During a recent visit to Karachi, Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Asim Munir met with key members of the city’s business community. In a series of discussions aimed at boosting confidence, General Munir offered hopeful projections for the country’s economic future. He mentioned the possibility of the US dollar falling to Rs250, hinted at a reduction in the industrial power tariff to nine cents, and acknowledged the need to repair roads in key trading areas. The Army Chief also expressed his gratitude toward Pakistan’s allies—particularly China, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE—for their contributions to the country’s economic recovery.
While these remarks were warmly received by many, they also raise a fundamental question about the Army’s role in addressing economic and business-related issues in Pakistan. Shouldn’t these announcements be made by government officials, such as the Minister of Finance, Commerce, or Trade? Why is the country’s top military official taking center stage in economic policy discussions?
Karachi, Pakistan’s financial hub, generates a significant portion of the country’s revenue, contributing to the national exchequer through taxes, duties, and other forms of revenue collection. As the main industrial and commercial center, it is home to the country’s largest corporations, banks, and the stock exchange. The city is responsible for around 25-30% of Pakistan’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and about 50% of the total federal tax revenue.
The port city is also a critical trade gateway for Pakistan, handling the majority of the country’s imports and exports. Karachi’s industrial base spans key sectors such as textiles, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, and steel, making it a vital cog in the nation’s economic machinery. However, despite its importance, Karachi suffers from a range of systemic problems that hamper its economic potential.
One of the most persistent complaints from the business community in Karachi is the city’s crumbling infrastructure. Roads in industrial and trading zones are often in disrepair, which increases transportation costs and delays in the movement of goods. Poor infrastructure also impacts the city’s ability to attract foreign investment, as potential investors are deterred by unreliable utilities and deteriorating roads. While General Munir hinted at the repair of roads in trading areas during his meeting, infrastructure development is traditionally the domain of civilian institutions like the local government or Ministry of Planning and Development.
Another major issue is the high cost and unreliability of electricity. Many industries in Karachi struggle with frequent power outages and high electricity tariffs, which affect their ability to remain competitive in the global market. The COAS’s suggestion of lowering the industrial electricity tariff to nine cents per unit would be a welcome relief, but again, this is typically a matter for the Ministry of Energy and related regulatory bodies. The business community’s call for lower energy costs reflects broader concerns about the government’s inability to manage resources efficiently.
Though Karachi’s security situation has improved in recent years, the city was long plagued by political violence, extortion, and gang wars. The Pakistan Army, particularly through the paramilitary Rangers, played a pivotal role in stabilizing the city. However, ongoing concerns about street crime and sporadic unrest still affect business confidence. While General Munir’s engagement with the business community in Karachi reflects the Army’s historical role in restoring law and order, it raises questions about whether the military should extend its involvement into other areas, such as economic management.
The business community in Karachi also struggles with inconsistent government policies, particularly regarding taxes and regulatory frameworks. Constant shifts in tax laws and the imposition of duties create uncertainty, making it difficult for businesses to plan long-term investments. This issue is compounded by Pakistan’s chronic economic instability, marked by currency devaluations, inflation, and a reliance on external financial assistance.
Given these challenges, the business community often finds itself in need of concrete and consistent policy decisions from the Ministry of Finance, Commerce, and Industry. However, the Army’s growing role in addressing these concerns highlights a unique and somewhat controversial dynamic in Pakistan’s governance structure.
General Asim Munir’s assurances to Karachi’s business leaders may have been aimed at fostering confidence during a time of economic uncertainty. His discussion of lowering the dollar rate, reducing energy tariffs, and improving infrastructure is no doubt comforting to those in the business community who feel frustrated by the lack of progress on these issues. However, these are traditionally the responsibilities of civilian authorities—specifically, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Commerce, and the Ministry of Energy.
The involvement of the military in economic and governance matters is not new in Pakistan. For decades, the Army has been a powerful institution with significant influence over national affairs. While military interventions in politics are well-documented, the Army has also been involved in economic management, particularly in times of crisis. For example, during military rule under General Pervez Musharraf, the military played a direct role in shaping economic policies. The Army has also taken control of large sectors of the economy through military-run businesses, such as the Fauji Foundation and the Army Welfare Trust, which operate in industries ranging from banking to fertilizers.
The Army’s deep-rooted involvement in Pakistan’s economy creates a blurred line between military and civilian governance. In many ways, the Army has taken on the role of a parallel government, stepping in when civilian institutions are perceived as ineffective. This could explain why General Munir feels compelled to address the business community directly on issues that would typically fall under the purview of elected officials.
One of the key questions raised by General Munir’s economic engagement is the role of civilian oversight. Ideally, in a functioning democracy, the military should remain subordinate to civilian authorities, with issues related to the economy being handled by elected officials. The Ministry of Finance, for example, is responsible for fiscal policies, including managing the exchange rate, while the Ministry of Commerce deals with trade-related matters. These institutions are designed to create policies that reflect the will of the people, as expressed through their elected representatives.
However, in Pakistan, civilian institutions have often been perceived as weak or corrupt, leading the Army to take on an outsized role in governance. This lack of effective civilian oversight has allowed the military to extend its influence into areas beyond security, including economic policy. In recent years, the Army has even been involved in negotiating with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other international financial institutions, a task that would typically be the responsibility of the Finance Ministry.
The Army’s involvement in economic matters raises concerns about accountability. Civilian leaders are elected and can be held accountable by the public through elections and parliamentary processes. The military, on the other hand, is not subject to the same level of scrutiny, leading to potential conflicts of interest and a lack of transparency. General Munir’s meeting with the business community is an example of this dynamic, as his assurances on economic matters bypass traditional channels of civilian governance.
Should Economic Announcements Come from the Army?
General Munir’s engagement with Karachi’s business community highlights a broader debate about the role of the military in Pakistan’s economic and political affairs. While the Army’s role in stabilizing the country cannot be denied, its growing involvement in economic policy raises important questions. Should the military be making statements on issues such as exchange rates, electricity tariffs, and infrastructure development? Isn’t this the job of the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Commerce, or the Minister of Energy?
In most countries, matters of trade, fiscal policy, and industrial development are handled by civilian institutions with expertise in these areas. This ensures a separation between security and economic governance, with the military focusing on defense and security while civilian authorities manage the economy. In Pakistan, however, the lines between these roles have become increasingly blurred, with the Army stepping in to address not only security concerns but also economic challenges.
The Army Chief’s recent engagement with Karachi’s business community, while perhaps well-intentioned, underscores the need for a clearer separation between military and civilian roles in Pakistan. While the military has historically played a significant role in stabilizing the country, especially in terms of security, its involvement in economic matters should be more limited. Economic policy decisions, such as exchange rates, power tariffs, and infrastructure development, should come from civilian institutions that are accountable to the people.
General Asim Munir’s statements may have been aimed at reassuring a business community that is struggling with a range of challenges, but they also highlight the limitations of Pakistan’s civilian governance. If Pakistan is to build a stronger, more resilient economy, it will need to strengthen its civilian institutions, ensuring that economic policy is driven by experts and elected officials rather than the military.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Coverpage’s editorial stance.
