National security plans are usually built upon the following strategic pillars: People’s security is the ultimate goal which needs the foundation of a sound and stable political system; economic stability which goes to fortify the foundation; military security that includes a guarantee about science, technology and culture and closely followed on the heels is maintaining international security. Economic security is dependent on the overwhelming national and international security, impacting directly upon social political and economic space. The threats that emerge from the lack of economic security include potential of layoffs and prioritizing short-term gains over long-term growth that may lead to making wrong investment decisions, thus giving rise to national security concerns.

A prerequisite for economic security, political stability and independence is rendered meaningless if it is not backed by economic independence, while the need to have energy security is closely related to economic security as well. There are also various aspects that together enable the achievement of economic security, such as economic growth and innovation, working efficiency, economic freedom and the free choice to produce and sell without any internal or external interference.

The enemy makes its decisions about its opponents by virtue of the latter’s strength and weakness. There is no other way around than being strong and invincible.

The interdependence of these security concerns is now more knotty and problematic than ever before, knowing the fact that a weak economic structure leads to a weak economy. A classic example of this was the breakup of the Soviet Union. China, in stark contrast, handled intimidating pro-democracy protests led by disgruntled youth, with military might in the late 1980s. Though the action was internationally condemned, China was able to sustain international pressure, along with various threats of sanctions, because of its strong economy. Having acquired the status of being the ‘factory of the world,’ China was, therefore, in a position to influence the economies of several other countries, and the West had to restrain its reaction.

An ally in the ‘War on Terror’, Pakistan paid dearly in terms of loss of human lives. The fallout was both political and economic. Yet again, Pakistan is braving the chilly winds of both political and economic turmoil and the resurgence of terrorist activities has added to the country’s collective woes. A few analysts have even gone to the extent of stating that Pakistan lives under the cloud of Hobson’s choice, as there are no available alternatives or choices to be exercised and we are caught between a rock and a hard place. The misbelief here is that despite being on the take-it-or-leave-it position, Pakistan would have illusions of security and rely on external forces to provide that security cover. There are some political pundits who harbour the view that we can get into a situation of facing Sophie’s choice --- a choice where every alternative has significant negative consequences. This scribe, however, holds an alternative and different view, as neither of these two choices can be at play, considering our nuclear status.

The safe keeping of the entire country is an issue of national security and as a matter of utmost importance, it attracts the most attention. We thus assign sizeable amounts to our defence and strategic assets, modernize the armed forces and replace outdated military equipment, aerospace technology, and lots more. In the given scenario, Pakistan has to embrace new defence technologies and the emphasis in the allocation of funds must remain unaltered.

The enemy makes its decisions about its opponents by virtue of the latter’s strength and weakness. There is no other way around than being strong and invincible to a very large extent. A very small country like Israel has successfully created the ‘invincibility’ perception of its defence mechanisms and also about the ability of its armed forces.

Any nation wishing to hold itself secure must have formidable economic resilience. Of all the aspects of national security, the most imperative task is to provide for the security of economic and financial assets of the country, which can only be achieved through a wholesome and comprehensive design and planning. It must inter-alia include clear-cut policies relating to trade - imports and exports, creation of a sizeable pool of foreign exchange reserves, fiscal discipline and taxation, industrial and agricultural policy, etc.

Energy security and food security concerns are the two important offshoots that emerge from the economic insecurity. In both of these areas, even after 75 years of the country’s independence we are not only dependent on others but are extremely vulnerable to the extent of coming up against a brick wall.

The security policy must also be able to deal with all possible contingencies. Good plans get scuttled and bad ones cause victory owing to a change in scenario. A fox can be evasive but never be inclined or in favour of peace. The bestial attribute in the enemy demands an infallible alertness.

Security matters are fortified only by calculation. No positive result can be achieved unless the issue has been profoundly thought through in the minutest of details. The security apparatus has to be for real to avert any possible adventurism from the enemy. The downing of the Indian Air Force aircraft in February 2021 is a case in point of readiness to exhibit the element of pursuing the existence of an invincible and ‘intimidating’ security screen.

The acquisition of nuclear technology, thanks to the vision of politically astute Zulfikar Ali Bhutto together with decades-long efforts of Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan and his many talented group of scientists, has given us that sound cover which acts as a major deterrent of any ‘military adventurism’ from the neighbouring country.

National security is an extremely serious business that should not be reduced to an item for discussion in public meetings and cannot be left entirely to the ignorant politicians. Our National Security Policy is ours, and not handed down for the protection of others’ interests. Pakistan first, is its prologue and epilogue. Nothing less.