Again, Desperate Times

It is difficult to disagree with the gist of this article as it is based on facts and 52 years of Pakistani history. People of my generation, who have been through the full tenure of General Zia, are well aware of the fact that, `quality of military rule is inversely proportional to time`. Mid-night coups can not form the basis of a meaningful social change that may lead to a peaceful and prosperous society in the long run. In economic terms, military rule costs more than all the money that has ever been looted by bank defaulters and corrupt politicians.

Some people representing the pseudo-intelligentsia of Pakistan are pushing the rhetoric that General Musharaf is a moderate, secular guy who would not use religion as a tool to prolong his stay in power. He is a middle class man from Karachi. He is well aware of the plight of common people on the street. All he wants to do is strengthen the national institutions, revive the ailing economy, pave the way for real democracy and lead the armed forces back to barracks. Sounds too good to be true, I`d say. Authors of this article have used excellent analytical skills, and strong reasoning (perhaps it reflects their physics background) to refute all arguments in favor of the current military regime. However, in my humble opinion, they have discussed the issue very broadly. A more in-depth study of the indicators which signal the arrival of time when military regimes realize that they can’t deliver on their promises and resort to their usual instincts of ruthlessness, and repression to prolong their stay would have turned this article into a master piece.

Mr. Jay

Your first response can be ignored as youthful exuberance of a chauvinist Hindu, but your later responses suggest that you are a right wing, skull washed (I don’t think you have any brains) militant Hindu. A product of RSS youth camp perhaps? You are equating Pakistani society with Talibans, which makes it clear that you have not bothered to study the existing social dynamics in Pakistan. I suggest you do some more study and familiarize yourself with Pakistani social dynamics before you make such claims.

As for China, in the next twenty years, Chinese economy is set to overtake US, the world’s largest economy. You don`t think they will wait for India to catch with them do you? At any rate, this implication of yours that burning fire of revenge motivates all progress in India is foolish. I am sure that majority of Indians are happy to see India progress, but they want Shanti in all South Asian countries, including China and Pakistan.

Gnostics,

They did the same to my first reply...prehaps they are polishing their censorship skills for later martial law times.

UR:

There are at least three different threads running here. I am (mildly) surprised at the lack of interest in unconventional defence strategies to reduce the (cash and technology) investment heavy dependance on defence.

Would wait to read your usually well thought out analysis and do-ability for nation wide defence through regulars and irregulars. Now that could be a revolution of sorts.

A minor digression: I am even more (pleasantly) surprised at the other side you chose to reveal. The poem was good. So there is a pulsating throbbing heart behind the stone cold exterior?

regards,

t

P.S. Pls. touch base with me temporal3@hotmail.com. Will send you a couple of interesting articles.

Temporal:

You can contact me at umair66@hotmail.com. Looking forward to emailing with you. Also, I am waiting for some more comments, and insights from other repliers, before I attempt to form a final opinion.

The main question is how can Pakistan reduce its military budget, without sacrificing its security, in an environment where India refuses to accept a plebescite in Kashmir.

The one and only sensible piece of writing from Pakistan on the coup.Shame on DAWN/NIGHT/NATION/NEWS ,here is one chap willing to tell the truth,not blame India/hinduisim/Israel for all the problems in pakistan today.May the tribe of one increase.

BORN RICH or BORN CORRUPT

We know Ayub Khan, Yahya and Zia, all those military rulers of Pakistan. But something like this we had yet to see; the commander, chief of army staff, and self imposed chief executive of Pakistan, the general Musharraf is a born rich; the only of its kind available in the sub-continent. Originally coming from a mohajir family, his father was a government servant. But taking a look at the details of published assets of general Musharraf and Sharifuddin Pirzada, it confirms that both were born rich, either as a prince or a nawabzada. But facts and their family history shows, that both of these two partners in military rule in Pakistan are merely from mid class family; families who were not well known even to their neighbors. What can you expect from those who had been looting for ages. So how come general Mutterraf amass seven residential plots in most posh areas in cities like Karachi and Lahore, and agricultural lands in Bhawalpur. Similarly Harami-ul-Haramie Haramzada (who calls himself Sharif-ud-din Pirzada) has his assets list published that includes plots and lands even more than his god general Mutterraf. Just declaring the assets must not absolve the corrupt from being accountable. We and my nation demands to know that how come these crooks amass such wealth? General Mutterraf and Haramzada should be made accountable for the wealth that they have most likely amassed by illegal means.

Roohi A Ditta

In response to UR (Reply #: 39) Part I

Dear UR:

There is nothing bad about having different perspectives and worldviews, as long as there is something essentially bad about a particular perspective.

I want to see this world free of arms, ammunition, and the means of mass destruction (an utopia!). I am opposed to creating justifications for the reproduction of these baddies. I consider all justifications as constructed. For me, there is no such thing as a just war. We can always create a justification to engage in a war. Given the realities of this world, we are supposedly forced to sustain armies. We, however, need to create an environment where the adversarial relations are minimized and the chances for peace to flourish are maximized. This requires a mindset.

I admire your statement: ``I think both you and I want the same end result, i.e. Pak military budget should be reduced, and more money should be spent on civilian uplift. I agree with this 100%.`` Despite my admiration of your statement, I am not sure when and under what conditions you may ``willingly`` create/accept a justification for an expanded reproduction of our army and its costly hardware. There at least two reasons for my skepticism: (1) you have served the army for, I think, thirteen years (and your joining the army and staying there for such a long/short period suggests something about your mindset and its conditioning. No offense to you personally); (2) you being such a well-read and intelligent person are neither sympathetic to my solution nor come up with a good solution yourself.

I have argued for a drastic reduction in the so-called defense expenditure. Please note my rhetoric: ``drastic reduction`` and ``so-called defense.`` Regarding the reduction you said: `` . . . I am just trying to figure out how to do this. That is where we disagree.`` I am calling for creative measures, given the current realities of the world. If our perceptions of reality are different and if you, in one way or another, find a justification of maintaining the status quo, we may never look for (let alone find) creative measures. One way is to put political (and moral) pressure, and keep pressing, until the army itself realizes that it needs to find ways to deal with the problem. If army is the most patriotic institution in Pakistan, it must agree to what is best in the interest of Pakistan (and not Pakistani army).

In an attempt to produce and reproduce Pakistani army, we have historically made some very bad choices. We need to change our priorities. In Pakistan, there are two different classes of people (and places) evolving. Let calls them, the dominant class and the subordinate class. The dominant (ruling) class consists of an alliance of army-bureaucracy-rich and powerful. The subordinate class includes all those who do not belong to the dominant class. Since the society is structured on the ruthless application of the dominant-subordinate dichotomy, there is a further stratification of both dominant and subordinate classes into a lower level of dominant and subordinate classes. Hence, in the University of Karachi (for example) there were/are A, B, C, D, E, F kinds of housing (where E and F kinds were/are the worst where a human family barely enjoys much needed shelter, based on the principle of something is better than nothing). This is the situation in one of the foremost institutions of learning in Pakistan. It was created by one of our best minds in the history of Pakistan. What an intelligence, what a sense of justice? I am sure the army also has such kind of distinctions. I am calling for a change in such kind of distinctions. For this, we need a change in our ways of thinking (our mindset, worldviews). We need to bring an end to the VVIP and VIP culture, as someone (perhaps Tariq Lodhi) recently pointed out on the Chowk. For this we need a passive (non-violent) peoples` revolution. We have reached to a point in our history where such a revolution is possible.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

re: UR #52

``The main question is how can Pakistan reduce its

military budget, without sacrificing its

security, in an environment where India refuses

to accept a plebescite in Kashmir.``

Before one starts asking that question, one

should try and question why Pakistan needs such a

large military establishment. AS far as its

territorial integrity is concerned, India has no

desire to and no appetite for invading Pakistan.

On the one hand we would gain little out of it,

and on the other we would have to restrain a

whole population, which would be a drain on our

already scarce resources. In fact even if there

was no pakistani army on the borders at all,

pakistan faces no real danger. A minimalist army

would, in a normal situation, be able to satisfy

all of that country`s defense and security needs.

A larger military is needed only because pakistan

needs to pressurise India in Kashmir. That

creates tensions between the two nations, which

in turn increases the threat perception of both,

and neccesiates a larger defense budget. So the

large defense budgets that Pakistan finds itself

laden with are, in large measure, the price it is

paying for its ambitions in Kashmir.

Can pakistan therefore cut down its defense

budgets? Yes, but only if they give up their

ambitions in Kashmir, and move towards peaceful

relations with India. In any case, it is unlikely

that India would ever allow Kashmir to go to

Pakistan even in the unlikely possibility that

there is a plebiscite in that unfortunate state.

No Indian recognizes the Pak claim on Kashmir, or

the TNT theory which forms the basis of these.

-narain

UR:

The solution is simple -- do not engage India militarily over Kashmir, or for that matter, on any other issue. The consequences of engaging are dire -- internal corrosion of Pakistani society just to keep up militarily with an economy roughly 10 times the size of Pakistan, and far more friends internationally than Pakistan.

There are smarter, more thoughtful ways of engaging India over Kashmir (e.g. India did not win freedom from Britain through violence. Violence would have been foolish -- it would simply have legitimized British rule for an extended period in India). Pakistan will have to develop a similar strategy over Kashmir. I believe that Nawaz Sharif had come to this realization, but the military not being happy at this turn of events sought a pretext to intervene.

Also remember, whenever you ask India to hold a plebiscite in Kashmir according to UN resolutions, realize that the same resolutions ask Pakistan to WITHDRAW from all of Kashmir, since the UN considers such occupation ILLEGAL. The same UN resolutions DO NOT call upon India to withdraw from Kashmir.

The chickens are now coming to roost! Pakistan`s entire foreign policy needs to reexamined (but not by the generals) through a civil debate in its democratic institutions

In response to SameerJB (Reply # 51):

Your statement (following some economists): ``The military should generate revenues in additiion to the budget outlays by creating their own military-industrial complex similar to Chineese model. This is different from Fauji Foundation which is primarily for the benefit of ex-armed forces personnel.``

Comment: I am sure the economist would soon start disliking me. Perhaps they already do. Economists are also a major part of the Pakistani problem. We have emphasized too much on economics at the cost of critically understanding our state, civil society, and economy. Let me ask all those who have taken courses in basic economic: What did you really learn? How relevant was it to the problems of Pakistan?

Please explain the Chinese model. How is it going to help Pakistan? Why can`t we think in terms of a Pakistani model that is based on our realities? How would the military finance the proposed military-industrial complex? What costs and benefits would such a complex impose on the country and, particularly, its people? Would such complexes create some additional problems for the national unity of Pakistan? Would such measures further consolidate the power of army? Are we simply relying on imitative development, which may or may not help us at all?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

P.S. Although there are some hints here and there that give me confidence, I need to wait a little bit more to put my (plausible) theory it in the form an article for the Chowk.

A TALE OF OF TWO STORIES.

Once up on a time, long, long ago there was a corrupt official, so corrupt that the subjects complained to the king, some thing unheard of in those days. The king made some enquires and found the complaint to be true. The wise king decided to assign the official a new job, a job in which he simply cannot collect any bribes. The king asked him to go to a sea cost near Kerala and count the number of waves, from sunrise to sun set.

The official dutifully set up the camp and counted the waves, report went to the king every day. After a week, the official went to the fishermen nearby, informed them of his duty to count the waves. He told them that their fishing boats were cutting the waves, making the wave count inaccurate. He asked them to refrain from fishing with immediate effect. As the story goes, that was the start of the bribery, and the people again went to the king complaining about this corrupt official.

The king being a wise man, the story has an ending that will be quite surprising to the pakistanis.

But why did I think of this story, all because DURDANA told me the following pakistani story.

Once up on a time a honest and upright pakistani went to meet God, at 40,000 feet God told him to go down to earth and rule a country in distress, steeped in corruption and economic mismanagement. He ordered himself down to earth in the place of his choosing, sacked the ruling king and installed a military rule, he called himself the CE. Years went by, with the magical powers of CE all subjects became honest law abiding citizens, economy boomed, women were no more afraid to die for honour, mujahideen and holy warriors ruled all of the neighbouring lands, and at last when milk and honey started flowing through the gutters of the kingdom, CE decided to call it quitts. He conducted elections following an ancient greek book, a new ruler was elected, CE took his two dogs and walked towards the sea. The water parted, CE is alleged to have walked all the way to the antartic where he can still be found preserved in eternal ice.

Now Durdana, the first one is a folklore from my child hood, the second is what the adults of pakistan believe, the ones who cheered the CE, the ones lulled into sleep, the ones who never heard any folk lore from india, the other nation. TNT has denied you lot more than what I thought. That is for another time.

Just for a second imagine durdana, if you had heard the first story, your hope and expectation of CE removing corruption would have been tempered by some ancient wisdom. May be that is why communication between pakistanis and indians are so difficult.

In response to Gnostics (Reply #: 44):

Dear Gnostics:

In your post, the paragraph pertaining to institutions and hundreds of overseas Pakistani sociologists is too abstract to make much sense (to me). What is your point? Could you name a few leading overseas Pakistani sociologists and their area of specialization?

Your points concerning forests (not trees) and structural analysis are well taken. What kind of structural analysis are you interested in?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

I have been a lurker on this list for a long time, and found it extremely fascinating indeed. Perhaps I could give some pointers on the discussion on why India would not accept the ``pre-conditions`` as were mentioned. One is the presence of the 4 million odd kashmiri pundits as refugees, a large proportion of them in New Delhi itself. Second, the fact that the Indian public has been told that 4 wars were fought and all were won by India (over or related to kashmir), hence to give back ``territory - washed by indian blood`` was a no-go area (another reason why LB Shastri is reviled in certain quarters). Thirdly, it has now become a question of honor (and once this happens, the brains seem to dribble out of almost all rational human beings). Fourthly, no Indian government can even DREAM of doing this, if they want to maintain credibility within the Indian body politic. I am sure others more learned than me can come up with additional points.

As for foreign mediation to solve the crisis, 3 cases from a certain perspective come to mind - Chechnya and Russia, Bangladesh and India, Kosovo and Serbia. Big countries tend to get away more than smaller countries can. Third party Mediation will only come into the picture once something extremely drastic happens (it also does not help that south asia, africa and latin america are sort of beyond the pale of europe and usa – out of sight and out of mine??????). (While mentioning this, I have to point out that the current Northern Ireland talks and agreement do give some hope that this hopeless quagmire in Kashmir can be resolved).

As for the military budget being pruned, it, unfortunately, is not that easy to do that at all. As some of my more learned colleagues have pointed out elsewhere, the main expenditure is on salaries or capital equipment (the differences between these two items differ w.r.t. the army, navy and airforce). You can either reduce the whole size of the forces by reducing recruitment across the board, or to disband a regiment/battalion/etc. As for capital expenditure reduction, that is much more complicated, deferring capital equipment purchases can only be done for so long, after that, the effectiveness reduces dramatically. But, in both cases, the reduction should not be driven by the objective of reducing the budget per se`, but according to a strategic review. For a fascinating insight into strategic reviews and force projection and future defence needs analysis, you may want to visit www.policy.com where there are large numbers of think tanks who specialise in producing such papers. Take for example the case of USA, their force projections undertake to have sufficient manpower to cater for 2 desert storm type of engagements simultaneously. For Pakistan, the issue is more complicated, since the advent of nukes in the neighbourhood. Reliance on nukes as a defence parameter should never ever ever ever be factored into the estimation of conventional forces (IMHO). Why?, primarily because the use (or non-use) of nukes relies more on aspects of game theory and tic-tac-toe than any kind of operational analysis. The size of conventional forces thus should be determined by the strategic objectives of the country rather than a knee jerk reaction. Knee jerk reactions are fine when you are dealing with sudden attacks or a steady escalation of hostilities, but not when you are embarked on a course of nation building. I would comment further, but would like to leave it here. If there are any questions or points raised, I would be too happy to answer and comment. One final comment, Defence budged reductions based on the above mentioned scenario is only possible when having civilian oversight and the concept of civilian supremacy supreme. I have to point out (IMHO) that asking the military establishment to reduce the size of the defence budget during the time of martial law is rather naïve.

Sincerely

bd

Fairdinkum,

`` I am told that fairdinkum is an australian word, dinkum in chinese mean `real gold` and was used when the chinese diggers found gold. That is another folk tale.

You apparently claim to know more about pakistan. If you are fairdinkum can you explain the following. A group of heavily armed militia takes up positions in karhgill, they had stinger missiles, heavily motivated and they well and truly challenged the indian army, no doubt they were more than a match for the army. These were not part of the pak army, your general has repeated that several times. They were not supported by the govt, because only moral and diplomatic support is given. Some of similar type were killed in a US missile attack on a bin-laden camp in afghanistan. To me theses are the taliban, the ones trained in afghanistan, determined assasins, the ones that operate independant of the pak institutional system. Even in the washington declaration, you PM said that we can only request these forces to return, we have no control.

My dear fairdinkum, you can respond by calling another set of names, just try to explain to an outsider, who are these militia.

There is also another set of lotus eating do-gooders, looking for a tangible solution to kashmir, like my good friend UR, of exmilitary. I leave it as a challenge to him also to explain who are these autonomous military, and with out a control regime for this militia, there can be no solution to kashmir. Wake up, kargill has changed a lot, it is no more the govt of pakistan and military. Kargill was the people of pakistan agaist indian military. That is for another time.

The Hindu, Nov 18, 1999

Describing the Kargil intrusion as ``a sort of watershed``, Mr. Advani said

the decade-long proxy war from across the border was still being waged

in Jammu and Kashmir. ``In a way, it is a war- like situation. How can we

afford to be off-guard? Sudden spurt in terrorist activities in the State and

impunity with which the Army headquarters was attacked indicates

frustration which is a direct fall-out of Pakistan`s humiliating defeat in

Kargil operations,`` the Home Minister said.

JAY#60

I would be the last person to do any thing about reading or inventing such folklores. May be you cannot take yourself from the fantasy of rishi muni on the banks of ganges,under the peepul tree in bodh gaya narrating leisurely to his ``mogli``&sabu the elephant boy such fantastic piece of ahort stories----just enough for the attention span. There are much more better ways to get messages to youngsters by EXAMPLE,The holy scriptures,& good company.In case you dont know literate muslims ,not your british clerk- babu type,you should go to Deobandh & Nadva ,yes these are in your bharat(for you might not get a visa for pakistan)before commenting on Islamic education .You will find a treasure of short stories from all over the world to Arabian Nights,Ali baba,Alladin & gene,jaffar,sindbad,....

In your two tales,which you unsuceesfully tried to give any message other than EVERYONE is corrupt which i am least bothered by.You should have known that Muslims are notorious NOTto elevate any body to Highest pedestal. Its not like the bharat who errect a statue for Gandhi,Nehru even Indira only to paint them black in short time.You see there is wisdom in Islam when it detest idolatory,because sooner or later they are torn down as no mortal human can be god including Musharaff,Ayub,Zia or..

People are replaced to do a relatively better job than there predecessor NOT TO BE GOD specially in a muslim country.

You are assuming too much elephant boy.None of your guesses of what i stand for or your misconception about ALL muslims are correct.

really, somnath, what is your point? don`t just post things all over chowk for the sake of making your presence felt.