Siegfried O. Wolf

Beyond the fallacy of coup-ism: conceptualizing civilian control of the military in emerging democracies

It is consensus in the democratization literature that civilian control of the military is a necessary ingredient for democracy and democratic consolidation. However, there is considerable disagreement on what civilian control of the military exactly entails and there is a lack of solid theoretical arguments for how weak or absent civilian control affects democratic governance. Furthermore, a considerable portion of the research literature is captured by the fallacy of coup-ism, ignoring the many other forms in which military officers can constrain the authority of democratically elected political leaders to make political decisions and get them implemented. This article addresses these lacunae by providing a new conceptual framework for the analysis of civil–military relations in emerging democracies. From democracy theory it derives a definition of civilian control as a certain distribution of decision-making power between civilian leaders and military officers. Based on this definition, the authors develop a five-dimensional concept of civilian control, discuss the effects of weakly institutionalized civilian control on the quality of democracy and address the chances for democratic consolidation.

An Assessment of the Latest Premature End of Nawaz Sharif's Prime Ministership

It happened a third time! Nawaz Sharif, the Prime Minister (PM) of Pakistan, got ousted from office. On 28 July 2017, the country’s Supreme Court (SC) unanimously disqualified Sharif as member of the national parliament and, in consequence, Sharif resigned as the country’s Premier. The judges deemed the PM of being unfit for public office. The five members of the country’s highest bench ruled that the PM had not been ‘honest’, which is a prerequisite for the eligibility for membership of the national parliament — and subsequently for the chief executive’s office — as enshrined in the Articles 62 and 63 of Pakistan’s Constitution. It was argued that Nawaz did not disclose to the national parliament and the judiciary his employment (and related monthly income of

EU-Pakistan Relations: European Perspectives at the Turn of the Twenty-First Century

3000) in the Dubai-based Capital FZE company in his nomination papers for the 2013 general elections. Ostensibly, the disqualification verdict was based on a Joint Investigation Team (JIT)report on corruption allegations, forgery of documents and conflicting statements involving his family in the context of the ‘Panama Papers case (Panama gate)’. It is interesting to note, that the apex court dispatched nearly all of the allegations listed in the JIT report. In fact, Nawaz was brought down just by a technicality that he not sufficiently laid out that he received a work permit (Iqama) for the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Subsequently, critics describe the court proceedings as a violation of the ‘principles of a fair trial’, even as a ‘judicial coup’. Cyril Almeida, assistant editor at the Pakistan based newspaper Dawn, describes the judgement as ‘confounding, appalling in argument and scope’. Furthermore, some observers emphasise that the PM’s ousting is based on politically motivated charges and weakened democracy. Nevertheless, besides the questions over the legality and justification of the SC’s verdict, the following assessments regarding Nawaz Sharif’s disqualification and its political ramifications can be made.

The EU in Afghanistan’s Regional Security Complex

The principle aim of this chapter is to analyse relations between the European Union (EU) and Pakistan and to present European approaches towards the growing influence of militancy in Pakistan. To understand European perceptions of Pakistan and South Asia, it is necessary to perceive the European vision of the international order as well as the nature and essence of Europe. Moreover, in outlining European perspectives towards Pakistan and towards countering militancy in this country, the authors make a comparative analysis of the respective approaches of the US and EU towards the ‘Pakistani challenge’. This leads to the conclusion that European and American perceptions of Pakistan differ due to different attitudes and approaches towards international order as a concept, as well as issues such as war, balance of power and the use of force. The European perspective places greater stress on soft power elements as the basis of Europe’s long-term strategy in Pakistan. This approach seems to gain particular momentum in light of the Pakistan General Elections of 2013. In order to strengthen its soft power elements the EU decided not only to deploy an election observation mission to monitor the elections on May 11th but also to reconfirm its commitment to deepening and widening its relations with Pakistan, with special focus on strengthening the process of democratic transition (EEAS 2013a, b). This should be interpreted as a tangible sign of the implementation of envisaged EU-Pakistan Strategic Dialogue as agreed on in June 2012 (EEAS 2012) “which forms the bedrock of deeper EU-Pakistan relations” (EEAS 2013b).

Epilogue: The Merits of Regionalisation and Emerging Prospects in South Asia

The formation of the European Union (EU) revolves around economic cooperation and integration. Over the decades the EU has developed into the world’s largest trading bloc and economy. It is therefore justified to claim that the EU as a whole ranks among the world’s great powers. In the definition of Buzan and Waever (2007, 34–36) great power interests stretch across the globe but often have unbalanced capabilities which may reduce the effectiveness of their efforts to pursue these interests. This conceptualisation fits the characteristics of the EU, which is an economic superpower, but has ineffective political institutions in the field of foreign policy making, and downright underdeveloped military capabilities. Nevertheless, in recent decades the EU has been trying to position itself as a credible foreign policy actor. In 2003 the EU for the first time presented its foreign security interests in the European Security Strategy (ESS). In pursuing its security interests abroad the EU has maintained its traditional mantra of promoting democracy – a logical policy as it is arguably the most stable political system available, and may well be considered one of the key ingredients to more than seven decades of stability in the largest parts of Europe.

Theorizing civilian control of the military in emerging democracies: agency, structure and institutional change

The fact that South Asia and its vehicle for regional integration South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC) are on the edge of improvement has been evident for quite some time. For most analysts of the subcontinent, this did not come as a surprise. Compared with other regional organisations it had a very difficult ‘starting position’ (Delinic 2011, 8). South Asia was not able to fully recover from the traumatic partition that followed the end of the European presence. The prevalence of intraregional diplomatic conflicts and fully fledged wars became rampant and prevailed over the logic and rational of effective and cohesive regional co-operation. Nevertheless, the challenge for SAARC exists in a connectivity problem because almost all of the SAARC member states share a border with India, but practically none share a common border, except for the troubled Durand Line between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Furthermore, besides some individual success stories, the region has to contend with endemic poverty, tremendous inequalities, mega-urbanisation, and extra-ordinary challenges when it comes to infrastructure, environmental issues, food and energy security. The most worrying concern is the persistent growth of religious extremism and militant fundamentalism finding its most visible expression in dramatic terrorist attacks and violence against religious and ethnic minorities in South Asia. The numerous domestic and intra-regional conflicts are worsening the situation as well. Addressing these difficulties has always been a great challenge and either suffered from inadequate political will or insufficient capacities or resources to carry out a sustainable integration and cooperation process (cf. Rahman 2004, 140).