When officers from the fighting arms of our military are asked to define “strategic defence,” the answer is usually instant and articulate. It will include satellites, early-warning radars, 360-degree surveillance, air dominance, sea control, and credible punitive strike options etc. If you then ask him a bit more, he will include economy as a factor but only as an adjunct to military power. His response is absolutely right from a technical standpoint, very professional, and based on his operational experience. However, it will still not cover the entire truth. What is often overlooked is that most elements of true strategic defence lie outside the military domain altogether. They belong to economists, educators, business leaders, religious scholars, civil administrators, the judiciary, and political parties.
Air Marshal (Retd.) Shahid Akhtar Alvi
For the purpose of this discussion, “strategic defence” is used not merely in the traditional military sense, but as a wider concept of national resilience encompassing governance, economy, justice, education, and social cohesion.
Which is why our concept of defence remains heavy on hardware and light on the societal foundations that ultimately determine whether a country can stand firm in the long run. And today, many nations are learning this lesson the hard way. Before turning to Pakistan, it is worth taking a brief look at a few examples. The rise of India over the last two decades has been remarkable, but ideological nationalism and RSS-influenced religious fundamentalism have weakened its unity and reputation. Under the BJP, majoritarian politics, historical rewriting, and shrinking civic space have eroded the image of a country once known for diversity and pluralism. Decisions like openly backing Israel in Gaza and provoking Pakistan without credible evidence reflect ideological impulse rather than principled statecraft. All in all, India has weakened its strategic defence despite modern military hardware and growing wealth.
Israel’s military superiority cannot offset the moral failure visible in Gaza. A state that normalises injustice gradually begins to lose its credibility and credibility itself is a form of protection. When legitimacy erodes, so does strategic defence. Scandinavia: By contrast, the Nordic nations don’t even use the term “strategic defence,” but they practice it far better than those who do. Their foundation is built on the pillars of education, equality, rule of law and public trust. Because their societies are stable and just, their borders are secure by default. On the contrary, the story of Pakistan continues to revolve around enormous potential and recurring disappointment. The military side of strong strategic defence exists, but it is surrounded by a weak national system. Professionalism, training, and combat readiness remain high, as demonstrated most recently when our military established unquestionable air dominance. But the broader frame of national defence is fractured. Our politics is personality driven instead of institution driven. Leaders prefer unflinching loyalty over merit. On one hand, we build dynasties instead of systems. On the other, we confuse charisma with competence. In the first case, leadership becomes a family inheritance; in the second, it becomes a stage performance. Both may attract crowds, but neither produces stable governance or lasting institutions. These structural weaknesses are not minor issues; they are direct threats to strategic defence.
It is painful that a country of 250 million cannot be defined by a single clear positive trait. We cannot honestly say we are known for hard work, innovation, or fairness not because these qualities are absent, but because they are not strong enough to shape our national character.
We still bow to power more easily than we stand up for truth. And too often, personal links matter more than plain honesty. These weaknesses did not appear overnight. They are the product of decades of uneven education, political interference, weak accountability, confused values, and a culture that celebrates personalities instead of building institutions.
Until the very roots of these problems are addressed, Pakistan will continue to shine in isolated areas but will struggle to form a coherent national character. And without that coherence, strategic defence will always remain incomplete. We do not need speeches about values or abstract virtues. We need practical reforms. The teachers should recognize that their education is laying the foundation of the nation’s resilience. A defense system that relies on poorly educated citizens falls quicker than one that relies on old weapons. The education reform should prioritize critical thinking, ethics, scientific attitude, and civics among the main areas of focus. Policy makers should realize that Strategic defence starts in the classroom.
Economists and business leaders have an equally critical role. A weak economy makes a country vulnerable long before the first missile is fired. The tough conditions imposed by the IMF are proof of that. We need policies that attract investment into real production instead of stock market speculation and endless real-estate schemes. We must boost exports instead of feeding overconsumption, and encourage genuine technological innovation rather than allowing a few groups to monopolise it. Simply put: economic independence is the economic equivalent of air supremacy. Judges and the judicial system sit at the heart of a country’s credibility. No nation can feel secure if its people believe the courts are powerless and justice is out of reach. Selective rulings, uneven enforcement, and political interference weaken strategic defence more than any external threat. Even the UK held firm through world war only because its judicial system inspired trust.
Religious scholars should return to their role as moral guides instead of being a tool of politics. Their divisive approach has already split the nation. It is time they bring back humility, truth, and respect for differing views because that is what strengthens a nation from within. Civil administrators and bureaucrats must understand that good governance is not a favour for which the nation should be grateful, instead it is their primary duty and a direct contribution to national security. Corruption and incompetence do not just slow progress; they weaken society, fuel resentment, and destroy public trust, directly impacting our strategic defense. The media and opinion-makers must either seek the truth or make room for those who will. Because of their shallow debate and deliberate misinformation, our society has lost clarity and with it, national will. A well-informed public is a protective shield, and those who shape opinion must treat it as part of national defence. It is time for our political leadership to accept that strategic defence goes beyond military power and it is their responsibility to build it. If Pakistan wants real security, we must stop treating defence as the military’s job alone. The armed forces have done their part. The strongest nations are protected by fair courts, honest economies, good teachers, responsible media, and leaders who treat power as a trust. Now the rest of us must do ours. That is the strategic defence we failed to build and the one we still can, if we choose to act.
