The number of army chiefs from other ethnicities and Punjab

The argument of the number of army chiefs and the military dictators is thrown to show that neither the army is controlled by Punjab nor the Pakistani state and the army are instruments for maintaining hegemony of Punjab's interests (it needs no explanation that from Punjab it is meant central and northern Punjab). Army isn't an empire nor it is a monolith that it will be controlled by one person. It is a modern institution which draws its strength from particular foundational myths and it's working is drawn by a particular mindset. If the number of army chiefs or the dictators belonging to other ethnicities is presented as the argument of non-Punjab nature of army then it needs no pointing that the decision making, policy making, major operational decisions are carried out by the officer rank of Brigadier and higher ranks. What is the composition of that section? Predominant majority will belong to the areas mentioned above.

Add to this the recruitment policies of the army. The 'martial regions' also include the Peshawar valley i.e. Peshawar and Nowshehra, and Kohat and Karak in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. But that's not because of some benevolent thinking but is result of the myths inherited from the Raj. The army doesn't release data on the ethnic and regional composition but other regions such as Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan also contributes to the army in terms of soldiers as the 'martial regions' of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

The most important consideration is the institutional thinking and myths of the army. They still operate on the Raj's era policies of strategic depth, strategic core and strategic periphery. The strategic core is central and northern Punjab, Pakhtunkwa (Fata, KP) and Balochistan are the peripheries, while the depth lies in Kabul. Institutionalization ensure that the whole officer corps is conditioned to this thinking. Individual officers may have individual thinking but their actions and decisions will be guided by the institutional blueprint. An officer from Nowshehra won't decide on the basis of his ethnicity but he will be conditioned to particular myths and he will have to decide on the basis of those internalized myths. Representation in the institution doesn't replace the 'centuries' old continuity of the institutional thinking. Certainly army isn't a democratic institution and it can't be expected from it that it will recruite on quota system but it's policies and it's thinking must reflect the democratic thinking.