From Kabul To Tehran: How Pakistan's Military Exploits The ‘Ummah' For Power

News18

17-07-2025

Last Updated:
The so-called support for the Ummah became a convenient narrative to mask Pakistan's collaboration with Western intelligence and its betrayal of genuine Islamic solidarity.
Ayesha Jalal, a highly respected historian from Pakistan, contends that the nation's foundational identity is built on a paradox: the effort to reconcile Islamic universalism, represented by the non-territorial concept of 'Ummah', with the territorial framework of the modern nation-state. This ideological tension, she argues, has left the state susceptible to manipulation by those in power. Over time, the unresolved contradiction has enabled Pakistan's ruling elites to selectively invoke Islamic identity when politically convenient, while gradually sidelining the collective ideals of the 'Ummah' in favour of state-centric interests and material gain.
On April 15, 2025, during the first Overseas Pakistanis Convention in Islamabad, Asim Munir, the current Army Chief, proclaimed that Pakistan is not only the only modern state founded on the Kalima but also the second state in Islamic history, after the Prophet's establishment of Riyasat-e-Tayyiba (Madinah al-Munawwarah) in 622 CE, to be created explicitly based on core Islamic tenets. He stated: 'In the annals of human history, the first state founded on the Kalima was established more than 1,300 years ago, and now, by the will of God, he has granted you the honour of being the second to be built upon the same sacred foundation."
Nonetheless, these proclamations, cloaked in religious reverence, ring hollow as they are invoked primarily to bolster the legitimacy of the military establishment that continues to dominate the country's political order. This use of Islamic rhetoric and eschatological references from the highest echelons of power is not a sincere call for Islamic governance but rather a strategic instrument of statecraft, designed to preserve the state's entrenched grip on power and perpetuate its political entanglements for the benefit of the Pakistani military elite.
This betrayal of Islamic values in favour of realpolitik is neither new nor subtle; it is a recurring pattern, etched into the very memory of Pakistan's modern history. From the battlefields of Jordan in 1970, where Pakistan's military aided the Jordanian monarchy in suppressing Palestinian factions during Black September, to the US-backed proxy war in Afghanistan throughout the 1980s, Pakistan's ruling elites have repeatedly compromised Pan-Islamic solidarity for Western approval and financial reward. These decisions, framed as acts of Muslim unity, were deeply transactional, serving the strategic interests of the Pakistani state while devastating Muslim communities across the region.
In both cases, Pakistan aligned itself not with the oppressed or the ideals of 'Ummah', but with authoritarian regimes and Western power, weaponising Islamic rhetoric for geopolitical patronage. The memories of the 1970s grow murkier as one of the central figures during the brutal Black September crackdown, representing Pakistan, was none other than Brigadier Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq himself. Furthermore, the Soviet incursion into Afghanistan in December 1979 signified the beginning of a protracted conflict that fundamentally altered the geopolitical landscape of the region.
Although Pakistan publicly asserted its role as a defender of the Afghan populace and the wider 'Ummah', its subsequent actions disclose a significantly more self-serving agenda. From 1980 to 1988, Pakistan, under the military governance of General Zia-ul-Haq, emerged as the principal conduit for US support directed towards the Afghan Mujahideen, motivated by both internal legitimacy and regional aspirations. It is widely believed that the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) sourced approximately $2 billion to $3 billion in clandestine support and provided training to over 80,000 combatants.
ISI openly supported factions aligned with its objectives, particularly Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, while marginalising more autonomous leaders such as Ahmad Shah Massoud. Consequently, this engendered the empowerment of extremist groups, many of which would subsequently metamorphose into the Taliban. Pakistan's initial endorsement of ideological extremism, cloaked in the language of 'Jihad,' allowed it to propagate a narrative of Islamic obligation while simultaneously pursuing its strategic depth doctrine. The military intervention was portrayed as a holy mission to liberate a fellow Muslim nation. However, in reality, Pakistan exploited the conflict to entrench its authoritarian regime and advance its regional ambitions.
The so-called support for the Ummah became a convenient narrative to mask Pakistan's collaboration with Western intelligence and its betrayal of genuine Islamic solidarity. Even after the Soviets withdrew in 1989, Pakistan continued to interfere in Afghanistan, backing militant factions that tore the country apart. The ISI trained the Taliban in various skills, including crafting explosive devices and orchestrating intricate suicide attacks. Tragically, these tactics, once seen as tools of 'resistance", became instruments of mass civilian suffering. Over two decades of war saw more than 50,000 Afghan civilians lose their lives. Far from defending the 'Ummah', Pakistan exploited it, leading to decades of bloodshed, instability, and the eventual rise of the Taliban.
No instance perhaps better elucidates the persistent nature of this duplicity than Pakistan's recent management of the Iran-Israel crisis, a paradigmatic instance of discursive dissonance, where invocations of Islamic solidarity mask the geopolitical pragmatism that truly guides state behaviour. Despite recurrent proclamations of allegiance to the 'Ummah', Pakistan remains conspicuously silent when that very 'Ummah' is in urgent need of advocacy, as seen in its muted response to Israeli aggression against Iran. Amidst this intensifying crisis, Pakistan's Army Chief, General Asim Munir, initiated a five-day diplomatic initiative in Washington, DC, a gesture that starkly contradicted Pakistan's avowed allegiance to the 'Ummah'. Munir further exacerbated the situation by nominating Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. This act, striking in its implications, highlighted Pakistan's implicit alignment with the Western-Israeli coalition, even as it publicly presented itself as a defender of Islamic interests.
This duplicity was not overlooked. Members of the Pakistani populace and civil society openly reproached the ruling elite for their perceived betrayal of the 'Ummah.' One notable political commentator, Talat Hussain, articulated this sentiment on X, stating: 'Israel's sugar daddy in Gaza and cheerleader of its attacks on Iran isn't a candidate for any prize." This public sentiment reflects a growing disillusionment with Pakistan's leadership, whose actions increasingly diverge from its rhetorical claims of Islamic unity and solidarity.
The Iran episode does not mark a deviation from Pakistan's foreign policy trajectory; rather, it exemplifies its core logic. From Jordan to Afghanistan to Gaza, Pakistan's reliance on Islamic rhetoric has rarely translated into principled action. Its muted response to Israeli aggression against Iran, punctuated by the push for the Nobel Peace Prize, underscores the dissonance between its pious rhetoric and cynical realpolitik. Iran is not an anomaly in this Pakistani history; it is its most vivid expression. What is laid bare is not simply hypocrisy but a decades-long pattern of betrayal shrouded in the language of faith, in which the 'Ummah' is evoked not to be defended, but to be instrumentalised in favour of Pakistan's military elite.
NC Bipindra is Chairman of Delhi-based think-tank Law and Society Alliance. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views.
About the Author
NC Bipindra
NC Bipindra is Chairman of Delhi-based think-tank Law and Society Alliance.
First Published:
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.