines.

We also tried to externalise it by calling it the "hybrid or 5th Generation warfare" imposed on Pakistan. The cost is staggering, whatever you call it; a textile sector bleeding on margins, an energy sector chained to imported fuel, and a nation paying for electricity in foreign currency it cannot earn — because its export backbone has been bent. Nothing sadder than the fact that the country with 46,000 MW electricity is hardly using 15,000 MW on the average and is unable to receive dozens of LNG cargos despite the capacity charges being paid to dozens of IPPs and LNG Terminals at Ports.

The nation's fortress will remain politically extremely vulnerable — both internally and externally — and its military prowess under stress until the elements feeding into the economic sabotage are seriously taken care of. The battle for respectable survival is within and the time to act is now.