Critically assess how youth perspectives, digital activism, and civil society movements are influencing civil military relations.

Introduction

Civil–military relations concern the balance of authority between elected civilian governments and the armed forces. In Pakistan, the military has ruled directly for over three decades and has remained influential in politics and policy under civilian governments. A young, connected population, digital media and civil society movements are changing the way this relationship is discussed and contested.

Historical pattern

Military rule under Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, Zia-ul-Haq and Pervez Musharraf, and the frequent dismissal of elected governments, created what scholars such as Ayesha Siddiqa and Hasan Askari Rizvi describe as a dominant military role in security, foreign policy and the economy. Popular trust in the army as an institution has historically been high, alongside periodic resentment of its political role.

Youth perspectives

A majority of Pakistanis are under 30, and millions of young people vote for the first time in each election. Urban, educated and digitally connected youth are more exposed to global ideas of accountability and democracy, and many express frustration with traditional political elites and with institutional interference in politics. At the same time, youth opinions are diverse; many continue to view the armed forces positively, especially in the context of external threats such as the May 2025 conflict with India.

Digital activism

Social media has broken the monopoly of state and mainstream media over political narratives. Hashtag campaigns, YouTube commentary and diaspora networks discuss topics once considered off-limits, including the military's political role. Political parties run organised digital campaigns that mobilise supporters quickly. However, the digital space also carries disinformation, abusive campaigns and propaganda from all sides.

Civil society movements

The lawyers' movement (2007–09) showed that civil society could challenge a military ruler and restore judges. Bar associations, human-rights organisations, journalists' unions and student groups have campaigned on enforced disappearances, press freedom and civil liberties. Rights-based movements in the former tribal areas and Balochistan raised issues of security operations and accountability.

Influence on civil–military relations

These forces have increased public scrutiny and debate about the military's role, making it a mainstream political issue, and raised the political cost of overt intervention. They have also contributed to polarisation, as events such as the protests of May 2023, in which military installations were attacked, led to military trials of civilians and sharp divisions. The state has responded with regulation and restriction — internet shutdowns, platform bans, amendments to cyber laws, and pressure on journalists — and with its own digital outreach. Constitutional changes in 2024–25 that strengthened the military's formal status show that institutional power remains considerable.

Critical assessment

Digital and youth activism has widened the space for debate but has not fundamentally altered the balance of power, which still rests on institutional strength, political divisions among civilians and external security pressures. Polarised, personality-driven activism can weaken civilian supremacy if it attacks institutions rather than seeking reforms. Disinformation undermines credible criticism. Equally, restrictive responses risk alienating young people from the state.

Way forward

A healthy relationship requires civilian governments that perform and are accountable; parliamentary oversight of defence and intelligence through committees; clear constitutional boundaries respected by all institutions; protection of free expression alongside measures against disinformation and incitement; dialogue among political parties on rules of the game (a new "charter of democracy"); and civic education that channels youth energy into democratic participation.

Conclusion

Youth perspectives, digital activism and civil society movements have made civil–military relations more visible and contested than ever before. They have raised expectations of accountability but also intensified polarisation and state restrictions. Their positive potential will be realised only if activism is constructive and institutions — civilian and military — commit to constitutional democracy.