Hard or competent state?

The debate around whether Pakistan should be a ‘hard’ state or a competent one touches the very core of our national dysfunction. Despite having the full arsenal of coercive tools, the state has failed to ensure long-term stability, peace, and financial resilience. A hard state is not inherently a strong or capable one. True competence lies in delivering essential services, collecting taxes effectively, securing borders, and earning public trust. Power without authority is futile—authority stems from legitimacy, public purpose, and consent. Nowhere is this disconnect more evident than in Balochistan, where decades of flawed governance, repression, and failure to address local grievances have fueled an insurgency that cannot be defeated by military might alone. In fact, coercion without consent has only further alienated the public, creating a vacuum where legitimacy should stand.

This article rightly argues that counter-insurgency is not just about weaponry; it is about winning hearts and minds. Suppressing peaceful dissent, as seen in recent actions against the Baloch Yakjehti Committee and political leaders like Akhtar Mengal, only tightens the noose around national unity. The Pakistani state’s tendency to conflate nationalist voices with militancy reflects a fundamental misreading of conflict resolution principles. The situation in Balochistan has reached a boiling point, not because of external interference alone, but due to a fertile ground of injustice and unfulfilled demands. Without representative governance, respect for human rights, and the active inclusion of political, economic, and social dimensions in its response, the state will continue to lose its credibility. Strength lies not in suppression but in inclusivity and reform.

Overview:

This article examines the false sense of strength projected by a coercive state and argues for a competent, legitimate governance system that addresses root causes rather than relying solely on force. Balochistan acts as a critical case study in how the misuse of power, in the absence of trust and representation, can deepen alienation and fuel insurgency. The author highlights the need for a multidimensional national security strategy rooted in consent, legitimacy, and comprehensive engagement.

NOTES:

This article is highly useful for developing analytical perspectives on civil-military relations, internal security, counter-insurgency, federalism, and governance issues in Pakistan. It illustrates the difference between power and authority and provides a critical lens on how statecraft should be rooted in legitimacy rather than brute force. The article can be quoted in papers to reflect an understanding of state-building challenges and strategies for conflict resolution, particularly in Balochistan.

Relevant CSS Syllabus Topics:

• Pakistan Affairs: Governance, Balochistan issue, civil-military relations
• Current Affairs: Counter-insurgency, internal security challenges
• Governance and Public Policy: Legitimacy, authority, public trust
• International Relations: External involvement in internal insurgencies

Notes for Beginners:

A hard state means using power to control, but a competent state goes beyond that—it works efficiently, gains people’s trust, and delivers services. For example, countries like Norway or Canada are competent states because people trust their institutions. In contrast, in Balochistan, Pakistan has used military force instead of listening to people’s complaints. This has made things worse, not better. An example is the protest march led by Akhtar Mengal that was forcefully blocked, which only increased anger among the locals. Facts show that without listening to the people and solving their basic problems, no government can bring peace, no matter how strong its army is.

Facts and Figures:

• Balochistan remains gripped by a raging insurgency due to long-standing grievances, poor governance, and the absence of representative rule.
• Multiple military operations have been conducted in Balochistan over the years, yet stability remains elusive.
• The crackdown on the Baloch Yakjehti Committee and the arrest of human rights activists escalated tensions rather than defusing them.
• Former Chief Minister Akhtar Mengal’s protest march was forcibly stopped, triggering widespread political condemnation.
• Leaders of several political parties gathered in Quetta to oppose government restrictions on peaceful protests and sit-ins.
• Pakistan possesses significant coercive instruments and hard power, yet lacks legitimacy and authority in conflict-prone regions like Balochistan.
• The absence of non-kinetic efforts—such as political, economic, and social reforms—has allowed external elements to exploit internal unrest.
• The state continues to use repressive measures to curb dissent and opposition nationwide, further eroding public trust and institutional credibility.

To wrap up, This article provides a compelling reality check for Pakistan’s policymakers. It dismantles the illusion that might is right and insists that sustainable peace can only be built on the pillars of legitimacy, public trust, and inclusive governance. It urges a strategic shift—from a security-heavy posture to a people-centered, rights-based model of governance, especially in conflict-hit Balochistan. A timely and critical read for anyone reflecting on the state’s future.

Difficult Words and Meanings:

1. Coercive – involving force or threats

Synonyms: forceful, oppressive

Antonyms: voluntary, consensual

2. Legitimacy – lawfulness or rightfulness of authority

Synonyms: validity, credibility

Antonyms: illegitimacy, unlawfulness

3. Disaffection – dissatisfaction or alienation

Synonyms: resentment, estrangement

Antonyms: loyalty, contentment

4. Kinetic – relating to movement or forceful action (often military)

Synonyms: dynamic, aggressive

Antonyms: passive, static

5. Panoply – wide array or complete range

Synonyms: array, range

Antonyms: limitation, scarcity