Pakistan's political crisis continued to deepen on Monday while Pakistan's army denied that it has had a hand in the escalation. Anti-government protests, which began on August 14, had mostly been peaceful until the weekend but have since devolved into a series of clashes between protesters and police. On Monday alone, the protesters raided government buildings and occupied the offices of state television channel PTV.The army was present throughout but it did little to stop the violence, despite a constitutional obligation to protect state property. That increased suspicions about the role it was playing in the increased tensions; the army had already publicly pressured the government and demonstrators to end the crisis and had been actively mediating between the sides. "Not to use force against those who are storming the state buildings and attacking police, what does that mean?" said Talat Hussein, an Islamabad-based political analyst. "It means the state should surrender to the mobs."When cricketer turned politician Imran Khan announced his "long march" from northeastern city Lahore to Islamabad, with the demand that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif resign, some analysts suggested that he must have had powerful backing; possibly the army. His ally, preacher Tahir-ul-Qadri, has often praised the army; after the occupation of the PTV offices, he told supporters the army is "defending our country.They are our protectors. You have to follow their directives."After two hours holed up in the building, the protesters left soon after an army officer announced on a megaphone: "You have come to a wrong place."Pakistan's army is no stranger to governance - it has ruled Pakistan for a total of 30 years since its independence in 1947. Some believe that Sharif has irked the military by being more assertive on issues related to India, Afghanistan and the U.S.; areas conventionally considered part of the army's purview. "It will be unjust to ignore the traditional strained relations between Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and the army, keeping the current situation in view," said Hussein, referring to the ouster of Sharif 's elected government in 1999, by former army chief General Pervez Musharraf.Hussein added that treason charges brought against Musharraf for imposing a state of emergency in 2007 may have increased the army's dissatisfaction with Sharif.Another potential point of concern, according to columnist Javed Chaudry, were tri-lateral talks held between Sharif and the presidents of Afghanistan and Turkey, in Ankara last year. "In the presence of [former Turkish] President Abdullah Gül, [Afghan] President Hamid Karzai used harsh and inciting language against the role of Pakistan and its intelligence agencies in Afghanistan but Nawaz Sharif remained completely silent on that," Chaudry said.He said both the then-army chief and intelligence chief were present and the latter, who had expected Sharif to intervene, interrupted Karzai.