A political analysis published in the Times of Israel on 25 July has argued that the United States must cease its support for Pakistani Army Chief Asim Munir, warning that backing him echoes Washington's historically damaging relationship with former military dictator Zia-ul-Haq. The report, authored by political researcher Vas Shenoy, describes Pakistan as a hybrid political system in which the military remains the ultimate arbiter of national security — not the elected civilian cabinet.

A Legitimacy Crisis at the Heart of Pakistani Politics

Shenoy's analysis contends that Pakistan's current civilian government, characterised as a 'cohort of the extended Sharif family,' is grappling with a severe legitimacy crisis. He cites multiple contributing factors: alleged irregularities surrounding the 2024 General Elections, the continued imprisonment and political exclusion of former Prime Minister Imran Khan and his supporters, restrictions on the media, the erosion of judicial independence, and documented violence against minority communities.

According to the report, these conditions have convinced millions of Pakistanis that the ballot box can no longer deliver a peaceful transfer of power. With constitutional politics losing credibility, public anger is increasingly being directed at the state itself — a development Shenoy describes as deeply destabilising.

Deteriorating Security and an Emboldened Militant Landscape

The security situation within Pakistan is also worsening, according to the analysis. The Pakistani Taliban has intensified its campaign, particularly in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Baloch separatists continue to challenge state authority in the southwest, while Islamic State–Khorasan and various sectarian organisations remain operationally active.

Shenoy noted that Afghanistan provides sanctuary and strategic depth to some of these networks. He argued that Pakistan's historically selective approach toward militant groups has blurred the line between organisations considered hostile and those once deemed strategically useful — a contradiction that continues to undermine regional stability.

Economic Fragility Beneath the Surface

'Pakistan's economic stabilisation should not be mistaken for structural health,' Shenoy wrote. While international assistance has eased the immediate threat of a balance-of-payments crisis, the country remains burdened by debt, a narrow tax base, energy-sector liabilities, and weak public services. He warned that poverty, rapid population growth, and severe exposure to floods, heat, and water stress have sharply reduced the state's capacity to absorb another major economic shock.

Washington's Policy Prescription: Conditions, Not Blank Cheques

Shenoy argued that the US should pursue a recalibrated Pakistan policy — one that combines economic and climate assistance with clear demands for credible elections, stronger civilian governance, and decisive action against every terrorist organisation, not merely those posing a direct threat to Pakistan. Above all, he said, Washington must stop unconditionally backing General Asim Munir, drawing a pointed parallel to US support for Zia-ul-Haq during the Cold War — a relationship widely regarded as having fuelled long-term instability.

The Nuclear Dimension: Plausible Risks Beyond the Worst-Case Scenario

Shenoy also underscored the nuclear dimension of Pakistan's fragility. He acknowledged that Pakistan possesses an operational nuclear arsenal with a specialised command-and-control system, and that the army retains custody of its strategic forces. An extremist group seizing the entire arsenal, he noted, 'remains a remote prospect under current conditions.'

However, he cautioned against focusing exclusively on that worst-case scenario. 'More plausible dangers include insider-assisted theft, sabotage of nuclear infrastructure, attacks on transport movements, the disappearance of material or components and the weakening of authorisation procedures during a military split,' he wrote. This nuanced framing shifts the nuclear risk debate from hypothetical catastrophe to credible, near-term vulnerabilities.