Pahalgam Attack Linked to Gen Asim Munir? Answer Lies in His Ties With 2 Men

Key to cracking Pak Army Chief Asim Munir lies in understanding his domestic political challenges and backstory.

(A recent speech by Pakistan Army Chief Asim Munir is being linked to the Pahalgam terror attack.)

(Vibhushita Singh/The Quint)

By now, crores of Indians must have heard the recent speech by Pakistan Army Chief General Syed Asim Munir. Two comments have gained the most attention - "Kashmir is Pakistan's jugular vein" and "Hindus and Muslims are two separate nations, different in every way".

Many media houses and observers in India have alleged that the Pahalgam attack - in which people were killed allegedly for being Hindu - was triggered by the General's statement.

However, the context and politics behind Munir's speech has gone unnoticed and it is extremely important to understand this. We are going to answer the following questions in this piece.

• Can Asim Munir's speech be connected to the Pahalgam Attack?

• What are the domestic factors within Pakistan driving Munir's strategy?

• What is his approach towards India likely to be?

Key to understanding Munir's strategy is to understand two important leaders in Pakistan's history and his interaction with them.

Was the Pahalgam Attack Linked to Asim Munir's Speech?

The simple, one-word answer is: yes. But not in the way many Indian observers are claiming. To say that the speech itself sparked the attack, is silly. Munir's speech is from about a week ago. An attack of this nature was clearly planned much before.

However, it does seem clear that terrorist actors from within Pakistan were involved in this attack. Aspects like training, arming and movement to the Line of Control and then across the LoC, couldn't have been possible without the collusion of at least some elements within the Pakistani security establishment.

The question is, how high up within the establishment? We don't know, and maybe we may never know conclusively.

But Munir's speech was clearly a statement of intent of the Kashmir policy Pakistan plans to pursue under him. It was the re-assertion of a policy that has been in place, with some intervals, since the 1980s. More on that later.

What Are the Domestic Factors Driving Munir's Strategy?

Many observers have missed the forum in which Munir made this speech. This is important. It was delivered during the 'Overseas Pakistani Convention' that took place in Islamabad between 13-16 April. The audience mostly comprised rich diaspora Pakistanis.

In his speech, Munir hailed the "brain drain" - or immigration of Pakistanis out of the country. He said that the diaspora is doing a great national service by "working hard abroad and sending remittances". He sought their help in "boosting Pakistan's economy" and assured them that the country is in "good hands".

The Pakistan Army shouldn't be viewed as an institution. It should be seen as a political actor that is actively involved in the struggle for power within Pakistan. It isn't even an entirely homogenous entity and has factions that often work at cross purposes.

Munir's speech needs to be seen in the context of his political struggle with the most powerful Pakistani politician in the last one decade - jailed former Prime Minister Imran Khan.

Asim Munir vs Imran Khan

The Pakistani diaspora has long been a major support base for Imran Khan. Even in the 2000s when Khan was struggling to win even a single seat in Pakistan, he continued to get the support of the diaspora. Thousands would throng his events in London and the United States. Many would even give donations to Khan despite the fact that at that time, he lay at the margins of Pakistan politics.

The Pakistani diaspora and much of Pakistan's middle class have never really liked the traditional politicians like the Bhutto-Zardari family and the Sharifs. They admire the Pakistan military and in the more recent past, Imran Khan.

It worked fine as long as Khan and the army were on the same side and ralleid against the PML-N and PPP. But it all went haywire when Khan became too big for the army and the establishment, in turn, colluded with the older politicians to get him out and put him in jail.

Khan hasn't gone down without a fight and his popularity is still intact. Since much of his base has also been the main support base of the army, his resilience has led to a rapid decline in the army's credibility.

Many Pakistanis, who for all these years backed the army to take on "corrupt politicians", now curse the army as being "corrupt" and "self-serving". On social media, pro-Imran handles even go the extent of calling the army "fascist".

Asim Munir's aggressive anti-India, anti-Hindu speech needs to be seen as his attempt to win back the support it has lost due to its tussle with Imran Khan.

Even at a personal level, Munir and Imran Khan have been known adversaries as the latter got him removed as the Director Genral of the Inter-Services Intelligence.

The supposed reason was the Munir made allegations of corruption against Imran Khan's wife Bushra Bibi - charges which the former PM has consistently denied.

There is another aspect to Asim Munir that is important to understand.

Asim Munir as Zia-ul-Haq 2.0?

Munir has often been compared to former president General Zia-ul-Haq, especially given how he claims to be an "Alim" (religious scholar) and his frequent use of Islamic vocabulary in his speeches. The parallels actually go beyond that.

Like Zia, Munir's family also hails from Jalandhar in East Punjab and they came to Pakistan during the Partition. Zia's father worked in the Army Headquarters in Delhi but was called "Maulvi" due to his deeply religious demeanour. Munir's father was the principal of a school as well as the Imam of a mosque in Rawalpindi.

A more important parallel between the two, is the context in which they have been at the helm of the Pakistan army.

Both Zia and Munir have been at the helm of the army at a time when Pakistan was under the shadow of two of its biggest populist politicians - Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and Imran Khan respectively. Their invocation of religion stems as much from their need for legitimacy as their upbringing.

There is also an element of cultural hatred. Munir now, like Zia four decades ago, wants to show himself as a pious soldier from a humble background taking on an elite, foreign-educated politician.

There is another aspect to this.

The last three Pakistan Army Chiefs before Munir - Qamar Javed Bajwa, Raheel Sharif and Ashfaq Parvez Kayani - are all sons of army men. Bajwa and Sharif's fathers were officers, while Kayani's father was a JCO. Then the two chiefs who came before them - Pervez Musharraf and Jehangir Karamat - were both sons of bureaucrats.

Munir is the first army chief in decades to come from a non-military, non-bureaucratic family background. When he became an officer in 1986, Zia-ul-Haq's influence on the army was at its peak

Zia-ul-Haq's tenure as President from 1978-1988 changed the nature of the Pakistan army. It is said that he made its cultural ethos much less colonial and much more Islamic. This changed a bit in the mid 90s but more rapidly under Pervez Musharraf based on Pakistan's new security challenges post 9/11. Therefore, it wouldn't be wrong to say that Munir's formative years as an officer were in the Zia and immediately post-Zia era.

Munir is the first army chief in decades who is almost entirely in the Zia mould.

What is Munir's Policy Towards India Likely to Be?

There are four aspects to this - two from Munir's past and two from the present.

Past 1: If Munir is indeed in the Zia mould, then he is likely to take forward the policy of "bleeding India through a thousand cuts". This is a policy that was initiated by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto but brought into force mainly by Zia and it involved promoting low-intensity insurgencies in different parts of India.

Past 2: Munir has been the DG of the ISI and the head of military intelligence and, therefore, may be much more rigid in upholding the Pakistani establishment's traditional doctrines on India (more on that in the next section).

Present 1: If Munir's priority is to take on Imran Khan in the arena of public opinion, then a confrontation with India may seem appealing for him. It may enable him to consolidate public opinion and divert attention from the legitimacy crisis that the army and the civilian government in Pakistan presently suffer from.

Present 2: However, some observers in Pakistan argue the opposite- that a confrontation with India is not in Asim Munir's interests. One of the priorities of the Pakistan Army since their ouster of Imran Khan has been to revive the country's flailing economy.

In this period, the army and the ministry of defence have been seeking the advice of economists and economic think tanks even though it doesn't fall in their domain. This reflects the centrality of the economy in their priorities.

Their calculation is that if they somehow address Pakistan's economic woes, it could help them counter the political threat they face. In this context, a conflict with India will prove to be counterproductive.

Imran Khan and Asim Munir's Contrasting Views on India

The contrast between Munir and Imran Khan's doctrine on India is evident from two speeches they made - Munir's recent speech and the speech Imran Khan gave announcing Pakistan's decision to release Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman following the Balakot strike in 2019. (Read this piece for a detailed analysis of Imran Khan's speech.)

Unlike Munir - who pitched the conflict between India and Pakistan as a 'Hindu vs Muslim' one, Khan didn't see India or even Hindus as homogenous. He said that the Indian public weren't to blame for the conflict and that the "tensions were mainly because of the Modi government and the Indian media".

“There are people in India who disagree with the tactics used in Kashmir. Most of the public also disagree with the war-mongering being done by the government. But they are being fed war hysteria by the media,” Khan had said.

Khan spoke of "atrocities in Kashmir since 2014" and even went to the extent of saying that "Until some years ago, Kashmiri politicians were firmly with India". This statement went against the official Pakistani stand that all "Kashmiris have been wanting independence from India and since 1947" and that the atrocities have been "going on for 70 years".

Khan invoked Guru Nanak in a number of occasions in that speech and in other speeches, something that Munir may probably never do as it doesn't fall in the "Two Nation" narrative.

Khan's aim was to present the BJP and RSS as some kind of radical fringe that has captured power in India.

He aimed to internationally make India look like a rogue state, pretty much the kind of narrative India had been building against Pakistan for years.

His claim was that the BJP and RSS "don't even represent all Hindus".

On the other hand, Asim Munir sees the conflict as some kind of civilisational war. His narrative actually vindicates the Hindutva position of India being a country for Hindus.

Of course, Khan never really got a chance to implement these views as policy as he remained embroiled in domestic challenges. However, the point remains that that Khan and Munir have very different approaches towards India.

Munir's hardline convictions and his desire for political legitimacy within Pakistan are likely to end up contributing to the escalation between India and Pakistan in the near future. However, observers and policy-makers within India would do well to take a more nuanced view of the realities within Pakistan especially the crisis of legitimacy that Munir and the civilian government face.