A Gory Tale of Lies, Greed and Deception

Neo-feudalism
Editorial
http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/Dec-2003/30/EDITOR/edi3.asp

IN answer to a Question in the Senate, the federal government has revealed that 485 residential plots in various cities of all four provinces were allotted to Army officers between October 1999 and July 2003. Though the plots were allotted to officers of all ranks from full general down to lieutenant, no less than 103 plots of 800 sq yds (plus or minus) were allotted to 45 general officers (major-generals and above). Of these plots, 46 were allotted in Karachi, 36 in Lahore. These plots were not allotted at a subsidy; they were given away almost free. Technically leased, the terms were token: Rs 5 per sq yd premium, with an annual lease of Rs 0.50 per sq yd. This works out to Rs 4000 for a plot just over one and a half kanals, with an annual rent of Rs 80. Even in a depressed real estate market, the worth would be at least Rs 6 million. The plots were allotted according to a policy framed in 1978, by the Zia military regime, but that is no excuse for what is now an institutionalised abuse.
First of all, the principle of giving land, which is a non-replenishable resource, for services is a bad one. In the classic feudalism of medieval Europe or the Mughals, land was given in exchange for military service, and was resumable by the Crown. Here we seem to have a neo-feudalism, in which land is given as a reward for military service. What happens when the land runs out? How will future generals be rewarded for meritorious service? The classic feudalism ran into trouble on this count, for the need to give fiefs or mansabs created a pressure for unbridled expansion, leading ultimately to overstretch and the collapse of the system (in the Mughal case, of the empire itself). The link of the military with land, whether it be allotment of agricultural land, or of urban plots both commercial and residential, whether embroilment in land disputes such as the Okara military farms, or whether the cutting edge of the real estate market, creates the kind of bad impression which echoed in the National Assembly during Saturday’s debate on the 17th Amendment.
Simply put, the military must not allow itself to be seen as an institution which protects and promotes its members’ acquiring real estate interests cheaply. The 1978 policy, among others, should be quietly shelved.

The growing divide

Mr Irfan Hussein in his column ``The growing divide`` (December 23) has rightly pointed out the growing resentment against army officers acquiring more and more power, wealth, plots of land, etc. However, the problem is not merely due to the greed of a few (or many) individuals but the widely accepted, systematic and official creation of a privileged class.

It can be argued that those serving in the armed forces should receive greater rewards since they risk their lives in defending the country. Perhaps one should just look at the facts: we have not fought a formal war for 33 years and yet we continue to support five soldiers versus only two policemen per 1,000 citizens. Could a well-equipped and trained police force also not defend the country in the unlikely event of war?

As far as laying down one`s life is concerned, the total number of men and officers killed in all three previous wars put together is less than the number of policemen killed in Karachi alone over the last 10 years.

The problem is also not merely of officers grabbing plots of land; the official system of salaries and rewards is intrinsically corrupt. The inspector-general of the Punjab police commanding more men than three corps put together gets a monthly uniform allowance of Rs250, whilst an army second lieutenant is paid Rs1,250 per month as kit allowance (in addition to ``disturbance pay`` for being married, a batman allowance, etc.)

Armed forces personnel are also apparently taxed differently to us mere mortals and receive rent-free quarters, entertainment allowance, foreign allowance, ration allowance, pension, deferred pay, disturbance pay, conservancy allowance and leave encashment preparatory to retirement free of tax, according to an English daily`s report (March 23).

Mr Hussein`s article in the light of these facts puts to shame the widely held belief that better pay and conditions lead to less greed and corruption. The exact opposite seems to be the case with the highest paid group of public servants wanting more and more.

However, the obvious and ruthless unfairness and inequality in our society extends far beyond the army alone. The same issue of Dawn reports an over 20 per cent increase in the salaries of higher court judges from July 2003, following a 40 per increase in January 2002.

I applaud Mr Hussein`s efforts in pointing out the gross injustice and staggering inequalities in our society, but perhaps he should not confine his ire just to the groups with which he is not associated.

N. AHMED
Kidderminster, UK
http://www.dawn.com/2003/12/27/letted.htm#2

Ref:
The growing divide
By Irfan Husain
http://www.dawn.com/weekly/mazdak/20031220.htm

Queries about ex-generals’ assets rejected

http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/dec2003-daily/19-12-2003/main/main19.htm

ISLAMABAD: The Senate Secretariat has scrapped opposition senators’ questions seeking details of assets of late Gen Ziaul Haq, Gen Akhtar Abdur Rehman during the period 1977-1985, arguing they were of secret nature and could not be disclosed to public.

Likewise, another question regarding allotment of a plot in the Police Foundation, Islamabad to Gen Pervez Musharraf has not been accepted on the grounds that no question could be put against the president of Pakistan.

This is not for the first time that such questions particularly raised by Senator Farhatullah Babar have been turned down by the chairman Senate on the grounds of secrecy. Earlier, Babar had asked the defence minister to state whether the practice of asset declaration by the army officers before the central officers record office (GHQ) was still continuing or has been discontinued.

If the practice was continuing, then assets of Gen Zia during 1977 when he imposed military rule and in 1985 when elections were held be declared. Likewise, the government was also asked to give similar details about the assets of Gen Akthar Abdur Rehman during the same years. The defence minister was also asked to tell whether General Pervez Musharraf had obtained a plot for himself from the Police Foundation.

Confessions of a failed jihadi
By Syed Saleem Shahzad
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EL06Df01.html

KARACHI - He was always considered extraordinary. He was an excellent pupil, a good cricketer, a natural student leader, and a popular teacher in the medical career that he chose to pursue.
Then he decided on a radical change in direction. He would become a jihadi, undergo a six-month training program, and then die as a martyr in the Kashmir Valley.
On the journey toward the ultimate sacrifice of his life, though, his views underwent another radical change, and what had appeared as reality became an illusion as the bitter realization hit home of how cheap life is in the military games that Pakistan and India play.

...````You know, the military establishment is flourishing on our revenues. It has consumed our resources, and now it aims to consume the whole of our society in the name of jihad. My problem is, we spend so much of our national budgetary resources on our army, yet it sends young civilian lads to fight in the occupied valley [of Kashmir]. Why don`t they wage this `jihad` themselves, for which they get fat salaries and dozens of other benefits which a civilian cannot even dream of?``

and much more .....

validating this article to great extent.