Rightsizing of the Armed Forces

This is article on Iranian nuclear program. Reference to Pakistani assistance as usual.

---
Inspectors in Iran Examine Machines to Enrich Uranium
By MICHAEL R. GORDON

WASHINGTON, Feb. 22 — International inspectors visiting Iran this week were shown a network of sophisticated machinery to enrich uranium, spurring concerns that Iran is making headway in its suspected program to develop nuclear weapons, Western officials and international diplomats said today.

The site in question is near the city of Natanz and was visited on Friday by Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, the chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency, who went to Iran to assess the status of its nuclear program. It was the first time that inspectors had visited the installation.

During the visit to the Natanz site, inspectors found that it included a small network of centrifuges for enriching uranium. The inspectors also learned that Iran had components to make a significant number of additional centrifuges.

American officials believe Natanz is part of a long suspected nuclear weapons program, an Iranian project that American intelligence believes has benefited from Pakistani assistance and that is far more advanced than the effort by Iraq.

The officials say Iran`s goal is to mine or purchase uranium, process the ore and enrich it to a purity suitable for making weapons — a process that would give Iran a largely indigenous capability to make nuclear weapons.

Iran insists that its aim is to make fuel for a civilian nuclear power program, and it maintains that it is opening its plant in Natanz to the atomic energy agency to demonstrate its peaceful intentions.

The new information on Iran`s program comes at an awkward time for the Bush administration, which is making final military preparations for a potential American-led invasion to topple the government of Saddam Hussein, an action justified partly on grounds that Iraq is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.

Noting that North Korea`s and Iran`s nuclear programs are far ahead of Iraq`s, critics of the Bush administration have contended that it has focused too much on a lesser proliferation problem. Administration officials contend that it is important to act before Iraq becomes a nuclear power and say the United States is trying to devise strategies to try to head off North Korea`s and Iran`s weapons programs.

Dr. ElBaradei, who had planned to visit Iranian sites for three days, cut short his visit to Iran and left today. Two senior officials from the atomic energy agency plan to continue their work in Iran for several days.

The site near Natanz has long been of concern to American intelligence agencies, which had concluded that Iran was building a large gas centrifuge plant there to enrich uranium.

The plant under construction there has thick concrete walls and is being built underground, an apparent precaution against a military attack. After the work on the plant was disclosed by an Iranian opposition group, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, Dr. ElBaradei asked that it be included in his visit to Iran.

The agency also pushed for the visit because of Iran`s announcement in September that it was proceeding with an ambitious nuclear power program, one that is planned to give it an indigenous ability to make and reprocess its own fuel. One objective of Dr. ElBaradei`s visit was to ask Iran to adopt an additional protocol that would provide the agency with significantly greater access to sites in Iran and information about its nuclear program.

American and foreign intelligence services believe Iran`s program would work as follows: Iran would mine natural uranium at domestic sites or buy it abroad. The uranium would then be taken to a facility at Isfahan, where it would be converted into uranium hexafluoride, a gas.

The fuel would then be taken either to the centrifuge facility at Natanz or, perhaps, to some covert centrifuge plant. The progress that Iran has made in centrifuge technology, as documented by the inspectors, reinforces concerns that Iran is moving forward in this major area.

Iran says Natanz will be used to produce low-enriched uranium for civilian power plants that it has yet to build. The plant that Russians are building at Bushehr would not need low-enriched uranium from Natanz because Russia is supplying the fuel.

Iran also says the Natanz facility will be under international safeguards, which means there will be monitoring equipment and regular inspections to make sure that no enriched uranium is diverted.

But American and British intelligence officials have several concerns. One is that if Iran is able to build a civilian plant in Natanz, it can develop a clandestine nuclear enrichment plant elsewhere. Another is that Iran might somehow divert material from Natanz and take it to a secret centrifuge plant for enrichment to weapons-grade material.

Still another concern is that Iran will complete the Natanz plant under international inspection but then withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which it is legally allowed to do with three months` notice. It could then reconfigure the installation to make weapons-grade uranium. A rule of thumb is that it takes 1,000 centrifuges of the type Iran is using to make a bomb`s worth of fissile material per year.

An urgent question is whether Iran has run some uranium hexafluoride through the small network of centrifuges at Natanz. That would produce small amounts of low-enriched uranium but would be a violation of Iran`s obligations under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Those obligations require that the production of nuclear material be reported.

Asked to comment on the centrifuges observed at Natanz, a spokesman for the International Atomic Energy Agency declined to respond.

``Iran will attempt to justify Natanz as part of its civilian nuclear power program, but it is actually an effort to develop a nuclear weapons breakout capability,`` said Gary Samore, director of studies at the International Institute for Strategic Studies and former expert on proliferation on President Bill Clinton`s National Security Council.

``It makes no technical sense for Iran to do this for civilian purposes because Russia has agreed to provide lifetime fuel services for Iran`s only nuclear power plant under construction, the one at Bushehr,`` Mr. Samore added. ``The Iranians will argue that they have plans to buy an additional four or five plants from Russia. But it would make more economic and technical sense for Russia to provide the fuel for those plants.``

Natanz is just one Iranian plant that is of concern. According to American intelligence, Iran has been building a plant near Arak in west-central Iran to produce heavy water, which can be used to make plutonium. Iran has yet to build a reactor that could use the heavy water.

Earlier this week, the Iranian resistance group asserted that research and testing on centrifuge technology was being carried out at a front company near Tehran called the Kola Electric Company. Iran says the company is a watch factory.

#37 by ahmadzai on February 8, 2003 6:56am PT

Sorry if this comes a little late, but probably the best response to your assertion that Pakistan was successful in the 1965 conflict would be the following link:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/indo-pak_1965.htm

This should perhaps open your eye to the fact that the Pak. Army is indeed the ONLY

#37 by ahmadzai on February 8, 2003 6:56am PT

Sorry if this comes a little late, but probably the best response to your assertion that Pakistan was successful in the 1965 conflict would be the following link:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/indo-pak_1965.htm

This should perhaps open your eye to the fact that the Pak. Army is indeed the ONLY army that hasn`t won a single war!!

Pakistani army has some amazing leaders. Compare the offer made to Turkey in contrast to the peanuts Pakistan got after Sep-11.

re: Paki Army
Let us face it, Pakistan is going down the drains all that Pakis can do is to justify one bad thing after another. There is a lot of intellectual masturbation going on here by people like Romair (who have nothing better to do) who want to prove that Mushy was the best bet but somehow things did not work. You want a political role model for Pak? Look next door: a sustsained democracy for 50 years, an intact constitution, rule of law and an abiding faith in the political process by its one billion citizens. India is the role model. Look no further.
Sridhar

[b]Pakistani general vs. American generals[b]

AFP has reported that the Pentagon?s inspector general is investigating undisclosed allegations of improprieties leveled at US Army General Tommy Franks, the commander who would likely lead US forces in any invasion of Iraq. Currently General Franks is commanding US forces in Afghanistan.

His boss, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld expressed ``full trust, respect and confidence`` in General Franks, calling him ``and enormously talented commander and a man of the highest integrity.``

What are the charges against General Franks? According to Washington Post, the general was being investigated for abuse of office by allowing his wife sit in on meetings at which classified information was discussed, had a soldier assist her on almost full-time bases, and assigned a military bodyguard to protect her.

Pakistanis should read the charges once again and then look at their own generals. General Tommy Franks is being investigated for abuse of office; do Pakistani generals abuse their offices? He is being investigated for allowing his wife to sit in on meetings at which classified information was discussed; don?t Pakistani generals let their wives run around all over Pakistan. Inspector general is investigating General Tommy Franks for having a soldier assist his wife on almost full-time bases; don?t Pakistani generals have army of soldiers at the disposal of their wives on full-time basis to run their family chores? He is being investigated for assigning a military bodyguard to protect her; don?t our generals have bodyguards to protect their families?

This is a small point-by-point comparison between US General Tommy Franks and Pakistani Generals for which he is being investigated; otherwise, our generals abuse their offices thousand times more than General Tommy Franks has done. Pakistani generals are eating Pakistan?s economic pie hundred percent leaving nothing for the people of Pakistan. They grab best rural and urban lands to sell and make money. Pakistani generals illegally takeover Pakistan and surrender it to enemy without considering themselves liable to answer to any authority in Pakistan. They trample the constitution of Pakistan and go scot-free. They hold fraudulent referendums and become illegal presidents and nobody investigates them. They crown criminals in positions of responsibility without fear of investigation.

Indeed they are very lucky generals. They are generals of the poorest country in the world but they are on the top in the list of richest generals in the world.

Poor General Tommy Franks just picked up a few minor things from Pakistani generals and he is in hot waters. Perhaps in the company of Pakistani generals he forgot that he was not a Pakistani but an American general. Therefore, he did not have the luxury to have a soldier assist his wife or provide her a bodyguard.

General Tommy Franks also forgot that Pakistani generals are real generals whereas he is a fake general. Better he should learn from his first investigation and he should not make such mistake again!

Courtesy
A Fauji`s Diary
http://www.pakistanweekly.com
Saturday February 08, 2003

General Mahmood planned to overthrow Musharraf
reported by Pakistan second largest daily newspaper (alas in Urdu) today (15/2-2003).

http://www.nawaiwaqt.com.pk/daily/feb-2003/15/ak4.htm

Filth produces filth. Intervention of the military in political affairs is not only harmful for the civil society, it is much more detrimental for the army itself. It is a matter of time that these generals will be plotting against each other, planning each other’s assassinations and cutting each other’s legs.

Please, for God sake wake up, before it is too late.

Ref ahmadzai #93

[I agree with you that Pakistanis were arrested by NA fighting needlessly in Afghanistan. But tell me should we really have believed the NA immediately after the conflict when the passions of NA were running very anti-Pakistani? If 60,000 Pakistanis were fighting in Afghanistan, NA should have allowed those arrested a POW status and some neutral body could have easily found out the truth.]

Exactly what kind of status was to those NA and other forces` fighters who fell into the hands of the Taliban?

The Swift Sword of Death for the enemies of Taliban means that when those enemies come back into power, you are going to have the Taliban and their Pakistani brethren locked up in airless shipping containers in 120 degree heat.

If you Pakhtoons cannot put up with Hazaras and Tajiks because you are Sunni and they are Shia or because you worship Allah five times a day and you suspect they are godless Communists, then don`t ask for Geneva Convention rights when you are picked up fighting against them. Expect to get the same treatment that you gave them. It is called being paid back in the same coin.

I feel sorry for those stupid Pakistanis who went into Afghanistan even after 9-11 thinking they were going to fight the wars of 1847 when there were no Americans with daisycutters. Somebody ought to capture their mullahs and hang them from lampposts. For stupidity, not for inciting violence; one ought not to allow these mullahs to further breed their stupid genes.

My response to Sadna at # 92 is as follows:

I agree with you that Pakistanis were arrested by NA fighting needlessly in Afghanistan. But tell me should we really have believed the NA immediately after the conflict when the passions of NA were running very anti-Pakistani? If 60,000 Pakistanis were fighting in Afghanistan, NA should have allowed those arrested a POW status and some neutral body could have easily found out the truth.

I have written it before and I am repeating it. As pro-communism Tajiks and Uzbeks were being migrated out of former USSR into Afghanistan in the 70s to destabilize it and turn it into a communist country, lot of the Pashtoons were migrating out of the Tajik and Uzbek dominated lands, where they were a minority, into Pakistan. These Pashtoons tended to keep dual nationalities. In addition, the distribution of some Pashtoon tribes (Ahmadzais are also distributed almost 50-50) across the border makes it easier for these people to keep dual nationalities. If the prisoners had been interviewed by neutral bodies, they would have found out that most of them were these anti-NA Pashtoons, who wanted to settle old scores.

About the media interviews, don`t you recall how CNN and BBC were showing Afghan women as Burka cladded oppressed people and NA as heroes. Did the burka go after the Talibans? Recall what the emancipators of oppressed Afghan women like RAWA had to say about NA - that under its rule before Talibans, it had inflicted same amount of atrocities on Afghan women as had Talibans.

I am not disagreeing with you to the extent that I believe that there were some Pakistanis too, who were mis-lead into the `Jihad` by some fundamentalist Islamic parties. But I will again argue that they were a very small and an insignificant number.

As to your last sentence, I have not fooled anyone. All of my posts clearly indicate that I am dead set against MMA, which came into being last year and comprises 6 parties, including a Shia Group (please read my response to Romair at # 90). I have also expressed my opinion on Bush Administration`s recent inept measures, which are being seen as anti-Muslim, and are making MMA stronger and General Musharraf`s and an average Pakistani`s job that much more harder to curtail them. I have also expressed my reasons why Bush Admin. might be doing it. This I am doing with a clean concious - I want extremism in the name of religion to leave all Pakhtoons. I want to see ourselves as progressive people. Religious yes, but not living in dark ages in the name of a great religion.

ahmadzai #91
The comparison between MMA and Sangh Parivar led mobs is a bit disingenous.

A church or a temple or a few measly members of Pakistani minorities are small fish for MMA who for the last 25 years, have been motivating, recruiting and training fighters for the Afghan jihad. According to an estimate made a few years ago, at least 60,000 Pakistanis fought in the Afghan jihad.

A few Pakistani jihadis , imprisoned in NA prisons, when interviewed said that their leaders in Pakistan told them to go and fight the infidel Soviets who hadnot left`. Others said they joined up for Kashmir but were told by their leaders to go to Afghanistan to `train for Kashmir`.

When MMA was fighting in such wide battlefields for jihad, for so much potential ideological ground to be won stretching deep into Central Asia, and so much money pouring in from every quarter for this purpose, they occupied pride of place as spearheads of Pakistan`s foreign policy, so why the heck they would be interested in attacking at home a few Pakistani Hindus and Christians who, to save their outrage, werenot even allowed to VOTE with them?


Sangh Parivar is exactly as bad as anyone can say it is. But as for the rest of the cr_p, you can fool your fellow Pakistanis, but not many others.

Urstruly and Harimau from 83 to 85:

No its not possible in Pakistan. We cannot learn from India and our MMA Mullas, although abhorable, are not comparable to Indian Sangh Parivar. For one, not a single leader of theirs has lead a march to bring a church or a temple down in Pakistan.

Also, the last time some of their followers were given a chance to burn sleeping Hindus, they chickened out - puck puck puck puck. Instead, they burnt a US flag down.

Finally, at the moment, they are more interested in challenging General Musharraf and PML Q rather than issuing threats to Indians of complete anhiliation and to isolate them in the world.

;)

In response to Romair at #87, who wrote:

``You seem to be a stronger supporter of Musharraf then even I am``.

First of all, EID MUBARAK to you and your family.

Being a nationalist from the NWFP, I think I am a supporter of General Musharraf purely from a selfish point of view in that I want Pakhtoons of Afghanistan (well, Pashtoons there) and Pakistan to be liberal, broad-minded and educated group of people, who are able to contribute positively to our respective countries and to the world as a whole. For too long, we have let ourselves ensnared in backwardness on the excuse of our love for religion. I strongly believe that the current Government can deliver that.

I hate Mullas, because they are exploiting the emotions of our people and are bent upon taking us (Pakhtoons) back to dark ages. Since at my family level I cannot do much about it, I am reclined to take an easier route of hating the enemy;)

I also dislike them for they are competent enough to destabilize Pakistan through creating anarchy and once Pakistan is destabilized, they will control a large mass of devouts, who will set out to destabilize Russia, China and India. Just imagine the population involved and the magnitude of pain that will follow. I mean all of us want to live in peace and prosperity. I don`t want to see people follow that dangerous a course, although at the moment they are set to.

My personal love for Musharraf ends here. The next part is my analysis of the events:

I bet your 3rd forecast about General Musharraf will also come true, but with a little difference. He will put off his uniform and will assume the leadership of PML Q. This will happen once the political dust settles and once he gets a firm nod from the leaders of the PML Q. Have this in writing from me. Your 3rd forecast will come out good.

As regards feudals, just take note of the labor pains of controlling Mullaism in Pakistan. I mean note all the wrath that he is earning from our far right. What you are suggesting is a course that would have doomed all his undertakings at this critical juncture. Btw, Mullaism is not as big a problem in military, and being from the army perhaps you will subscribe to this viewpoint, as we are made to believe. But feudalism is. Children of feudals are now serving at highest ranks in various services. I bet General would have gone out for getting feudals by their balls before the Mullas. Devolution of power was a step in that direction. However, just too much of sectarian killings, other terrorist acts and finally the friendly advice of Bill Clinton to Pakistanis, prompted him to go after Mullas first (on 14th August 2001 to be precise, i.e. a month before the tragic 9/11). The later event of 9/11 reinforced the need for him to continue on that path.

Taking all the evils in one go would not have been possible for the military. Taking on Mullas and feudals at the same time would have turned a large segment of top brass military officers against the well-wishers of the country within the military.

This is regarding the discussion on satellites and space programmes. There was an article recently in the New York Times that said that the Russina space program had shrunk so much that its budget was only two percent of NASA`s budget! But the more surprising thing was that NYTimes mentioned that Russia`s space budget was only 50% of India`s space program budget.
It shows how steeply Russia has fallen and how much India has risen.

The culture, values and principles of Pakistan Army`s lower strata i.e. from a foot soldier to Lt. Colonel, are different from those who wear swords on their shoulders with a red tape on the collars. The lower strata of the Army believes in Jihad, is always ready to die for the country and Islam, committed to the defence of Pakistan`s frontiers from external and internal enemies and stands with the people of the country on every issue ranging from the restoration of democracy to the restricted role of Army in the politics.
The top brass of the Army has different priorities. The culture they inherit revolves around absolute authority. They live to capture even the slightest opportunity to overthrow the elected governments, occupy the positions like President, Governors, and Ministers, use the civilian bureaucracy as their personal servants, get expensive real-estate in posh areas of the cities, make fiefdoms in the interior of the provinces after getting huge agriculture farms free of cost or on throw away prices.
Today`s Pakistan Army has two faces - one a pro-people and the other a pro-colonial.

http://www.weeklyindependent.com/backpage3.htm

ahmadzai #81: You seem to be a stronger supporter of Musharraf then even I am (or was for the three year period).

The Army, if it comes in, must come in when the situation is completely disastrous. That was the case in 1999, and that is why nearly every Pakistani supported the coup (except a few arm-chair revolutionaries on Chowk).

It should then work honestly to the best of its ability to stablize things. It obviously will not have the dexterity and skills of honest civilians in running a civilian enterprise, but it should do the best it can, with the help of competent civilians. Which it did this time around.

During its brief stay, it should take on every evil in the society, head-on. I don`t know why it never goes after feudals. The feudals are sh//t scared of the military (and of maulvis), becasue these are the only groups that can knock them out. Ayub and Zia`s families actually ended up joining the feudal political crowd. Luckily, Musharraf hasn`t done that. But, he didn`t take on the feudals either (until this is done, Pakistan will never progress).

After wiping out the status quo, the Army should quickly leave, and hold elections, with completely new faces, under completely new rules.

Musharraf hasn`t done this last part. And I can make a bet it will cost him. His approval ratings till the referendum were sky high in Pakistan (according to magazine surveys). Now, they are going down and down. The only two things he has going for him is that everyone knows he is scruplously financially honest and that he is still better than the other corrupt lot. If you are just better than the worst, then you don`t have much to go by, if you ask me. You are required not for your own virtues, but to keep other people`s vices in check.

The one thing Pakistan needs more than anything else is not someone who is popular when he is in power (Musharraf achieved that in the pre-referendum days). But someone who leaves when he is popular. Which Musharraf could have done also.

Pakistanis need political role models. Someone they can compare the corrupt politicians (and other corrupt Generals etc.) to and tell them, ``Woh bhi tau tha, jo imandari say kaam kar kay, voluntarily kursi chaur gaya.``

Currently, they can only say this about Jinnah. Not about any other leader, civilian or military. I think Musharraf was the best possible candidate for this. I opposed Zia, even when I was in the military. However, I supported Musharraf from the start. Primarily, because I still feel I can pick a good General from a bad one. He is the best the military has to offer, as far as dictators go. Uptil his referendum, he did everything I predicted he would do, under super-tough circumstances.

I stated he would hold elections. Which he did. I said he would go after maulvis, while others on this site tried to paint him as a mullah. Which he did. The only prediction I was wrong on was that I thought he would completely leave after three years. He has only partially left. And this is his achilles heel.

He should now resign from the military and put his name up for Presidentship. If the NA does not elect him, then he has done his share. People will still respect him. He could probably come back in five years and win an NA election in a landslide, if he is interested in Public Service. Imran Khan would have given him a position in his party (the party I support).

Eventually, Pakistanis have to pay for their own selections. Non-Constitutional govts. should only come under desparate circumstances, when the elected ruler has started storming Supreme Courts and filling Swiss Acounts. After that, they should quickly leave. Musharraf alone, regardless of how well-intentioned he maybe, cannot solve all of Pakistan`s problems. He has done his share, which was stabilization over three years. Now he needs to become a civilian.

Had I been in his shows, I would have ruthlessly wiped the slate clean in three years - gone after the feudals, mullahs, corrupt business and beaurecracy. I would have then in the final year, internally reorganized the Army. Would have dictatorially changed the Constitution, banning uniformally anyone who had been in the Assemblies before. Held a clean election. And then retired to the Boston.

Sounds like a lot. But the Army is powerful enough to do the above.

Re freeing of the press of Pakistan.
http://www.statpak.gov.pk/depts/fbs/statistics/social_statistics/newspaper_average.pdf


The combined circulation figures of daily newspapers from the Govt. of Pakistan site are as follows:
(these are circulation figures for 2000, there are no figures for 2001 and 2002).
Urdu dailies : 4.6million
English dailies : 501,643
Sindhi : 508,345

Being `freely` criticised in 500,000 odd copies of English newspapers in 140 million population doesnot constitute much of a threat.

Ref ahmadzai #82

[Are you giving any suggestions to Pakistanis to learn from our respectable neighbors the Indians i.e. how are they running the Government in say Gujrat and hope to follow that up in other states? Are you hinting that the country be run by MMA, the honorable counterparts of Sangh parivar?]

You are already running a government that is a hundred times worse than any government even by the Sangh Parivar.

If you have any doubts about it, I don`t suggest that you get a bunch of Hindus/Christians/Sikhs to set fire to a train occupied by Muslims.

Just wrap up peanuts in a sheet of paper printed in Arabic or Urdu and claim that it was given to you by a Hindu vendor and that the paper is a sheet from the Koran.

Ref Urstruly #83

[Yes I am also hinting that, though comparing MMA with Sangh Parivar is unethical and unprinicipled; but whether its MMA or Sangh Parivar in Paksitan I will kiss the mouth of an eczema infested bitch and stand by her if she stands up for the constitution and soveriegnity of Paksitan.]

I was under the impression you were already married... unless you now propose to cross generally accepted norms against cross-species sex. You will then be bringing new meaning to the term ``man`s best friend``.

Are you giving any suggestions to Pakistanis to learn from our respectable neighbors the Indians i.e. how are they running the Government in say Gujrat and hope to follow that up in other states?

As a matter of fact I am.

Are you hinting that the country be run by MMA, the honorable counterparts of Sangh parivar?


Yes I am also hinting that, though comparing MMA with Sangh Parivar is unethical and unprinicipled; but whether its MMA or Sangh Parivar in Paksitan I will kiss the mouth of an eczema infested bitch and stand by her if she stands up for the constitution and soveriegnity of Paksitan.

Urstruly at # 78:

``Does someone know where the Paksitan`s National Assembly is since last November? Four months have gone by and there hasn`t been a single legislative session? What the hell is going on? How the hell is country running its business. ``

Are you giving any suggestions to Pakistanis to learn from our respectable neighbors the Indians i.e. how are they running the Government in say Gujrat and hope to follow that up in other states? Are you hinting that the country be run by MMA, the honorable counterparts of Sangh parivar?

;)

In response to Romair at # 71:

Thank you very much for a detailed reply.

You wrote:
``I think in these three years, the economy has been stabilized, Pakistan is no longer internationally isolated, the press has been freed, and Pakistan is facing (most of) its skeletons in its closets. ``

I would say:
This is what we wanted - stability and continuation of policies. For example, the areas of industrial development that the Government has chosen to be pursued as a long-term policy, were being identified by the World Bank for a long time, but no elected Government between 1988-1999 heeded the WB advice. The press is free as can be seen from harsh anti-Government articles being published in the newspapers every so often.

You wrote:
``At the same time, I wish Musharraf had gone after power groups like feudals, corrupt politicians etc., with the same zeal as he went after the maulvis and the beaurecracy....``

I would say:
I think the best strategy would have been to attack one adversary at a time. Opening too many fronts against the status quo would have added not only to the General`s problems, but to an average citizens as well. For example, if he had taken feudals head on, average citizens would have suffered at the lack of food supply. As a priority Government decided to take the restructuring and reorganization of various institutions before attacking on the social pillars of corruption.

You wrote:
``I still think, for his own good, and for the reputation of the Army, he should now retire.... I dont think the country is now going off a cliff as it was in 1999, so military rule is no longer needed.... though they will still respect him more than the other clowns like BB, NS, Altaf etc. ....``

I would say:
I don`t think for a second that we have a political leader capable enough, strong enough and resolute enough to take on the challenges that Pakistan confronts today. Any other person at this stage would need the support of military to run the WOT and yet not displease conservative segments of the society. Then there is always an impending threat of terrorists` backlash. The terrorists are currently on the run as they know that they are pitted against the army. The PML (Q) is spared of this backlash as its the military and special forces that are being perceived as real enemy by the terrorists. If military recedes, then pronouncements and actions against the terrorists would have to come on a daily basis from the elected Government and we know how well defended they are against assassinations and murders. Please recall that when in the 80s Pakistan Navy had captured a vessel of private arms and ammunition belonging to Murtaza Bhutto, his personal security guards had started taking the revenge against poor naval officers and 6 young officers were murdered before the mystery was solved. What I mean to say is that we should not be blinded at this reason why we need military working strongly with the Governments at this time. Its only the General who is earning the anger of the extremists and the elected Government is being spared.

You wrote:
``As for the Mullahs....If the currently elected mullahs outright win the next election, while the condition of the country remains the same, then I can see another coup occuring, with strong support of the USA (and ironically from the secualr Pakistanis), in around five to seven years time. ``

I would say:
Having heard of the way the campaign was run in the NWFP and Western Balochistan at least, I am sure that the Mullas capitalized on anti-American feelings. They had no agenda. That is why they have not come up with a single action after being elected to offices that would boost the living conditions of the masses. In Karachi, they have reclaimed their seats of yesteryears. In Lahore, it was an adjustment between PML N and Jamat-e-Islami. Economic factors cited by you could be real in urban centers of Karachi, Lahore and Islamabad, but not of NWFP and Western Balochistan. I am sure that MMA will not improve the economic situation of the country and at the same time will keep becoming stronger due primarily to a very ridiculous agenda of the West at play at international level.

The US and the European countries are accusing General Musharraf`s Government of various weaknesses in the hope that it will make Mullas stronger in Pakistan. If Mullas take over the country, it will provide the US a genuine reason of attacking and de-fanging Pakistan. But like Eric Margolis had once written that when the actual fight starts, it has little to do with strategy. So basically I agree with your forecast of a revolution, but to me, it would be of an entirely different dimension, not even sparing the neighborhood.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Coming back to the subject of what the overgrown army is costing Pakistan, Ustad Daman said the last word:

Pakistan deaN maujaN e maujaN
Jedha vaikho faujaN e faujaN

Further to # 77

Does someone know where the Paksitan`s National Assembly is since last November? Four months have gone by and there hasn`t been a single legislative session? What the hell is going on? How the hell is country running its business.

I can bet that the most popular person in Pakistan is Abdul Sattar Edhi. You may use whatever benchmark you want to, Edhi is 100 times more adored and respected than all generals put together. His practical accomplishments too surpass the performance of the top brass by horse lengths.
Does all that should be a pretext for him to start demanding veto power in policy matters, let alone carte blanche to rape the country and/or tear apart the only document of consensus we have, namely 1973 Constitution?

The pertinent questions about the reliability of the referred surveys aside, what does the popularity of the military, as the defenders of the nation, has to do with the topic under consideration? Does that allow military bosses to keep the country hijacked to their personal ambitions?

Moreover, I think it is more than obvious that whosoever criticize the army doesn’t mean to bash the poor orderly polishing the shoes of officers and serving the bloody begums or those standing guard at Whaga. It is the filth at the top one is so damned tired of.

In fact, I would like to go one step further. We should try to have some sort of adjustment ala Switzerland. Dismantle this nasty army altogether. Slaughter this holy cow, kill this white elephant -- at the earliest. Confiscate all the plots and land grabbed by these so-called defenders. Put them in jail, for treason, those who sit on more than two residential plots.
Imagine that our generals travel around in bullet-proof limousines not in use even of German and French generals. And there are people who call them honest and good for stability. Think yourself, are these faggots capable of anything more than selling (and buying) souls and zameer (if they have any)?
Might be there are people who still respect them, I have no choice but to respect their perverted choice. I on my part wouldn’t like to disgrace my saliva by spitting on them.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Romair : I think in these three years, the economy has been stabilized, Pakistan is no longer internationally isolated, the press has been freed, and Pakistan is facing (most of) its skeletons in its closets.

Yaar where do you live? Do you even bother to read the newspapers? Free Press? According to Press and Publication Ordinance issued by Musharaf in November Government can sue Press for ``false criticism`` and according to another Ordinance issued during the same time government can hold any citizen for a year in custody without charging him and without giving him access to a lawyer or court. In a country where police drinks the blood of Paksitanis as a Naashta this law gives horrible powers to state. Currently, there are 2k to 5k prisnors held in Paksitani prisons under such law. So much for the skeletons in the closet. And one must be on funny cigarettes to think that economy has been stabilized. Less said the better.

Ref Field Marshal #71

[At the same time, I wish Musharraf had gone after power groups like feudals, corrupt politicians etc., with the same zeal as he went after the maulvis and the beaurecracy. ]

What were you smoking when you wrote this? The maulvis and mullahs were out from house arrest as soon as the US turned its back after taking note of the fact that Mushy saluted smartly and banned a couple of terrorist outfits when they demanded it.

[If the mullahs can help the poor villager, whose kids dont go to college (and hence could care less about co-education) and who does not have even electricity (what to talk of cable television), and who is already quite conservative, he could care less about the intense convservitism the MMA will bring to the cities it rules.]

You are wrong. Back in the late 70s when TV started its spread through India, I was amazed to see antennae sticking out of the roofs of thatched huts in slums. One guy would buy a TV on installment payment, steal electricity from an overhead wire and all of a sudden he was running a nightly show for the neighbors for one rupee. When the most the Doordarshan could offer was Indira Darshan, as the news show was contemptuously called (or even better, Priyadarshini, this being Indira`s middle name), folks in Chennai were putting up 60-foot tall antennae to pull in Sri Lankan TV and I am sure the resourceful Punjabis were watching PTV as they do even now.

In case you didn`t read the coverage of the Afghan War by slate.com, the first things to come out after the Taliban fell were the TV sets, VCRs and porno movies on tape. This was in Kabul which according to you is more conservative than Lahore.

Actually, people want no interference. It is not for you, me or the mullah to dictate to them what they can and cannot see. Thus in India, there is Fashion TV which shows the catwalks from Milan, Rome, Paris, etc. Just yesterday, there was this model wearing a long skirt and a see-through dupatta-like cloth on her upper body... no bra either....when people want to see boobs, I guess TV will give it to them and the fact that the Hajj has started has no effect on the viewers, the cable TV stations, or even the morality police.

#37 by ahmadzai on February 8, 2003 6:56am PT

1. Oh so you guys know the truth after all? I thought the Pakistani propaganda machine had done a great job in blinding the average Abdullahs (in Arjun`s words) to the perfidious games Pakistan has always played since its birth. Pakistan of 1948 was busy trying to convince the whole world that it was not its armed forces, but the tribals who were doing it. Just as in 1999 it tried to hoodwink the world into believing that it was the Mujahideen who had occupied the icy peaks on the Indian side of the Line of Control, and not its own troops of the 4, and 5 Northern Light Infantry. In any case, the state of Jammu & Kashmir had not acceded to India when your “tribals” had attacked it.

2. Gen. Chowdhary having tea at Lahore Gymkhana? I consider myself a very avid reader, strange I never came across any such article. I do remember though having read that during the 1971 war, when under pressure from the Indian forces in East Pakistan, Pakistan opened up another front at Longewala (where a handful of men successfully defended the border against 200+ of your marauding tanks) on India’s Rajasthan border, your generals had hoodwinked your soldiers into believing that they would have tea at Jodhpur and dinner at Delhi.

3. Well I must say the break-up of the Soviet Union was indeed tragic. But more tragic to me is the drug and Kalashnikov culture that Pakistan inherited with the result that Pakistan social fabric has been irreparably torn apart, and Pakistan’s involvement in the Afghan Jihad could well prove to be the most decisive factor in Pakistan’s ultimate survival (or extinction).

4. And what about the treaties Pakistan signed left right and center to overcome its insecurities vis-à-vis India?

Ref tahmed32 #66

[On India`s biggest enemy: T`aint China and t`aint Pakistan. It is poverty and ignorance and poverty and prejudice and poverty and poverty and poverty.
And this is Pakistan`s biggest enemy too. And China`s too.]

There is no way to eliminate prejudice. Education until 18 ain`t nothing but prejudice. After that, one has to do better than Rutgers or Oklahoma State to get the blinkers off one`s eyes.

On the other hand, one can hope to educate the next generation and the one after that and hopefully, in a couple of generations, you get people thinking about a job and putting food on the table and limiting families.... none of that 4-wives-and-16-children dream of waqaralisheikh. Then there is some hope of eliminating poverty.

[And the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Someday, when people come to their senses, they will realize this.]

Pakistan has already had this epiphany: their enemy is India, India`s enemy is China and thus proclamations of eternal friendship with China.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Just few weeks back there was an article over here “Some Burning Questions” by Nighat Yasmeen, available at
http://63.194.130.82/cgi-bin/show_article.cgi?aid=00001766&channel=chaathouse&start=0&end=9&chapter=1&page=1

Dear romair, she has replied most of your questions quite eloquently in her letter. I fully agree that very few Pakistanis, if at all, don’t keep the soldiers [NCOs and JCOs] and junior officers [to the rank of Major] guarding national frontiers in utmost high esteem. No question about that. No sane person can have a grudge against those poor souls. The problem, rather let me call it the cancer, eating the nation from within, is our ca. 400 good-for-nothing star officers.

ahmadzai and romair, if you don’t mind, you seem to have some weird definition of “honesty”. As N Y wrote, khakis had transformed plunder and loot to institutional game. Modalities may differ the result is almost the same – accumulation of personal wealth. Can you mention ONE general among the serving ones [who are supposedly “honest” by your account] who is NOT a multi-millionaire?

I guess rightsizing, as proposed in the article, may not instantly eliminate the menace of military intervention, but it would definitely serve a message to the top brass that their “extra-curricular” activities are not accepted anymore.

See, judiciary, the corner stone of any civilized society, is totally discredited today due to the swine in khaki and the forced indemnifications under “doctrine of necessity”. Tell me, is there even a theoretical possibility for improvement where senior most judges have been “promoted” to royal whores? And who is responsible for that?

Today we have no institution worth mentioning left that is not in tatters, no political tradition, no constitution, only and only whims of few stupid generals and that’s all. What honesty and what economical stability you people talk about?

Ahmadzai #68: You have made some good points.

I supported Musharraf`s coup for the three years time limit, because I felt the other options, (BB, NS) were dictators just on the verge of destroying Pakistan completely. An honest dictator is better than a dishonest one. I think in these three years, the economy has been stabilized, Pakistan is no longer internationally isolated, the press has been freed, and Pakistan is facing (most of) its skeletons in its closets.

At the same time, I wish Musharraf had gone after power groups like feudals, corrupt politicians etc., with the same zeal as he went after the maulvis and the beaurecracy. And I wish he had reorganized the military, in the lines I suggested in a previous reply (from what I have heard, he has done a great deal internally to de-mullah-fy the Army however). After doing that, he should have held elections and just retired into oblivion.

I agree if the current NA is given free reign, we will once again be back to the days of free-for-all loan defaults. So his presence is somewhat of a necessity now. However, it wouldn`t have been had he not allowed the same people into the elections, to begin with. Kind of a Catch-22 - such is the shortage of financially honest people in Pakistan. So he has himself (with the help of the Pakistani voter who keeps voting for the same people and then complains about the people he votes for) created kind of a situation where he is still needed.

I still think, for his own good, and for the reputation of the Army, he should now retire and put his name up for a civilian Presidentship through the NA. If they don`t elect him, well fine, he did whatever he could. He will leave with his credibility intact. And at the moment, Pakistan needs a leader who leaves while he is popular with credibility, far more than it even needs a good leader in power.

If Pakistanis want to support the maulvis and corrupt politicians, when they have (had) the choice of a leader, who for all his other faults, is scruplously honest financially and liberal, then it should be their choice. I dont think the country is now going off a cliff as it was in 1999, so military rule is no longer needed. In the end, Pakistanis will have themselves to give credit to or blame. From the referendum onwards, however, Musharraf`s popularity, due to his own double-mindedness has gone down and will continue to go down. If he doesn`t resign, people may respect him as a person, but not as a President - though they will still respect him more than the other clowns like BB, NS, Altaf etc.

As for the Mullahs: I think people are underestimating and not analyzying the surge in their popularity. I don`t think Pakistanis have voted for them due to religion or due to USA military presences. Pakistanis never vote for religion. They have voted for them because they have exhausted all other possibilities. The mullahs and the MQM are the only two parties which have candidates who are actaully, ``like`` the voters whom they represent. MMA has farmers, maulvis, shopkeepers etc. as its candidates. While MQM has pharmacists, taxi-drivers etc. as candidates.

The people have said that we will accept the mullahs ridiculous backwards shenanigans, in the hope that they may make us less poor and give us the facilitites that have been hounded by Pakistan`s upper class (which the ANP leaders and Baluchi tribal politicians belong to). It is no coincidence that Pakistan`s most educated and advnaced city, Karachi, now completely elects middle class and lower-middle class candidataes (MQM and MMA).

If the mullahs can help the poor villager, whose kids dont go to college (and hence could care less about co-education) and who does not have even electricity (what to talk of cable television), and who is already quite conservative, he could care less about the intense convservitism the MMA will bring to the cities it rules. He just wants more food on his plate. And if the mullahs are successful in this, their popularity is bound to spread into Punjab and Sind, much to the disgust of the English speaking, upper class, secular and Westernized population of the big cities - which most of us interactors on Chowk belong to (Anyone in Pakistan who can speak English and has Internet access is actully part of the upper-middle class, considering that 65% of the population lives in villages and only 1% has Internet access).

If the mullahs also fail in raising the living standard of poor Pathans and Baluchis (areas where they rule), then I am not quite sure where the next group of politicians will come from. I am hoping it will come from newer parties like PTI (which is by the way now aligned with the MMA).

If the currently elected mullahs outright win the next election, while the condition of the country remains the same, then I can see another coup occuring, with strong support of the USA (and ironically from the secualr Pakistanis), in around five to seven years time.

Romair at # 67:

Although your post is addressed to Riffat, I would like to differ from you only on the action plan of the strategic mission of transition from pure military to pure democracy. I would reiterate that General Musharraf should continue till the time economic stability is not realized. A democratic government under its populist agenda would lead us to bankruptcy unless put on a leash (short or long does not matter) at least for few more years.

As to your last paragraph on the popularity of Mullas, they are raising non-issues and getting carried away by emotionalism. They have not raised a single issue yet, but are reaping a rich harvest. For example, people are much more prone to support Mullas when they raise the non-issue of American`s asking Pakistanis to register themselves in the USA. Not a single Mulla or his emotional follower would have an answer to the following question: Why would American listen to Pakistan on such small an issue like this one, when it is not listening to the entire world on Iraq? What I meant to suggest is that Pakistanis would not turn to Mullas on the grounds that Musharraf`s performance is bad.

riffatj #48: ``Presumably, some of the readers don’t have an idea that today even ordinary people -- right from illiterate lower working class to apolitical housewives -- have started squarely blaming Army for the sordid mess in the country.``

This is true if you talk about the interventions of the military into politics.

Not true if you look at the people`s view of the average soldier, doing his job on the border, or in his unit. Specifically in rural Punjab and NWFP, where nearly every, ``apolitical housewives`` and, ``illeterate lower working class`` person has at least one relative who is a soldier, and has no relatives who are politicians, expatriates engineers, or can even write and speak English.

I would say, overwhelmingly, Pakistanis (inlcuding me) have disapproved of any leadership that Pakistan has had, military or civilian. I would consider Musharraf`s three year rule to be the most honest, amongst the past thirty years, but would not approve of military rule as a solution, in general. Very few people would. I think after completing three years, Musharraf should now retire and put his name up as a civilian President. This however does not mean people approve of the Nawaz Sharif or BB either. People want a third type of leadership - no military, no feudals, no PML, no PPP. That is why they are now giving the maulvis a chance. After the maulvis, they may go to other groups.

However, this is different from critiquing the military itself, for its defence roles. The only motivation to rightsize a military, cannot be to reduce its participation in politics. There are, and should be, other reasons also. I don`t see how rightsizing the Army by 25%, as you have suggested, from 450k to 320k will reduce the chances of a coup. It may make the Army more efficient, and save money, but how does that reduce the chances of a coup, when most coups barely require 1000 soldiers. Could you highlight?

If survey after survery indicates a high deal of respect of the military in Pakistan (which they do), that does not mean these surveys justify a role of the military in politics. These are too different issues. I think the average Pakistani:

-Thinks low of the peformance of the Army in politics.
-Thinks low of the performance of all civilian political leaderships also.
-Does not want the Army as a long term political solution
-Thinks very high of the soldiers themselves in their role as protectors of borders. You can look at the writing of any journalist (Urdu or English), to the views of any politician (including even BB and NS). They will criticize Generals, but will never ever criticize the sepoy standing on the border. This is what the surveys point to.

The above are my views as well. I have lived in a lot of rural areas also, and at a personal level, seen how I am treated now as a relatively well-off expatriate civilian and was treated as a low-paid soldier, by the average farmer, taxi-driver, shopkeeper, etc. The common folk of Pakistan maybe hostile towards Generals (as am I), but I cannot imagine them being hostile towards the common soldier. Infact, they think far more lowly of the rich expatriates living in rich neighborhoods of Pakistan, employing the poor class of Pakistan (many of whom are actually relatives of low-paid sepoys).

People need to evaluate the military in two different areas:

1) Should it be in politics, and what damage has that done, and how will rightsizing improve that
2) Is it required to protect the borders against India, which is arming itself to the teeth, and how should it be rightsized to make it more efficient.

People tend to take an, ``all or nothing`` approach to the above. Those who think the Army is needed for border protection and that soldiers are sacrificing their lives for it (which they are in places like Siachen) tend to think this justifies the Army`s role in politics also, i.e. politicians are stupid, hence military should rule. The ones at the other extreme, state that since the Army Generals have been as poor, if not more poor, at ruling the country in comparison to the civilians, hence the whole Army is an evil and unnecessary, and is the cause of all of Pakistan`s problems. In both cases, the baby is being thrown out with the bathwater.

In my opinion, the Army is necessary to protect the borders, but not in politics (unless it comes in to protect the storming of the Supreme Court or in situations like the violence in Gujrat, India, or if Pakistan has reached a stage where it cannot even pay the salaries of it employees. Even in such situations when Pakistan is completely going of a cliff, it should come in and be out very quickly). However, the only way it will stay out of politics is if the people have faith in the civilian politicians, and thus rise up when a coup occurs. Could you highlight any other practical way of avoiding coups?

I do not agree with the, ``people have too many day to day problems to rise up,`` that you have presented. People have even more day to day problems in India, since it has far more poor people. Yet I doubt they would accept a military rule. Primarily because they seem to have a lot more faith in their civilian politicians.

I think Pakistan will continue between civilian and military leaderships, until either an outstanding honest civilian leadership emerges, or until people finally decide in favor of one over the other (once and for all). Currently, people tend to favor civilian leaderships when they start, and then favor coups once the civilians disappoint. The coups are favored for a few years, and then they are disappointed with them as well, and want a civilian leadership, i.e. people like a leadership when it starts, but want it removed after about three years. Only a, ``relatively`` honest civilian leadership can break this cycle.

I am hoping people like Imran Khan and his party can fill this vacuum. But the way things are going, being fed up with military in politics and being fed-up with the PML and PPP and with ethnic parties like ANP and MQM, people are now tilting towards maulvis. If the maulvis end up improving the lot of the poor person in NWFP, regardless of their banning of co-education and cable TV, I have feeling they may start winning in Punjab as well.

Saima Shah #61 On India`s biggest enemy: T`aint China and t`aint Pakistan. It is poverty and ignorance and poverty and prejudice and poverty and poverty and poverty.
And this is Pakistan`s biggest enemy too. And China`s too.
And the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Someday, when people come to their senses, they will realize this.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Riffat & Saima:

In the past, the change of democratically elected govs boiled down to undoing the previous govs doings. The frequent 180 degree changes in policy lead to instability in the country. For example, our industrialists always complained about the frequent changes in SROs that adversely impacted the industrial performance.

I would strongly defend General Pervaiz Musharraf and his current set up to keep the continuity of policy till the time political and economic stability returns. Also, in the absence of the General and his army backing them up, the current democratic government will collapse against terrorists` backlash.

Ref SaimaShah #61

[then tell me, who or what is India`s biggest enemy? and who or what can save India from it?]

Today, India`s biggest enemy is China.

In the long run, it is the USA which wants to run the world as it sees fit.

So long as Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Myanmar think they can play the China card against India, they will form temporary nuisances, not enemies.

saima 61,

I think I have in a post to the most sane man on chowk, paagalinsaan has said that for most indians, the only interest in pakistan is because of kashmir terrorism. In a way, it had been good, the neglect of the forces since the 1970 war has been corrected, with the use of force coming to the forefront as in the case of iraq, kargill invasion was the best that happened to india.

Containing islam will remain the most importamnt topic for at least a few decades. Isolation of pakistan is next only to that of south korea and with the continuing attack on troops in afghanistan, the missing osama, it may be time for india to define pakistan as enemy.

I am not believer of the crapbeing said on chowk by the ilks of tahmed, ras etc that poverty is the enemy. No, with out a political system to suit it poverty cannot be removed. Pak poverty has increased in the last decade simply because of jihad. Now it is isolated simply because of jihad. First jihad has to be eliminated before poverty can be tackled. Poverty is a symptom, the cause is something else.

#59

Re: Jay

hello? I wasn`t being sarcastic at all. I sincerely meant it. You guys are great people. You keep criticizing. You keep bringing up the same issues: jihadis, narrow-minded Pakistanis, nutty muslims--so they maintain their priority on Chowk as topics--. I think everybody benefits from constructive criticism and some leg pulling is necessary. Yes, people in Pakistan have been racist, nationalistic, prejudiced and downright mean to minorities. Yes, the armed forces run the country. As for who or what will `save` Pakistan....firstly, let`s define the enemy. Who is Pakistan`s biggest enemy? And who or how will Pakistan be saved from it?

then tell me, who or what is India`s biggest enemy? and who or what can save India from it?

waiting for a response (especially since you know so much about geopolitical affairs in that conflict ridden part of the world)
sincerely
Saima Shah

ESCAPING QUICK SANDS,

Pakistan is trapped in the jihadic quick sands, and like the real quick sands, the only option is ti p--iss on it. This article is the first of its kind, the jihadists have been called the cannon fodder, the mercenaries. What is needed is more co-ordinated p-issing on the jihadists.

Saimasha, 57,

Instead of coming up with sarcasm, learn something out of our posts, learn what is criticism. It is not what the ilks of you do, ooh pak army is corrupt, the politicians are bad, the jihadists are not good. Tell the truth, for example tell the world that so many temples were destroyed in response to babri majid, do not let the jafir, PM to be the only person to say that. Tell YLH that there are no roads named after abdus salaam, do not leave ferzok to be the only person.

Saima, truth will save pakistan, and of course the indian army.

ISLAMABAD, Feb 8: Pakistan has decided to reduce the share of defence expenditure in GDP to 3.6 per cent, thus reverting to a trend that aimed at keeping the defence budget constant in real terms over the medium term.

Informed sources told Dawn here on Saturday that Pakistan had informed the World Bank and the IMF that continued tension on the country`s eastern border was still hampering the government`s ability to create additional space for the much-needed increase in human development expenditure.

Nonetheless, both the international donors were assured that Pakistan`s defence expenditure will ``remain static`` despite provocations by India, which has increased its military budget manifold, particularly during the last three years.

The sources said Pakistan had been advised by both the international donors to continue discussions with them to assess the quality of current financial year`s Rs140 billion Public Sector Development Programme (PSDP) and the Interim-Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (I-PRSP) programmes.

The donors were also informed that district governments were executing their investment budgets in line with the needs and priorities of the community they administer.

The government was expecting that the devolution of investment expenditure to the elected local administrations will increase the effectiveness of such expenditure.

The sources said the World Bank and IMF were told that various reforms in government procurement policies, the restructuring of Water and Power Development Authority and Karachi Electricity Supply Corporation, and better monitoring and greater accountability of public enterprises will achieve the programmed reduction of quasi-fiscal activities and of explicit and hidden subsidies to public enterprises. Assurances were given particularly about Wapda that it will not require any further budgetary support from the next financial year.
http://www.dawn.com/2003/02/09/top7.htm

#55 by hamidm2 on February 8, 2003 8:25pm PT
//after reading the silly crowing comments of the horrible hindoos...i think we should double the defense budget with back-pay for our field marshall romair ...//

Good for Romair. As for Pakistan - it would accelerate towards insolvency at double speed. And horrible hondoos will crow even more.

Re: Jay, Arjun M

I would like to sugges that Pakistan should give you honorary citizenship. People who can criticize Pakistani policy fallicies with such detail and knowledge--they should become MP`s there. Truly these are opposition leaders that can benefit Pakistan`s long term future. Hamidm2--don`t lose sight of the fact that the army`s size and power is ultimately making Pakistan weak not strong. Pakistanis should do the same--a strong critique of India` s weaknesses ultimately benefits the Indian people. Two strongly democratic and progressive countries don`t go to war.

...... after reading the silly crowing comments of the horrible hindoos, i would like to retract my disparaging remarks about the pak army .......... as a matter of fact, i think we should double the defense budget with full back-pay for our field marshall romair ..........

Riffat Jahan # 48: You have precisely and objectively laid out the broader picture of our society. The nature of Pakistani society needs understanding with the help of history. I would not go into the details here but the net result of a number of factors is that our society lacks clear vision. The official version of Pakistaniness or pakistani identity is largely the concepts developed during independence movement. Public is very confused about it because the practices are widely vascillating on either side of the narrowly defined Pakistani society. Everybody wants progress, social justice and prosperity but the solutions in mind are extremely diverse. On one side, supremacy of religion is offered as a solution and secularism on the other; those who accept little bit of both have been in power and messing up big time because they follow appeasement of both extremes. Many in the diasporic Pakistani population are comfortable with this poutpouri of opposite extremes and justify military dictatorship for the lack of credible and honest political leadership.

Military (Army establishment) has been playing the game of divide and rule with the political leadership with always finding enough civilians to tow military line. The outcome of military interference have been devastating for Pakistani economy, internal cohesion and foreign policy matters. For example, military created Taliban but remained complacent about Taliban involvement in sectarian terrorism in Pakistan. Both BB and NS were so helpless in dealing with sectarian terrorists because of the `strategic depth` polices of military.

I recall pointing out surge in sectarian violence near the end of NS era and sudden drop in violence with his overthrow. The resident expert of military affairs at chowk was sooooo upset for even thinking that military could possibly be a party in the sectarian violence. Now every child on the street knows that sectarian terrorist, Taliban and Kashmiri mujahideen were interchangeable labels for same people.

It is impossible to think that military intelligence did not know that some of the best physicians and surgeons were treating OBL, his lieutenants and Talibans. Who are responsible for tranfering nuclear technology to N. Korea in exchange for rocket technology. Didn`t they consider its effect on relationships with east Asian countries and the USA.

What else is new? They have not changed. They manipulated the whole election process to bring down BB and NS in exchange for MMA. The military has not closed the books on supporting jihads and Islamic terrorism. Right now, it is safely tucked away in exchange for political power to mullahs. The MMA and Army establishment nexus can be revived within days once USA pressure eases. In the meantime, mullahs can be occupied with morality issues in NWFP and Balochistan.

The story of Musharraf taking personal interest in buying partially disabled satellite from Boing appeared in the press, including SA Tribune. Pakistan was made to lease it by a middleman in Chicage (where Boing is headquartered) when nobody in the region was interested in leasing it. I wonder who could be a middleman in Chicage with close access to Musharraf? Boing was not going to make any money on it this year for sure, but thanks to our expert in gorilla tactics, Boing will earn 40 million.

Pakistan and Russia has very litttle trade. Our Kargil mastermind goes to Russia with so much media propaganda that even China will not be pleased with such a move. Russia is not an ascending power to give so much importance.

So it is not just the military budget, unfair business practices of military industrial complex, squandering resources and plots grabbing; the major loss to Pakistanis is both bad policies and military-backed state sponsored indoctrination to create a Pakistani identity that focuses almost exclusively on ideological and political enemies much more than on progress, prosperity, native cultures and decent living.

#46 by arjun_m on February 8, 2003 11:58am PT
//..FBI seeking Pakistani man who entered U.S. illegally..//

It is a conspiracy hatched by FBI to justify INS registration of pakistanis and malign the reputation of Pakistan.

re:#16 by jay
Mushy is an idiot and knows next to nothing about satellites. Pak Army, when not defending the country (which it never has), indulges in these kind of antics for domestic consumption. Russians will charge a hefty amount from Pak (which is spending its meagre resources for what?) for satellite launches and Mushy will have the satisfaction of saying what he likes.
Few countries have the capability for satellite launches (India is one of them) and putting a satellite into a geostationary orbit. India has been doing this successfully for small weight satellites and has created a niche for itself in this field. Sometimes back, South Korean and a German satellites were piggybacked on a rocket with an Indian satellite and launched successfully.
I am only reminded of a sanskrit proverb here: ``Ardho ghatam ghosham upayeti noonam`` meaning `` a half empty vessel makes a lot of voice``. That is what our Mushy boy is: a half-empty vessel!
Sridhar

CONTRIBUTION OF ISRAEL,

The contribution of israel in redefining jihad has not been well accepted by the non-muslms. In the past, the shaheeds, the martyres, provided a significant boost to the families. The mulim NGOs stepped in with money and the society honoured the families. There were films of proud families sending their children to death. Now the situation is different, most want to dis own the shaheeds, the only thing that martyre leaves to his family is homelessness and loss. This has altered the mindset of the palestinians towards jihad. Once again, israel has knowcked of one conutable against each of the uncountables.

The pak army has relied on the uncountables to support their strategic depth concept, the kargill invasion. It is clear that the pak army will exclusively rely on these un countables why the lead a luxurious life style running the Wapds. I do hope that india will soon realise this, and backed by the airborne warning system and the new airforce hardware india should turn the uncountables to countables along the indo pak borders. That would be the minimum required to contain the jihadists.

NEEDS OF THE ARMY,

When the US lifted the embargo, mushy in his first visit to the US asked for the F16 fighters, that was the top most in his mind. After 30 years a pak president visits russia, and he wants missile defence sytems. Army is only interested in preserving itself from the indian troops, the only threat to them. The pak society is finall a monolith, jihadists have control of the military and have managed to put the jihadists in the pak parliment as well through the graduate progra. In pakistan a person who has spent ten years in a madrassa learning koran by rote can become a meber of parliment, he is a graduste, but does not recognise an oxford degree.

The new Pm of pakistan, in his first address wanted friday as holiday, not different from the needs of the army.

The chowk mullahs like the tahmeds talk of roti kapda, no sirs, that can wait,a mushy kalifaei is the first priority, and only threat to it is india.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

riffatj #48 Good post. It is in a way good, as you say, that ``they (the people of pakistan) are too pre-occupied with their daily life problems to partake in street politics.`` Pakistan`s best hope for the future is its energetic and down-to-warth population. For the past couple of decades, only those who couldnt get into professional colleges joined the military, and most of the fanatics were even bigger losers. Unfortunately, these losers and troublemakers are taking all the headlines (and political power).
But never underestimate the power of the people - the sun will shine one day on Pakistan as well. And that will be due to the honest, hardworking qualities of its ordinary people - not the scum that captures the headlines.

Hello!

To my immense pleasure, the interaction so far has been very relevant and strictly to the point. A couple of clarifications would be in order.
An easy access to the Internet notwithstanding, [thankfully] I am pretty doubtful that I can be classified as “elite” by any measure. I stem from a simple rural set-up of northern Punjab with very mediocre financial standing. Obviously, not the lowest social strata, I can however claim to represent the mainstream society of Pakistan.
There is a gross misconception that the military is still revered by the 99 % [or for that matter even simple majority] of the Pakistanis. Presumably, some of the readers don’t have an idea that today even ordinary people -- right from illiterate lower working class to apolitical housewives -- have started squarely blaming Army for the sordid mess in the country. The intervening role of the army is no more a mere academic discussion. It is being discussed and denounced in remote villages as well as kachi abadis.

A pertinent question would be that why don’t we see any civil unrest in the country then? Please note, the [disappointment and] resentment of a common man against the junta is not equal to an approval for the political leadership either. In general, people are totally disillusioned on one hand and utterly despondent on the other. They have almost lost the hope and consequently vigour to stand up and fight for their rights. They are too pre-occupied with their daily life problems to partake in street politics. This silence is a sort of macabre indifference, not at all an endorsement of Musharraf & Co.

Now moving from the social/political issues to military aspects, I would warmly recommend a really nice thought-provoking article. Please, read it and have your own opinion.

Professionalism and Discipline of Armed Forces in a Society with Repeated Military Interventions — Case of Pakistani Armed Forces
http://www.defencejournal.com/2003/jan/military.htm

Regards,
Riffat Jahan

Please, listen to it, in particular the first five minutes, to have an idea what respect our militarymen have for the people and their will.

BBC`s Report with Musharraf`s Interview at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/rams/zafarye.ram

you will be appalled, to say the least.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#37 by ahmadzai on February 8, 2003 6:56am PT
//...Its just that they were able to snatch 1/3rd of Kasmir from India in 1949...//

AFAIK, Kashmir wasn`t with India at that time. Its king joined India later to save his a**, when the invaders came close to Srinagar. ( Experts tell us that - but for that invasion in 1949, Kashmir would probably still be an independent territory, but that`s another story)

But, are you sure it was the great Paki Army which ``snatched`` 1/3 of Kashmir? Until today, pakis insisted that it was the brave ``tribals`` who did it. So who was it then?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

To those countrymen eugolizing the military.

...After years of observing and writing about the antics of our military and political rulers, I have reached the somewhat cynical conclusion that no matter who is in charge, some things will never change. The reality of power in Pakistan is that the army has controlled the destiny of the nation for most of its existence, and is likely to continue doing so in the foreseeable future. The invisible `agencies` have huge, unaudited budgets and manipulate and malign politicians and control sections of the press. Incidentally, all this is a matter of public record: names of politicians and journalists who have received cash handouts from the exchequer have been published many times without any action being taken against those making the payments and those receiving them.

Under these circumstances, how can democracy possibly function? And if it can`t, what difference does it make who occupies the prime minister`s house in Islamabad? Before the elections, the received wisdom was that there would inevitably be friction between the elected PM and President Pervez Musharraf over the exercise of power.

In the event, the transition has been relatively smooth despite the hysteria in the press, although to be accurate, there has in fact been no transition as power remains firmly and securely with the president/chief of army staff. All that has happened is that the title of chief executive has passed to Jamali who is perfectly content to play second fiddle.

One major problem with the army`s role is that as an institution, it is convinced that its interest is identical to the national interest which it has defined without any semblance of a public debate. This leads to the conclusion that to justify our bloated defence budget, Pakistan needs an enemy. In our case, this means India. The logical inference to be drawn from this line of reasoning is that the Kashmir issue will never be resolved.

Another reason the army will never voluntarily loosen its grip on power is that the officer class is too accustomed to all the perks that go with running the country. Currently, literally hundreds of civilian jobs here and in our missions abroad are manned by serving and retired military personnel.

Housing estates and agricultural lands across the country have been parcelled out to officers as a matter of routine. Above all, they are virtually exempt from any sort of prosecution on charges of corruption. Every class has its own set of demands and requirements and normally, these are mediated with the state and some compromise is reached. In the army`s case, there is no mediation because it controls the levers of power.

Had the army`s monopoly on power meant simply the usurpation and waste of resources, we could have gritted our teeth and got on with life. Unfortunately, the assumption that GHQ is the source of all wisdom has many implications: for instance, when there is complicit relationship between religious extremists and the `agencies`, it is not possible for the enfeebled state to control the former. Their violent methods in Afghanistan and Kashmir cannot be switched on and off at will, and the result is the kind of hate-filled rhetoric and bloodletting we have grown so accustomed to...

http://www.dawn.com/weekly/mazdak/20030104.htm

Pakistan Army was significantly smaller before the 1971 War

In 1970 we had about 2,500 gazetted officers and about 12 generals. Now we have more than 125 generals and over 12,000 bureaucrats.

The author is right on. So long as the military is promoted and regarded as a sacred cow there is little hope of making anything beyond a token investment in the basic needs of the the people, food, shelter, health care, education etc. Defence and debt-servicing (which is also largely the result of fueling the military machine) consume almost the entire state revenues year after year.
And the army`s claim to the status of a sacred cow rests on the twin myths of preventing Indian aggression and ``liberation`` of Kashmir. It is high time for tha saner elements of in Pakistan refuse to be hoodwinked, opt for peace with India and let the people of Kashmir define and lead their own struggle.