Moving beyond 1947

Article in Weekly Pulse on 23rd March 2015

Yasmeen Aftab Ali

Trains upon trains pulled in the Lahore Railways Station with mutilated bodies of old men and women, children, women pregnant and young men and girls. No one was spared. A few lucky ones who were spared were those who were taken as dead; bathed in blood of those killed around them, buried in the pile of dead bodies, pretending to be as dead as their fellow passengers.  This was the standard scene of post Pakistan creation trains heading from India. Unfortunately, instead of moving forward beyond this hatred in 1947, India has chosen to stay stuck in this familiar zone. How has this choice been made, one may ask? Firstly, by illegally occupying Kashmir.  This disputed area holds great strategic importance for both India and Pakistan. The Indus and the tributaries flowing from Indus are the source of fresh water for a largely agricultural economy of Pakistan.  Controlling water by increasing or decreasing the flow can damage crops in Pakistan. This is exactly what happened soon after Independence, India had shut off the canals of Central Bari Doab. The result was damage to crops it being the sowing season. Historian Naveed Tajammal  in an article states, “The article lll of the Indus Water Treaty  binds the Government of India not to hinder the flow of the western rivers, i.e. Indus, Jhelum and Chenab, to Pakistan, and India cannot store any water or construct any storage works, on the above cited rivers, having been given total rights since march 1973, of Ravi, Beas and Sutlej. We get flood surplus of these rivers which is released in case of excessive rains, which helps in recharging our ground waters levels, but that too will cease after the second Ravi-Beas Link is made. Today while we slumber,  India has started works on, the following projects; Pakal Dul 1000MW, Kiru 600 MW,Karwar 520 MW, Baglihar (eventual 900 MW),Sawalkot 1200MW (two 600mw units),Salal 390 MW, Sewa-ll 120 MW, and finally the Bursur project on the Marusudar river, which, is a major tributary of Chenab river, here the Foxland intends to build a massive water storage dam, which will control and regulate the flow to maintain levels of Pakal dul, Dul Hasti, Rattle, Baglihar, Sawalkot and Salal Hydro-projects, on the Chenab. Jhelum will be blessed by the foxland with Kishanganga 330 MW and Uri-ll 240 MW.” (Published March 6, 2012)

Kashmir has another significance for both countries and this is the existence of Silk Route. The main land connection between Pakistan and China that passes through Kashmir.   Kashmir has led both countries to war. It represents the main bone of contention between both.  No amount of superficial handling of relationships between both and by both nations can lead to continuing peace between both nations. Only an intelligent settlement of the dispute can deliver this result. In light of the existing government in India, any such settlement is unlikely. In fact, to expect any government togive away a territory it has occupied, albeit illegally will be political suicide.

Perhaps Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru, gave the solution to this issue in his statement in the Indian Parliament on 7th August, 1952; “Pandit Nehru said, “Let me say clearly that we accept the basic proposition that the future of Kashmir is going to be decided finally by the goodwill and pleasure of her people. The goodwill and pleasure of this Parliament is of no importance in this matter, not because this Parliament does not have the strength to decide the question of Kashmir but because any kind of imposition would be against the principles that this Parliament holds. Kashmir is very close to our minds and hearts and if by some decree or adverse fortune, ceases to be a part of India, it will be a wrench and a pain and torment for us. If, however, the people of Kashmir do not wish to remain with us, let them go by all means. We will not keep them against their will, however painful it may be to us. I want to stress that it is only the people of Kashmir who can decide the future of Kashmir. It is not that we have merely said that to the United Nations and to the people of Kashmir, it is our conviction and one that is borne out by the policy that we have pursued, not only in Kashmir but everywhere. Though these five years have meant a lot of trouble and expense and in spite of all we have done, we would willingly leave if it was made clear to us that the people of Kashmir wanted us to go. However sad we may feel about leaving we are not going to stay against the wishes of the people. We are not going to impose ourselves on them on the point of the bayonet.” (Arundhati Roy inThe Hindu November 28, 2010) And this by the way was neither the first nor the last time he opined on the issue.

This main cause has led to a cascading fountain of negativity that has given birth to more actions and reactions that one can recount. A deep distrust of each other, nurtured and watered by the continuing existence of the dispute has stopped both India and Pakistan to move forward confidently into the future developing programmes that focus on their people not upon fear of each other.

This very fear has led India to fear that “with the “official end” of war in terror in Afghanistan heralded by the departure of US combat forces, Pakistan shall launch the jihadists in India-occupied Kashmir. Nothing can be further from the truth. One; Pakistan does not “own” the jihadists as claimed by India and two; Pakistan is facing terrorism within its borders.” (My op-ed September 24, 2013) This very fear has led to focus on the Ayni Air Base also called as 'Gissar Air Base' located 10 km west of the capital of Tajikistan-Dushanbe. Between years 2002-2010, India invested approximately $70 million in renovations, installing state-of-the-art air defense navigational facilities. The runway was further extended. This access offers immediate strategic depth in the region to India. This very fear has also led to India’s decision to maintain a strong foothold at the Farkhor Air Base; a military air base located near the town of Farkhor in Tajikistan. To be noted; aircrafts taking off from Farkhor could be over the Pakistani skies within minutes. 

This very fear has led to spending of funds from both sides in equipping their armies, their fleets and air forces with bigger, better machines and equipment in case needed against each other. If not anything else; to be viewed as a deterrent towards each other.  The question here would be; why must this money be spent based on the fear of each other? Why should not this money be spent on the development of facilities, healthcare and education of its people?  According to a U.N research study, “Far more people in India have access to a cell phone than to a toilet and improved sanitation. Says Zafar Adeel, Director of United Nations University’s Canada-based think-tank for water, the Institute for Water, Environment and Health: “It is a tragic irony to think that in India, a country now wealthy enough that roughly half of the people own phones, about half cannot afford the basic necessity and dignity of a toilet.” (United Nations University 2010)

India being the one occupying Kashmir must bear greater responsibility for this climate of distrust and hostility between both nations. It has been sixty-eight years to the birth of both nations being free from the yolk of their colonial masters. Yet they continue to live with the legacy that has only created hatred. Is that wise?

Time to take stock.

The writer is a lawyer, academic and political analyst. She has authored a book titled ‘A Comparative Analysis of Media & Media Laws in Pakistan.’ She can be contacted at: yasmeenali62@gmail.com and tweets at @yasmeen_9

The Pakistani Identity

Article in The Dawn (Supplement 23rd March 2015)
This is a cross post.

Yasmeen Aftab Ali

Pakistan continues to suffer from its birth convulsions since 1947, unable to determine a common bond of identity, with other Pakistanis, across the board. To understand the dilemma, one must have a clear understanding of terms involved. The simplest meaning of identity can be defined as a distinctive character marking an individual, group of individuals, an ethnic group, a nation. Most Pakistanis however, remain confused to this date regarding their identity. Some measure it by religion, others by culture, yet some use other varied markers.  Each of these markers are used in exclusion of other elements involved; a fatal mistake.

The first seed of the split was sown when the speech of Quaid-e-Azam for 11th August 1947 was censored by Chowdhery Muhammad Ali. The only paper to publish it uncensored was The Dawn. Chowdhery probably did not agree with the Quaid when he stated, “You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques, or to any other place of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed-that has nothing to do with the business of the State…. Even now there are some states in existence, where there are discriminations, made and bars imposed against a particular class. Thank God, we are not starting in those days. We are starting in the days  when there is no discrimination, no discrimination between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State.”

Little did Jinnah know that the identity that had emerged as a strength in the  pre-partition era would be damaged, molested and torn apart by divisions created by different vested interest groups. It was this understanding of a pluralistic society that gave birth to Pakistan; yet today we stand, in 2015, trying to piece together what exactly that identity is. The identity is not based upon religion to the exclusion of rights of those not following the religion of the majority. The excerpt shared above of Jinnah’s speech stands testimony to that.  Also standing testimony to this thought process is the Chapter of Fundamental Rights of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973, as does Article 19 that deals with Freedom of Expression and Speech and states thus:

“Every citizen shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, and there shall be freedom of the press, subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interest of the glory of Islam or the integrity, security or defence of Pakistan or any part thereof, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, [commission of] or incitement to an offence.”

The term citizen denotes every person holding the citizenship of Pakistan irrespective of the caste, creed or religion. If I may add: exactly as promised by Jinnah.  Freedom of expression is deemed to be a basic human right, that includes; freedom of thought, freedom of press, freedom to express oneself in arts, poetry, architecture, crafts, lifestyles, dressing, eating, culture, music, sculptures, professing one’s faith,  so on and so forth. Every citizen of Pakistan has the right to freedom of expression; also an integral part of the constitution, in line with Jinnah’s philosophy. Pakistani identity therefore, does not offer this gift to members of one religion while excluding others. Nor does it offer an advantage to one sect within the religion to the exclusion of another.

Some promote the theory that there are at least six distinct ethnic races in Pakistan ie the Pathans, the Punjabis, the Baluchis, the Sindhis, Kashmiris  and the Urdu Speaking. They opine that since these ethnic races have a cultural heritage spanning centuries, therefore the Pakistani Identity (whatever it may be) takes a back- bench and has thereby failed to develop. This, as put forth by them; includes not only cultural differences but also difference in language spoken by them. Lack of a common language base is promoted as a major dividing factor by these theorists.

Let me submit here, that nations geographically and demographically bigger than us, have had more cultural diversity in terms of ethnicity than we can imagine, yet they have managed to emerge as one nation. One such example is the US. The US Census Bureau map shows the ancestry of its 317 million people of which Germans are by far the largest with 49,206,934 people. This is followed by the African-Americans. Then there are roughly 4.5 million Irish people settled in the larger cities of the US including New York, Boston and Chicago to name a few. The English-Americans are also sizeable in number. Those claiming a Mexican ancestry are said to be at 31,789,483 in number. Yet, this does not stop any one of them from thinking and acting only as Americans.

In countries having served time under colonial rule, English has more often than not been given a legislative status. Most African states for example, had English as their national and official language to curb ethnic disputes, which would otherwise arise from existence of multi-tribes and ethnicities.

We made the mistake of trying to impose one uniform language; Urdu from top down ignoring the multitude of local languages especially Bengali. A region where few spoke or understood Urdu. The result dear readers, was the 1971 episode. Among other reasons, effort at imposition of Urdu on a Bengali speaking ethnic race led to disastrous results. The educational policies followed by successive governments to create different classes based on language preferences namely the elite and regular (English language being mandatory for good jobs) has undoubtedly created a deep schism within the Pakistani society. We must move towards a solution, as it is high time, not remain bogged down by deterrents preventing us from achieving greatness.

To move towards that solution, we must first address the question posed; what is then a Pakistani Identity?

I believe the Pakistani Identity must be seen in a bigger context as opposed to being relegated to religious, linguistic, or similar levels to the exclusion of other elements at play.

Pakistani Identity evolved in 1947 as a political statement. It is composed of different ethnic groups and different religious groups; further sub-divided into different sects within these different religious groups. Pakistan was and is created for each one of these groups as clearly enunciated in Jinnah’s speech of 11th 1947.  

No country can develop as a nation if it negates its component parts. Translated, it means, a Pakistani Identity cannot establish and entrench itself in the psyche of its people minus the identity of being a composition of all its multi-cultural and multi-religious roots. To deny the uniformity leads to a national identity. Acknowledgement and nurturing of sub- cultures making up these layers; does. Imposition of any form that is alien will not create an identity; it will only destroy the existing one leaving one groping in the dark in confusion.  Subscribing to the thought expounded above,  Hywel Coleman, an Honorary Research Fellow of Leeds, did a research paper for the British Council in 2010 addressing the weightage awarded to English Language competency in the Civil Service Exams in Pakistan. He suggested that applicants should need to demonstrate not only competency in English language but also the language generally understood by all; Urdu as well as competency in at least one regional language.  In one stroke of brilliance, Hywel told us that though English is necessary in today’s world based on inter-linking of nations, important too is to link Pakistanis across board under the ‘umbrella’ of Urdu understood by all. He has at the same time awarded equality to regional languages as well thereby emphasizing upon the importance of one’s roots.

The Pakistani Identity is not based on one aspect alone to the exclusion of every other component involved; it is multidimensional and multilayered. It is many things rolled in one.  The objective never was that once the goal of creation of Pakistan was achieved, Pakistanis would meet out the exact same treatment to their minorities as meted out to them in undivided India. At least, that was not Jinnah’s vision. Pakistan is essentially pluralistic in its identity; a society composed of different ethnicities, religions and cultures and as such must be given the environment to nourish, gain strength and grow, learning in the process to love and celebrate their differences. Belittling or nullifying these varieties of flavor will only damage the fabric of our combined identity. Yet at the same time, one needs to understand that all are intertwined as one under the umbrella of ‘Pakistan’ and this; defines each of us!

Multiculturalism is the underlying thread that weaves the Pakistani Identity and holds it together. Emphasizing on the citizenship alone will fail to gel people from different faiths and cultures as one. Accepting and celebrating the differences, initiating serious inter-faith dialogues and appreciation of cultural flavors will create a bonding.  

Endnote: “In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic State — to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non- Muslims — Hindus, Christians, and Parsis — but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan.”(Jinnah  in February 1948 address in US)

The writer is a lawyer, academic and political analyst. She has authored a book titled ‘A Comparative Analysis of Media & Media Laws in Pakistan.’ Her mail ID is yasmeenali62@gmail.com and tweets at @yasmeen_9

MILITARY INC BY AYESHA SIDDIQA REVIEWED

By Afreen Baig

Dr Ayesha Siddiqa's 'The Military Inc.' is a book deflective of reality, highly derogatory and against the very notion of sovereignty.

Dr Ayesha Siddiqa launches the book by giving the impression that her intention is to cover the entrepreneurial activities of military worldwide. However, in depth reading reaffirms suspicions that her book massively targets the Pakistan Military and the top echelons of the Armed Forces, most of which are based upon self serving assumptions and intentional hoodwinking. A labyrinth of financial figures is presented to further obscure the ordinary reader's intelligence.

The book sets forward four arguments. First, that MILBUS (Military Business) is military capital that perpetuates the military's political predatory style; and is kept concealed and includes questionable transfer of resources from public sector to individuals connected with armed Forces. Second, the military's economic greed increases in totalitarian systems. Third, Military convinces the citizens to bear additional costs for security on basis of conceived threats to the State. Fourth, the book considers the Pakistan Military the cause of all ills, social disparity and democratic fiasco.

Let's start by setting the record straight. MILBUS in Pakistan - is the result of honest intentions and visionary policies - to raise independent resources, to self-finance the on-going national technological development, to modernize strategic assets, and most importantly, the determination to rely less on Foreign Aid. While at the same time, build facilities for retired military personnel and their families; and slowly withdrawing from National Defense budget allocation as a percentage of GDP.

MILBUS also exists in well developed countries like the USA, UK, France, China, Israel or even Turkey. The Milbus or the PMEs (Private Military Enterprises) are generally known as the Private Military Industry. Famous US PMEs include Halliburton, Black-water worldwide, Defensecurity, Titan Corporations, Kellogg Brown & Root, Air Scan, DynCorp's, CACI International, etc. Famous UK PMEs include Black-Op's and Aegis Defense Services. Most of these are active beneficiaries of the Iraq War. The worldwide PME industry is now worth over $100 billion a year. Thus, this is not just a Pakistan specific industry.

MILBUS in Pakistan is being criticized unnecessarily, with the sole intention to malign the Armed Forces. The Pakistan military has never intended to deliberately conceal their economic activities and they do not cause injustice by weighing heavily on civilian corporate sector or individual leaders.

The book 'Military Inc' is based upon a series of presumptions and false accusations. Throughout her book, the author obstinately insists that the growth of Military economy is the case of self interest and predatory acquisition by senior officers, in which it allow the Generals to seek benefit for themselves and their clients.

The author fails to provide, any concrete evidence that could confirm her allegations, that questionable transfer of wealth is made to individuals connected with armed forces. All she could give in example were the 500 sq yard official plots given to the Generals at the end of their service, as part of their benefits, and hence her assumption that a retired general is worth from Rs.150 million to Rs.400 million.

Rarely do critics mention, that nominal deduction from the pay of all military officers are made during their service, in return for a small apartment or a small housing, which is handed over at the time of their retirement. However, this facility is still not available to all retiring servicemen.

Next, the book alleges that the military's economic greed increases in totalitarian systems, where the general public, private businessmen, civilian corporate sector and national business units are all oppressed to encourage and endorse military business units. Her book focuses largely on the four welfare projects managed by the Pakistan Military i.e. The Fauji Foundation (FF), the Army Welfare Trust (AWT), Shaheen Foundation (SF) and Bahria Foundation (BF), and in some places the Frontier Works Organization (FWO).

The author believes that "the profit earned by military is directly proportional to power and gives the armed forces a sense of being independent of the incompetent civilians" - which can only be considered as an extremely reckless comment.

There was great wisdom behind establishing these welfare projects. The visionary minds knew that "the profit earned by the military will be directly proportional to Sovereignty of the Country and the Institution".

The Military established its first welfare foundation in 1954, with funds received from the British as part of Pakistan's share of the Post War Services Reconstruction Fund. In India, those funds were distributed immediately amongst those who fought the Second World War. Unlike India, Pakistan's wise military opted to use those funds to establish projects that would ensure the overall well-being, availability of jobs, and a decent pension for their armed forces.

The initial purpose of these welfare projects was to create employment opportunities for the honorable retired or disabled military personnel. Servicemen - whose only obligation is defending the borders of Pakistan.

This one wise decision, not only raised the morals of the serving military men, but also gave the ordinary citizens a reason to join the Armed Forces of Pakistan and serve their country. Assured that their future is protected, the servicemen live their lives in testing times on borders, remote locations and a life away from family.

The Fauji Foundation, Shaheen Foundation and Bahria Foundation were all established under the Charitable Endowments Act 1890. The Army Welfare Trust was established under the Societies Registration Act 1860.

Then all these entities are registered Tax-paying Companies. The Army Welfare Trust and the Fauji Foundation pays tax at 20% of their profits. Shaheen Foundation and Bahria Foundation pay Taxes at 30% of their profits. Fair enough!

This limited industrial base that evolved over years added to the military's credibility and resolves to contribute towards the Nation's socio-economic development and Pakistan's Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Like any ordinary successful businessmen or multi-national corporations (MNCs), the Pakistan Military utilized their available structure, nominal budget and dedicated their human resources for the welfare of the uniformed men and civilians working in those companies. While also pioneering technology, developing expertise and establishing quality control.

The book 'Military Inc' accuses the Pakistan Armed forces of running business (MILBUS) that are diverse in nature, ranging from small scale to large scale corporate enterprises. As examples, it quotes Schools, Banks, Insurance Company, Radio and TV, a Fertilizer company, Hospitals and Clinics, Cement plant, Universities and institutes, etc.

Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa left no opportunity to magnify and exaggerate the limited and partial presence of MILBUS competing in Pakistan's broad based expanding economy.

Let's analyze the limited magnitude and negligible worth of these Military run ventures, compared to similar mega business entities currently present in Pakistan.

According to State Bank of Pakistan, there are total 73 Banks in Pakistan. From which, there are 24 Limited banks, 11 Foreign Banks, 8 Financial Banks, 4 Specialized Banks, 13 Investment Banks, 7 Micro-finance Banks and 6 Islamic banks. Out of these total 73 banks - Dr Ayesha Siddiqa tends to be intolerable towards ONE 'Askari Bank' run by Military? In 2007, Askari Bank paid a Tax of Rs. 743 million.

According to Federal Bureau of Statistics, there are 24 Cement plants in Pakistan, and only ONE owned by 'Fauji Cement Company Ltd'. A Tax-paying company listed on the Stock Exchange.

According to State Bank of Pakistan, there are total 59 Insurance companies in Pakistan. There are 4 in the Public sector, 50 companies in the private sector and 5 are incorporated abroad. Why should anyone be narrow-minded towards ONE owned by military - 'Askari General Insurance Ltd', which is listed on the Stock Exchange and pays Tax?

According to the Health Division and the P.M.D.C, there are around 924 Hospitals, 12,726 Medical Institutions, 560 Rural Health Centers and 4712 Dispensaries all over Pakistan. Out of these, if 10 Hospitals and 20 Medical Centers are being run by Fauji Foundation, what's the hue & cry about? These Medical services are offered to the military and civilians alike. Even the prestigious Aga Khan Health Services (AGHS) own 7 Hospitals and 164 Medical Centers.

According to State Bank Pakistan, there are above 10 Fertilizer Plants in Pakistan from which 6 are State owned and the rest are private. Out of these, only ONE is military owned, the 'Fauji Fertilizer Company Ltd', which is listed on the Stock Exchange and audited by KPMG Taseer Hadi & Co, and pays Tax annually.

According to Higher Education Commission, there are 122 Universities in Pakistan. Out of which, 65 are in the Public sector and 57 in the private sector. Foundation University and Bahria University are the only two affiliated with Armed Forces providing quality education to all citizens alike.

Foundation Schools have 90 branches all over Pakistan; compared to the City School which has more than 150 branches and the Beacon-house School which has around 130 branches. We as a Nation should triumph the quality education being promoted by the Foundation schools and the model paradigm implemented.

The Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) has 50,125 companies registered with it. From these only 9 are MILBUS projects. Why can't Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa accept these 9 MILBUS projects out of the 50,125 projects broadmindedly?

The author also alleges that Military's Internal Economy is hampering the growth of Pakistan's free market economy - which of course is not true. For her information, under this same system and era, and under the leadership of General Musharraf, Pakistan's free market economy boomed from $75 billion in 1999 to become $160 billion in 2007.

In the last 6 years, the free market economy of Pakistan expanded by $85 billion. The expansion and growth the Civilian Corporate sector, National Business Units and Multi-National Corporations witnessed in these last 6 years remain unprecedented in Pakistan's Economic History. Hence proven, that Military's Internal Economy did not hamper Pakistan's free market economy!

According to Dr Ayesha Siddiqa's book, the worth of Fauji Foundation is $169m, the worth of Army Welfare trust is $862m, the worth of Shaheen Foundation is $34.4m and the worth of Bahria Foundation is $69m. Total worth of MILBUS entities in Pakistan arise to ONLY $1.135 billion.

Hence, the presence of MILBUS companies, in Pakistan's free economy of $160 billion, amongst these other sectors and enterprises arises to a negligible maximum 0.8%.

The Karachi Stock Exchange (KSE) Market Capitalization in January 2008 stood at $75 billion. MILBUS worth as compared to KSE again arises to only 1.5%.

It's amusing to note that Dr Ayesha Siddiqa wrote a whole book, to malign a system (MILBUS) whose worth does not exceed 0.8% of Pakistan's free market economy.

Dr Ayesha Siddiqa's desire to portray the Pakistan Military as a coercive and self serving breed aiming to consolidate their economic power at the expense of Pakistan, not only erodes her neutrality into bias, but the above economic comparisons also contradict all her presumptuous and sham claims. As MILBUS in Pakistan has been competing fairly in free market and contributing to today's knowledge-based economy. It has played an active role to generate revenue for Pakistan and in contributing to overall GDP.

One of the greatest wisdom foreseen, behind establishing MILBUS was to liberate the Pakistan Armed Forces of international aid assistance and interference. Classified financial autonomy gives the Armed Forces a sense of self-respect and confidence of being independent of the dominating 'International Coalition of the willing' and their foreign aid.

The Pakistan Army has received a total of around $17 billion from the United States for arms, equipment and compensation since 1954, the year the United States entered into defense pacts with Pakistan. Much of it was uselessly spend during the 1980's Afghan war and the wars Pakistan fought with India. After 9/11, the famous foreign assistance of $10 billion comprises 60% reimbursement costs for expenditure incurred by the Pakistani Military while patrolling on PAK-Afghan border, recorded in the 'Coalition Support Funds'. These worthless assistances have not helped the Pakistan Army contrary to perception propagated in media reports.

Because, with these insignificant and worthless assistance, follows a series of humiliating articles and editorials composed in American print media. The clueless and prejudice Pakistani media ignorantly picks up the chanting and further plays an important role in distorting and altering the actual facts and figures. No relevant person is approached to clarify and set facts straight. Authors like Dr Ayesha Siddiqa bank on such distortion to further slander the admirable Pakistan Military.

After year 2000, the $85 billion expansion of Pakistan's economy, decreased the ratio of US aid & assistance to Pakistan's economy by around 100%. Now the U.S aid & assistance account to only 6.25% of Pakistan's expanding economy. Pakistan is successfully wriggling out of foreign influence. Visionary MILBUS was the right step in the right direction at the right time!

Pakistan Military requires a proper platform utilized to clear the misperceptions being propagated against them and counter the sham allegations. In short, Pakistan military lacks the exposure to enhance their PR with the Public. Pakistani GHQ and ISPR should take up an active role similar to Pentagon and make their interactions more effective.

Next, the book 'Military Inc' considers Pakistan Military the root cause of social disparity and democratic fiasco. It alleges that socio-political fragmentation would result in strengthening the army's control over politics. Throughout her book, Dr Ayesha Siddiqa lambasts and scoffs at the concept of MILBUS accusing the military of building assets and calling them as the 'new land barons'.

In her desperation to smear the Army, she even fails to condemn the corruption practiced and coercive measures exercised by the inept political leaders. How these redundant leaders influence the bureaucracy, alter the constitution, plunder national institutions, stagnated the trade & exports, multiplied the foreign debts for the country, rob the country of the foreign reserves and accumulate their wealth in developed countries - is all together ignored by her conveniently.

The truth is that the Armed forces are forced to intervene reluctantly and take control of the state to save it from the irresponsible and hopeless politicians, who drag the country towards brink of collapse, every time they come to power.

In short, Pakistan's external debt rose from $18 billion in 1988 to become $38 billion by end of 1999. In 1999, Pakistan's total debt (internal & external) was almost 90% of its GDP. External debt in ratio to foreign exchange earnings were 347%. Debt servicing allocated in 1999 budget was 61% of total revenue resources. According to the World Bank, in 1999-2000 Pakistan was amongst the highly indebted countries.

Despite the above mentioned debacle for Pakistan - the substantial expansion in the personal wealth, land and business interests of Mr. Zardari and Mr. Nawaz Sharif has earned them a place in the 'Top 5 richest people' of Pakistan in 2007. Not a single General or military servicemen made it to the list of 'Top 40 Richest Pakistani'. Who should we consider a peril to Pakistan's existence - these fraudulent politicians or the reserved military?

The Raiwind complex of Nawaz Sharif, build on an area of around 2000 acre, consist of palatial residences, 300 acre farm, 500 bed hospital, a school, 200 acre dairy farm, etc - constructed at a cost of above Rs. 800 million. He personally owns Ittefaq foundries, three Sugar mills, numerous Textile mills, Steel Mills, Paper Mills, Spinning mills, Engineering companies, and numerous other business units. He owns several residential properties in Lahore and Muree. He owns vast acres of lands in Sheikhapura, Chunian, Raiwind, Multan and Bhopattian. These feudal turned politicians can easily be labeled as the 'old Pakistani barons'.

Dr Ayesha Siddiqa also alleges that the military convinces the citizens to bear additional costs for security on basis of conceived threats to the State. She wants the public to believe that their taxes are being exploited at the expense of the notion 'National Security'. This statement of hers is an attempt to ignore and snub the volatile situation Pakistan faces at its borders.

She also remains oblivious to the fact, that India allocates 5 times that of Pakistan's defense spending.

However, under President Musharraf, the military spending DECREASED as percentage of GDP and National budget. It now stands at 3% of GDP and 15% of National budget. It strikes out though, how Dr Ayesha Siddiqa veils and ignores the bulk of the National budget of 85% that lies at the disposal of the manipulative hands of our shady politicians. The public has the right to know, what proper utilization has been brought about with that unaccountable 85% in the 1990's?

This derogatory book 'Military Inc' intends to sow seeds of disenchantment amongst the general public against the modest and patriotic institution of the Armed forces of Pakistan, and lower its grace. Those Armed Forces of Pakistan that run to protect and deliver relief, to ordinary Pakistanis in times of calamities, natural disasters, floods, train accidents, and earthquakes. Does Pakistan have any other force or institution which is as disciplined and effective in providing speedy help immediately? Shouldn't we strengthen this only institution that we have?

The publication of Dr Ayesha Siddiqa's own book 'Military Inc' in 2007, in President Musharraf's era, repudiates her claims to term the military rule as manipulative and suppressive. It's evident that no subtle or coercive measures were taken against her or any arm-twisting to curb the publication of this highly controversial book! Where would she find such boundless and gracious freedom? The book 'Military Inc' has become a checker of the chessboard being maneuvered by the unknown and ambiguous foreign powers interested in Balkanization of Pakistan.

The ultimate objective of the book 'Military Inc' is to perpetrate friction and cause dissent amongst the ranks of the disciplined Armed Forces. By deliberately triggering upheaval within the lower ranks, the intention appears to encourage internal revolt. As a consequence, the unity, discipline and allegiance of the Armed Forces of Pakistan can be destroyed.

Thus, to protect the allegiance of the Armed Forces, the whole concept of visionary MILBUS is justified, as a set of activities for the development of Pakistan's military might, meant to counter the rising regional threat convergence and decreasing dependence upon foreign aid - ultimately protecting the sovereignty of Pakistan and its savior Armed Forces!

Glory and Triumph to Pakistan Armed Forces!

Afreen Baig is an independent analyst majoring in International Relations and Economics.

MILITARY INC BY AYESHA SIDDIQA REVIEWED

By Afreen Baig

Dr Ayesha Siddiqa's 'The Military Inc.' is a book deflective of reality, highly derogatory and against the very notion of sovereignty.

Dr Ayesha Siddiqa launches the book by giving the impression that her intention is to cover the entrepreneurial activities of military worldwide. However, in depth reading reaffirms suspicions that her book massively targets the Pakistan Military and the top echelons of the Armed Forces, most of which are based upon self serving assumptions and intentional hoodwinking. A labyrinth of financial figures is presented to further obscure the ordinary reader's intelligence.

The book sets forward four arguments. First, that MILBUS (Military Business) is military capital that perpetuates the military's political predatory style; and is kept concealed and includes questionable transfer of resources from public sector to individuals connected with armed Forces. Second, the military's economic greed increases in totalitarian systems. Third, Military convinces the citizens to bear additional costs for security on basis of conceived threats to the State. Fourth, the book considers the Pakistan Military the cause of all ills, social disparity and democratic fiasco.

Let's start by setting the record straight. MILBUS in Pakistan - is the result of honest intentions and visionary policies - to raise independent resources, to self-finance the on-going national technological development, to modernize strategic assets, and most importantly, the determination to rely less on Foreign Aid. While at the same time, build facilities for retired military personnel and their families; and slowly withdrawing from National Defense budget allocation as a percentage of GDP.

MILBUS also exists in well developed countries like the USA, UK, France, China, Israel or even Turkey. The Milbus or the PMEs (Private Military Enterprises) are generally known as the Private Military Industry. Famous US PMEs include Halliburton, Black-water worldwide, Defensecurity, Titan Corporations, Kellogg Brown & Root, Air Scan, DynCorp's, CACI International, etc. Famous UK PMEs include Black-Op's and Aegis Defense Services. Most of these are active beneficiaries of the Iraq War. The worldwide PME industry is now worth over $100 billion a year. Thus, this is not just a Pakistan specific industry.

MILBUS in Pakistan is being criticized unnecessarily, with the sole intention to malign the Armed Forces. The Pakistan military has never intended to deliberately conceal their economic activities and they do not cause injustice by weighing heavily on civilian corporate sector or individual leaders.

The book 'Military Inc' is based upon a series of presumptions and false accusations. Throughout her book, the author obstinately insists that the growth of Military economy is the case of self interest and predatory acquisition by senior officers, in which it allow the Generals to seek benefit for themselves and their clients.

The author fails to provide, any concrete evidence that could confirm her allegations, that questionable transfer of wealth is made to individuals connected with armed forces. All she could give in example were the 500 sq yard official plots given to the Generals at the end of their service, as part of their benefits, and hence her assumption that a retired general is worth from Rs.150 million to Rs.400 million.

Rarely do critics mention, that nominal deduction from the pay of all military officers are made during their service, in return for a small apartment or a small housing, which is handed over at the time of their retirement. However, this facility is still not available to all retiring servicemen.

Next, the book alleges that the military's economic greed increases in totalitarian systems, where the general public, private businessmen, civilian corporate sector and national business units are all oppressed to encourage and endorse military business units. Her book focuses largely on the four welfare projects managed by the Pakistan Military i.e. The Fauji Foundation (FF), the Army Welfare Trust (AWT), Shaheen Foundation (SF) and Bahria Foundation (BF), and in some places the Frontier Works Organization (FWO).

The author believes that "the profit earned by military is directly proportional to power and gives the armed forces a sense of being independent of the incompetent civilians" - which can only be considered as an extremely reckless comment.

There was great wisdom behind establishing these welfare projects. The visionary minds knew that "the profit earned by the military will be directly proportional to Sovereignty of the Country and the Institution".

The Military established its first welfare foundation in 1954, with funds received from the British as part of Pakistan's share of the Post War Services Reconstruction Fund. In India, those funds were distributed immediately amongst those who fought the Second World War. Unlike India, Pakistan's wise military opted to use those funds to establish projects that would ensure the overall well-being, availability of jobs, and a decent pension for their armed forces.

The initial purpose of these welfare projects was to create employment opportunities for the honorable retired or disabled military personnel. Servicemen - whose only obligation is defending the borders of Pakistan.

This one wise decision, not only raised the morals of the serving military men, but also gave the ordinary citizens a reason to join the Armed Forces of Pakistan and serve their country. Assured that their future is protected, the servicemen live their lives in testing times on borders, remote locations and a life away from family.

The Fauji Foundation, Shaheen Foundation and Bahria Foundation were all established under the Charitable Endowments Act 1890. The Army Welfare Trust was established under the Societies Registration Act 1860.

Then all these entities are registered Tax-paying Companies. The Army Welfare Trust and the Fauji Foundation pays tax at 20% of their profits. Shaheen Foundation and Bahria Foundation pay Taxes at 30% of their profits. Fair enough!

This limited industrial base that evolved over years added to the military's credibility and resolves to contribute towards the Nation's socio-economic development and Pakistan's Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Like any ordinary successful businessmen or multi-national corporations (MNCs), the Pakistan Military utilized their available structure, nominal budget and dedicated their human resources for the welfare of the uniformed men and civilians working in those companies. While also pioneering technology, developing expertise and establishing quality control.

The book 'Military Inc' accuses the Pakistan Armed forces of running business (MILBUS) that are diverse in nature, ranging from small scale to large scale corporate enterprises. As examples, it quotes Schools, Banks, Insurance Company, Radio and TV, a Fertilizer company, Hospitals and Clinics, Cement plant, Universities and institutes, etc.

Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa left no opportunity to magnify and exaggerate the limited and partial presence of MILBUS competing in Pakistan's broad based expanding economy.

Let's analyze the limited magnitude and negligible worth of these Military run ventures, compared to similar mega business entities currently present in Pakistan.

According to State Bank of Pakistan, there are total 73 Banks in Pakistan. From which, there are 24 Limited banks, 11 Foreign Banks, 8 Financial Banks, 4 Specialized Banks, 13 Investment Banks, 7 Micro-finance Banks and 6 Islamic banks. Out of these total 73 banks - Dr Ayesha Siddiqa tends to be intolerable towards ONE 'Askari Bank' run by Military? In 2007, Askari Bank paid a Tax of Rs. 743 million.

According to Federal Bureau of Statistics, there are 24 Cement plants in Pakistan, and only ONE owned by 'Fauji Cement Company Ltd'. A Tax-paying company listed on the Stock Exchange.

According to State Bank of Pakistan, there are total 59 Insurance companies in Pakistan. There are 4 in the Public sector, 50 companies in the private sector and 5 are incorporated abroad. Why should anyone be narrow-minded towards ONE owned by military - 'Askari General Insurance Ltd', which is listed on the Stock Exchange and pays Tax?

According to the Health Division and the P.M.D.C, there are around 924 Hospitals, 12,726 Medical Institutions, 560 Rural Health Centers and 4712 Dispensaries all over Pakistan. Out of these, if 10 Hospitals and 20 Medical Centers are being run by Fauji Foundation, what's the hue & cry about? These Medical services are offered to the military and civilians alike. Even the prestigious Aga Khan Health Services (AGHS) own 7 Hospitals and 164 Medical Centers.

According to State Bank Pakistan, there are above 10 Fertilizer Plants in Pakistan from which 6 are State owned and the rest are private. Out of these, only ONE is military owned, the 'Fauji Fertilizer Company Ltd', which is listed on the Stock Exchange and audited by KPMG Taseer Hadi & Co, and pays Tax annually.

According to Higher Education Commission, there are 122 Universities in Pakistan. Out of which, 65 are in the Public sector and 57 in the private sector. Foundation University and Bahria University are the only two affiliated with Armed Forces providing quality education to all citizens alike.

Foundation Schools have 90 branches all over Pakistan; compared to the City School which has more than 150 branches and the Beacon-house School which has around 130 branches. We as a Nation should triumph the quality education being promoted by the Foundation schools and the model paradigm implemented.

The Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) has 50,125 companies registered with it. From these only 9 are MILBUS projects. Why can't Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa accept these 9 MILBUS projects out of the 50,125 projects broadmindedly?

The author also alleges that Military's Internal Economy is hampering the growth of Pakistan's free market economy - which of course is not true. For her information, under this same system and era, and under the leadership of General Musharraf, Pakistan's free market economy boomed from $75 billion in 1999 to become $160 billion in 2007.

In the last 6 years, the free market economy of Pakistan expanded by $85 billion. The expansion and growth the Civilian Corporate sector, National Business Units and Multi-National Corporations witnessed in these last 6 years remain unprecedented in Pakistan's Economic History. Hence proven, that Military's Internal Economy did not hamper Pakistan's free market economy!

According to Dr Ayesha Siddiqa's book, the worth of Fauji Foundation is $169m, the worth of Army Welfare trust is $862m, the worth of Shaheen Foundation is $34.4m and the worth of Bahria Foundation is $69m. Total worth of MILBUS entities in Pakistan arise to ONLY $1.135 billion.

Hence, the presence of MILBUS companies, in Pakistan's free economy of $160 billion, amongst these other sectors and enterprises arises to a negligible maximum 0.8%.

The Karachi Stock Exchange (KSE) Market Capitalization in January 2008 stood at $75 billion. MILBUS worth as compared to KSE again arises to only 1.5%.

It's amusing to note that Dr Ayesha Siddiqa wrote a whole book, to malign a system (MILBUS) whose worth does not exceed 0.8% of Pakistan's free market economy.

Dr Ayesha Siddiqa's desire to portray the Pakistan Military as a coercive and self serving breed aiming to consolidate their economic power at the expense of Pakistan, not only erodes her neutrality into bias, but the above economic comparisons also contradict all her presumptuous and sham claims. As MILBUS in Pakistan has been competing fairly in free market and contributing to today's knowledge-based economy. It has played an active role to generate revenue for Pakistan and in contributing to overall GDP.

One of the greatest wisdom foreseen, behind establishing MILBUS was to liberate the Pakistan Armed Forces of international aid assistance and interference. Classified financial autonomy gives the Armed Forces a sense of self-respect and confidence of being independent of the dominating 'International Coalition of the willing' and their foreign aid.

The Pakistan Army has received a total of around $17 billion from the United States for arms, equipment and compensation since 1954, the year the United States entered into defense pacts with Pakistan. Much of it was uselessly spend during the 1980's Afghan war and the wars Pakistan fought with India. After 9/11, the famous foreign assistance of $10 billion comprises 60% reimbursement costs for expenditure incurred by the Pakistani Military while patrolling on PAK-Afghan border, recorded in the 'Coalition Support Funds'. These worthless assistances have not helped the Pakistan Army contrary to perception propagated in media reports.

Because, with these insignificant and worthless assistance, follows a series of humiliating articles and editorials composed in American print media. The clueless and prejudice Pakistani media ignorantly picks up the chanting and further plays an important role in distorting and altering the actual facts and figures. No relevant person is approached to clarify and set facts straight. Authors like Dr Ayesha Siddiqa bank on such distortion to further slander the admirable Pakistan Military.

After year 2000, the $85 billion expansion of Pakistan's economy, decreased the ratio of US aid & assistance to Pakistan's economy by around 100%. Now the U.S aid & assistance account to only 6.25% of Pakistan's expanding economy. Pakistan is successfully wriggling out of foreign influence. Visionary MILBUS was the right step in the right direction at the right time!

Pakistan Military requires a proper platform utilized to clear the misperceptions being propagated against them and counter the sham allegations. In short, Pakistan military lacks the exposure to enhance their PR with the Public. Pakistani GHQ and ISPR should take up an active role similar to Pentagon and make their interactions more effective.

Next, the book 'Military Inc' considers Pakistan Military the root cause of social disparity and democratic fiasco. It alleges that socio-political fragmentation would result in strengthening the army's control over politics. Throughout her book, Dr Ayesha Siddiqa lambasts and scoffs at the concept of MILBUS accusing the military of building assets and calling them as the 'new land barons'.

In her desperation to smear the Army, she even fails to condemn the corruption practiced and coercive measures exercised by the inept political leaders. How these redundant leaders influence the bureaucracy, alter the constitution, plunder national institutions, stagnated the trade & exports, multiplied the foreign debts for the country, rob the country of the foreign reserves and accumulate their wealth in developed countries - is all together ignored by her conveniently.

The truth is that the Armed forces are forced to intervene reluctantly and take control of the state to save it from the irresponsible and hopeless politicians, who drag the country towards brink of collapse, every time they come to power.

In short, Pakistan's external debt rose from $18 billion in 1988 to become $38 billion by end of 1999. In 1999, Pakistan's total debt (internal & external) was almost 90% of its GDP. External debt in ratio to foreign exchange earnings were 347%. Debt servicing allocated in 1999 budget was 61% of total revenue resources. According to the World Bank, in 1999-2000 Pakistan was amongst the highly indebted countries.

Despite the above mentioned debacle for Pakistan - the substantial expansion in the personal wealth, land and business interests of Mr. Zardari and Mr. Nawaz Sharif has earned them a place in the 'Top 5 richest people' of Pakistan in 2007. Not a single General or military servicemen made it to the list of 'Top 40 Richest Pakistani'. Who should we consider a peril to Pakistan's existence - these fraudulent politicians or the reserved military?

The Raiwind complex of Nawaz Sharif, build on an area of around 2000 acre, consist of palatial residences, 300 acre farm, 500 bed hospital, a school, 200 acre dairy farm, etc - constructed at a cost of above Rs. 800 million. He personally owns Ittefaq foundries, three Sugar mills, numerous Textile mills, Steel Mills, Paper Mills, Spinning mills, Engineering companies, and numerous other business units. He owns several residential properties in Lahore and Muree. He owns vast acres of lands in Sheikhapura, Chunian, Raiwind, Multan and Bhopattian. These feudal turned politicians can easily be labeled as the 'old Pakistani barons'.

Dr Ayesha Siddiqa also alleges that the military convinces the citizens to bear additional costs for security on basis of conceived threats to the State. She wants the public to believe that their taxes are being exploited at the expense of the notion 'National Security'. This statement of hers is an attempt to ignore and snub the volatile situation Pakistan faces at its borders.

She also remains oblivious to the fact, that India allocates 5 times that of Pakistan's defense spending.

However, under President Musharraf, the military spending DECREASED as percentage of GDP and National budget. It now stands at 3% of GDP and 15% of National budget. It strikes out though, how Dr Ayesha Siddiqa veils and ignores the bulk of the National budget of 85% that lies at the disposal of the manipulative hands of our shady politicians. The public has the right to know, what proper utilization has been brought about with that unaccountable 85% in the 1990's?

This derogatory book 'Military Inc' intends to sow seeds of disenchantment amongst the general public against the modest and patriotic institution of the Armed forces of Pakistan, and lower its grace. Those Armed Forces of Pakistan that run to protect and deliver relief, to ordinary Pakistanis in times of calamities, natural disasters, floods, train accidents, and earthquakes. Does Pakistan have any other force or institution which is as disciplined and effective in providing speedy help immediately? Shouldn't we strengthen this only institution that we have?

The publication of Dr Ayesha Siddiqa's own book 'Military Inc' in 2007, in President Musharraf's era, repudiates her claims to term the military rule as manipulative and suppressive. It's evident that no subtle or coercive measures were taken against her or any arm-twisting to curb the publication of this highly controversial book! Where would she find such boundless and gracious freedom? The book 'Military Inc' has become a checker of the chessboard being maneuvered by the unknown and ambiguous foreign powers interested in Balkanization of Pakistan.

The ultimate objective of the book 'Military Inc' is to perpetrate friction and cause dissent amongst the ranks of the disciplined Armed Forces. By deliberately triggering upheaval within the lower ranks, the intention appears to encourage internal revolt. As a consequence, the unity, discipline and allegiance of the Armed Forces of Pakistan can be destroyed.

Thus, to protect the allegiance of the Armed Forces, the whole concept of visionary MILBUS is justified, as a set of activities for the development of Pakistan's military might, meant to counter the rising regional threat convergence and decreasing dependence upon foreign aid - ultimately protecting the sovereignty of Pakistan and its savior Armed Forces!

Glory and Triumph to Pakistan Armed Forces!

Afreen Baig is an independent analyst majoring in International Relations and Economics.

Afghanistan put on the back burner?

This is a Pakpotpourri Exclusive

By: Yasmeen Ali

Has the world forgotten Afghanistan? The developments recently in Libya seem to have diverted world media to America’s new play field. The old one lies, ravaged, raped, destructed and now, ignored like yesterday’s newspaper.

Libya was attacked by America, as in Iraq, and Afghanistan, it was first preceded by an avalanche of propaganda against it’s ruler. Eric Margolis, in an article, stated and I quote,” America’s glaring double standard in the Mideast and Muslim world is a major reason for growing hatred of our nation. America would be hailed as genuine liberator of long-suffering Libyans if it also intervened in Bahrain and Yemen — and perhaps Saudi Arabia — to protect civilians from the ferocity of their despotic governments and promote real democracy. But it’s only oil-rich Libya that is getting the “humanitarian” treatment from the US and oil-hungry western European former colonial powers”. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-margolis/after-bombing-libya-what-_b_838548.html

Coming to Afghanistan, America & her allies, must have by now realized that the physical invasion of a country is a far cry from subjugation of the will of the people of the country and holding that country as captive. Superior technology, well developed war toys, can make invasion the easier part, it is what follows thereafter is the difficult part.

Karzai is not a person the Afghans trust. He is seen as an American front man and someone in a position for the sake of serving American interests. The increasing corruption of his government does not help either.

A report of February 28^th, 2011 states that Maj. Gen. John Campbell, commander of NATO coalition forces in eastern Afghanistan, said he has been repositioning some of his troops since last August to make them more effective in the region that borders Pakistan.

The terrain that is the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan is the toughest in the world. Also, impossible to man, owing to the area, geography and weather conditions.

The question, Obama must ask of himself , is, what gains have been attained after invading Afghanistan. Have the terrorist attacks ended? The answer, is a resounding No. Afghanistan, invaded by US and British forces in direct response to the September 11 attacks, saw a rise from very few before 2003 to 802 since then. The “war on terror” seems to have made the world a more insecure, a more dangerous place to live in.

What then, should the USA and her allies do, to bring peace to the region, if, that is the objective?

Killing and attacks is not the answer as the years of their presence in Afghanistan has already proved.

The answer lies in reverting to the Rule of Tribal Balance. There are many tribes in Afghanistan and FATA/NWFP areas. But all, subscribe to the code known as “Pashtunwali”. It may be interpreted as the “way of life of the Pashtuns”. Those who digress, face the repercussion of being denounced by their tribe. One principle of the code, is revenge from the wrong doer, committed in any date, even 1000 years ago. An invasion of their homes, thereby taking away their honor, is definitely considered as a wrong doing. America’s presence in their homeland will thereby, always be opposed and resisted by this race.

Historically speaking, it is the Pashtunwali that made the system of “jirga” successful with the Pashtuns. . A Loya Jirga(Tribal Jirga), is a mass meeting to choose a new king or, discuss an emergency of mammoth proportions. It is a forum unique to Pashtuns of Afghanistan and Pakistan, bringing the tribal elders together. However, all tribes are given equality within decision making, hence the success of Rule of Tribal Balance.

The Barakzai clan, successfully ruled Afghanistan from 1826 to 1929, or 1973 after the end of the rule of Mohammad Zahir Shah.

America has not understood the cultural norms and the local traditions of the country she purports to rule. The traditional western solution of Presidential rule will fail in Afghanistan. History has proved, anything that is forced upon a nation, in contradiction to their code of life, will fail to hold.

Any solution that is based away from the one respected, understood and followed by the Afghans, will and must, fail. What America needs to do, is to feel the pulse of the nation. And not to foist an individual, a system that may have worked in America, but instead, to put a system in place that is acceptable and workable with the local people of Afghanistan.

Yasmeen Ali is a lawyer teaching in a university in Lahore. You may visit her website at: http://pakpotpourri2.wordpress.com/ .

1 Vote

Releasing Raymond Davis

Why I Agree With Zardari

By YASMEEN ALI

Lahore

The atmosphere in Pakistan is charged with emotions: fury at the release of Raymond Davis, the U. S contractor who killed two Pakistanis in cold blood. The government, especially the President, is coming under firing for “doing” this. A rally by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf was organized in a few hours. All kinds and shades of experts are speaking 24/7 on the electronic media airing their views. Print media is working over time trying to prove the government is ineffective and the “deal” struck between the victims families and Raymond Davis is immoral, wrong, without justice.

Pakistan is being labeled as a “bargain basement”, ridiculed. Emotions aside, let us examine the facts:

Pakistan refused to accept the diplomatic status of Raymond Davis. In spite of the pressure on the Pakistan by the powerful executives of the U. S government, During a press conference in Washington, no less a person than Obama himself, said that the US official, identified as Raymond Davis, enjoys diplomatic immunity. "If our diplomats are in another country, then they are not subject to that country's local prosecution," Obama stated. The Pakistan Government did not back down! They did not cave in!

The case was registered as per law of the country, and the matter referred to the court. The entire nation, media, politicians, rejoiced. Pakistan had decided to stand up to The Power and go by the Law. Raymond Davis was kept in the Koth Lakhpath jail throughout the period of the hearing of the case.

The Court indicted Raymond Davis for double murder after rejecting plea for diplomatic immunity. This had made every Pakistani proud. There is faith in the justice system that has decided the case according to the tenants of law and not pressure, no matter how immense.

Then came disillusion. News broke out that the families of the victims have accepted “blood money”, Raymond Davis has not only been released but flown out of Pakistan, as have the families of the victims. The latter to USA.

Let us first explore the concept of “blood money” under which this was made possible. In the Qisas and Diyat Ordinance Section 315 is relevant in the case under discussion:

Section 315:Qatl Shibh-I-Amd.

Whoever with the intent to cause harm to the body or mind of any person causes the death of that or of any other person by means of a weapon or act which in the ordinary course of nature is not likely to cause death is said to commit qatl shibh-I-amd.

Punishment : whoever commits qatl shibh-I-amd shall be liable to Diyat [compensation specified in section 323, payable to the heirs of the victim by the offender, Eds] and may also be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term up to 14 years as ta’zir.

When we say ”may also” it becomes an option in law. Court may or may not add imprisonment as part of the punishment. In a case where the victims forgive the accused after accepting diyat, the punishment will not accrue.

Here rises the question whether or not the families of victims were pressurized into accepting the diyat. This decision, is to be taken by the free will of the heirs.

According to the lawyer representing the victims, pressure was exerted. However, to be admissible as proof this has to be certified by the concerned parties themselves and not by others.

The pressure could have been from either side, to accept the diyat and also by others not to accept diyat. Let us remember they were poor people with no contacts to save them from the repercussions of pressures or threats. Thereby, it made sense, for their own safety, to remove them to a place of safety from their abodes.

We, as a nation, need to make a focused decision. Do we want to accept the decision on the basis of law or on the basis of emotions? If our vote is for the former, then let us accept that the decision was taken lawfully. Yes, the speed with which all events took place; the court’s indictment, Davis’s release, his departure, has made politicians and “analysts”, play on the emotional pitch of their countrymen they understand so well.

A friend wrote to me, on the protests against Davis’s release:

“[As for]the parties protesting, except for the Pakistan Muslim League, no one gave the families any financial aid. They are just using this for their political gains. The special fund created by an advocate with the help of AAJ TV got only Rs,49,000;this too from poor people. No rich person contributed any thing! What a shame. If the nation had contributed if not billions but at least a decent sum; one rupee per person even then these protests would have been justified.”

What should have been questioned by politicians, media and the civil society, is not the case of diyat which is a perfectly acceptable Islamic option, but as to why, when Lytton Road police had put Davis’ arrest on record in the second FIR registered against him under charges of carrying an illegal pistol (Express Tribune February 3rd 2011), this finds no mention in the final analysis. All focus was on the murder charges and not on the offence committed by him against the State.

The case of Raymond Davis will have far reaching effects on the relationship of both the countries. For one, the world realizes that irrespective of the country of origin, a wrong doer will be nabbed and charged in Pakistan.

Second, after the arrest of Raymond Davis, Pakistan has began scrutinizing records of the Americans living in Pakistan and discovered several discrepancies, causing many suspected American operatives to maintain a low profile and others to leave the country altogether.

Extract from a report by Express Tribune by Asad Kharal published Februray 23rd 2011:

“The foreign ministry states that there are 851 Americans with diplomatic immunity currently in Pakistan, of whom 297 are not working in a diplomatic capacity. However, sources at the interior ministry put the number of non-diplomats at 414. The majority of these ‘special Americans’ (as the ministry refers to them) are concentrated in Islamabad, with some also residing in Karachi, Lahore and Peshawar. Interior ministry records show that most of the “special Americans” live in upscale neighborhoods in Islamabad and Lahore, with smaller presences in Karachi and Peshawar.”

Third, this should be a lesson to Pakistan not to put all its eggs in one basket!

Yasmeen Ali is a lawyer based in Lahore, teaching in a University. See her site, http://pakpotpourri2.blogspot.com/ and

http://pakpotpourri2.wordpress.com/

THIS IS A CROSS POST FROM COUNTER PUNCH.

LINK:

http://www.counterpunch.org/yasmeen03182011.html

Needed: Democratic Infra structural Changes in Pakistan

This is a Pakpotpourri Exclusive

By: Yasmeen Ali

Since it’s inception in 1947, Pakistan has been riddled with the question of finding a system of governance tailor made for her needs. In the quest,Pakistan has had affairs with Parliamentary System, Presidential System, semi-Presidential System…..but has been unable so far, to determine what suits her best.

All shades of governments and rulers came and went. Democracy was replaced by Dictatorship and Dictatorship by Democracy. Governments formed, mostly in coalition by the winning party joining hands with one winning provincially to form a majority and set up government.

If we look at the 2008 General Elections results, it provides an enlightening picture. Pakistan Peoples Party won a total of 94 seats excluding 4 for minorities and 23 reserved for women, bringing the score up to 130 seats. Pakistan Muslim League- N bagged 95 seats, including 3 for minorities and 17 reserved for women. Pakistan Muslim League-Q secured 55 seats including 2 for minorities and 10 reserved for women. Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) walked away with 26 seats, including 1 for minorities and 5 for women. Pakistan Muslim League-Fazlur Rehman Group nabbed 5 seats including one reserved for women. Pakistan Peoples Party –Sherpao Group took 1 seat as did the National Peoples Party. Baluchistan National Party-Awami, bagged a whooping 18 seats .

Thereby, a total of 226 seats were contested for and won by various parties in elections, 60 reserved for women, 10 reserved for minorities, bringing the total to 336. Jamiat-Ulema-e-Islam (F) did not contest.

The picture becomes clear as the mist clears by figures quoted.

Collaboration and partnership of Muttahida Qaumi Movement becomes mandatory if the party bagging most votes needs to set up a government in Sindh. Once done,there are the constant tantrums thrown, and the provincial party, following in the footsteps of a film heroin, falls out with her lover, then is cajoled with sweets, flowers, and more expensive offerings. There are situations leading to a near complete break up of the love-hate relationship, only to realize, by both, near the brink ,how important the partnership is,managing to pull back and embrace- letting bygones be bygones- till the same cycle happens all over again!

Likewise, in Baluchistan, the active support of Baluchistan National Party (BNP) is mandatory to form government in province.

In Peshawar, it was Awami National Party that won 13 seats, but none from Hazara. To form government, support by ANP to the party forming the provincial government is needed.

What clearly emerges from the above scenario was that no single party is, across the board acceptable to the people of Pakistan. PPP emerges as the only party with representation in all four provinces securing half the seats in Sindh, one-third of seats in the Punjab, and roughly 30 per cent seats in NWFP and Baluchistan. PML-N, the second largest party is routed to Punjab only, with no representation in Sindh and Baluchistan, and, in NWFP, secured seats only in the non-Pushto speaking Hazara area. Ethnicity has started playing a big role in electing candidates-a dangerous trend.

The net result of this scenario is the following of an Appeasement Policy in dealing with the parties on board by the ruling party-whichever party is in the steering position, the 2008 General Elections results used as an example only. Instead of focusing on issues that should be focused on, time , energy, funds and resources are misdirected towards keeping the coalition partners happy and willing to keep government intact. Good governance suffers. It becomes relegated to the back burner. Insults are hurled at each other, accusations, counter accusations hold the day. Then miraculously, a ministry here, a promise there, and the sun comes out, bright and clear, till the next round!

The interests of these small pockets of seats won by local parties may,and do, differ widely on issues from that of the ruling party. In the long run, it may be the national interest that is sacrificed at the alter of Appeasement!

Who is to be blamed? The smaller parties? The ruling party? Or both?

I think it is the wrong system that is to be held responsible. So long there are smaller parties nibbling in the pie, demanding a slice, good governance will continue to suffer.

Pakistan must seriously look at changing over to a Two Party System rather than a Multi-Party System it presently is. This is something we have never tried. Something so basically, glaringly wrong in our whole approach to democracy, that that it has effected governance by whomsoever government has been in power.

Yes! It is time for those democratic infra structural changes in Pakistan.

(Yasmeen Ali is a lawyer based in Lahore. She also teaches in a University and moderates her blog Pakpotpourri2).