SMOKERS’ CORNER: DOCTRINE DIORAMAS |
In the theatre of global politics, a ‘doctrine’ is more than just a policy paper. It is a nation’s strategic DNA. From the 1823 Monroe Doctrine, which fenced off the western hemisphere from European monarchs, to the 1947 Truman Doctrine that looked to aggressively ‘contain’ Soviet communism, these blueprints signal a country’s core values, and the consequences for those who cross them.
In 1968, the Soviet Union introduced the Brezhnev Doctrine, asserting Moscow’s right to militarily intervene in socialist countries being threatened by capitalist/pro-US forces. Fast forward to the 21st century, and the blueprints have become increasingly aggressive.
We’ve seen the Bush Doctrine’s ‘strike first, ask questions later’ approach (‘preemptive strikes’), and Russia’s Gerasimov Doctrine, which treats disinformation and cyberattacks as the new artillery. We see the Xi Jinping Doctrine seeking to enhance China’s glory through the sprawling veins of the Belt and Road Initiative, while Donald Trump’s recent ‘Donroe’ Doctrine is an obsession with border walls, drug cartels and keeping Chinese influence out of ‘America’s backyard.’
But doctrines are not static. They mutate. They adapt to the scent of power and economic reality. This is apparent in Pakistan as well. Pakistan began with its founder Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s high-minded idealism, but was quickly forced into a security-first straitjacket by the shadow of a much larger India.
Pakistan’s national ‘doctrine’ has continued to mutate according to the whims of those in power, thus resulting in an often erratic and haphazard approach to strategy-building
By 1958, the harsh realities of the Cold War had taken hold. Upon seizing power, Gen Ayub Khan established a doctrine that firmly anchored Pakistan within Western alliances. This manoeuvre was shaped to leverage US military and economic assistance........