It is impossible to effectively address Pakistan’s myriad problems so long as security conditions continue to deteriorate. We are unable to control our own territory as armed militias and criminal gangs run amok in our cities, towns and villages.
Sectarian violence is growing unabated. Business is fearful and the economy in tatters. Many of those with resources are making plans to migrate. Meanwhile, terrorist organisations freely launch attacks at home and abroad, with the government unable to provide security even in the capital.
Since we have sunk to this point mostly during Gen Musharraf’s nine years in power, it is time to re-examine the fundamental security strategy of Pakistan.
For decades the army has functioned under the increasingly questionable assumption that the greatest threat the country faces is a military confrontation with India. The armed services have accordingly consumed great proportions of Pakistan’s tight budget ($4.4bn for fiscal year 2008-2009, a seven per cent increase over the previous year) in preparation and readiness for a conventional war that they cannot win. As part of the same strategic objective, in the hopes of keeping large numbers of Indian troops (close to 700,000 at last count) occupied in Indian-held Kashmir, the army allegedly trained fundamentalist militant groups and encouraged them to wage attacks there.
At the same time, it is alleged that our military and intelligence establishment trained and supported the Taliban in Afghanistan with the purpose of having a friendly government on the western border over which Pakistan could exercise its influence (all part of the dubious policy of ‘strategic depth’ in case of a war with India). Of course, the predictable blowback from these operations has resulted in the current state of near-complete lawlessness in large parts of the country, as well as every province being awash in weapons.
Have any strategic goals been reached? No. Is the Kashmir problem any closer to a solution? No. Do we have a friendly government on our western border? No. What we have achieved is an insecure and crumbling state that could well become a pariah in the international community.
We have already demonstrated we possess a credible nuclear deterrent and must realise that we hurt only ourselves by imagining India as an enemy hell-bent on our destruction. India is a fast-growing economic giant, focused on lifting itself out of poverty. It has little to gain from any attempts to capture Pakistani territory and everything to gain by having a stable and prosperous neighbour as a trading partner. The Kashmir issue can and should be resolved through diplomatic pressure and international support.
In any case, we must ask ourselves whether the well-being of 170 million Pakistanis can be forever held hostage to the fate and future of the Muslim community in Indian-held Kashmir, especially after more than 60 years of support has not improved the situation for them one jot, but has led to disastrous results for us.
The present danger to Pakistan comes from the lawlessness and terrorism in the country and the government’s inability to effectively project authority and guarantee the safety of its citizens. Jihadist organisations with foreign funding appear to have joined hands with the Taliban and their sympathisers to wreak havoc in the country with their ultimate retrograde dream of creating a mediaeval society where a draconian interpretation of the Sharia is enforced, women kept as chattel and modernity and progress defeated.
Some of these groups are determined to attack and intimidate, if not eliminate, religious minorities. Then, we have the heavily armed militias affiliated with political parties. Finally, there are the criminal gangs involved in drug trafficking, kidnapping, carjacking, extortion, armed robbery and murder.
The idea that the army can somehow defend the country against this lawlessness is ludicrous. How can the armoured corps help fight sectarian car-bombings in Karachi? How will yet another squadron of F-16 aircraft defeat the drug smugglers in Lahore? How does the infantry do the detective work necessary to bring kidnappers and carjackers to justice? How can the army deal with the creators of mayhem that are thoroughly dispersed within our population, in every town and every city? It cannot. Yet the armed forces consume a hugely disproportionate share of Pakistan’s federal budget.
So, here is my suggestion: reduce the size of the Pakistan armed forces by a third, and use the money saved to dramatically increase the police budget. Currently defence spending is 20 per cent of the federal budget, while slightly over one per cent is spent on policing. This move will allow at least a six- to seven-fold increase in the police budget. Give our brave police the salary, equipment, training and manpower they need to bring law and order back to our cities and towns. They are the ones paying the highest price in terms of lives, and they are the only ones with a chance of controlling the proliferation of weapons and our epidemic of crime and terrorism.
Explain the decision candidly to our neighbours, refuse to be drawn into a no-first-strike nuclear policy and make a security pact with the United States to deter any hostile actions by India. It is in both those nations’ interest that Pakistan be stable and well-policed. This will also have the salutary effect of significantly reducing corruption in the country, and will result in an atmosphere of security and justice in which healthcare and education can be delivered effectively, and business can start dealing with the challenges of the 21st century economy.
Syed Abbas Raza, editor of 3QuarksDaily (3QD), wrote this piece for Dawn.
@Aamir Ali
“Don’t forget that alongwith the budget the Americans are dumping 5 times more money left and right these days in Pakistan then in the Musharraf era.”
This is incorrect. The US has spent a grand total of $11 billion of Pakistan from the 9/11/ 2001 to Ahttp://www.finance.gov.pk/ugust 2008 (less than 7 years). This comes to about $1.6 billion/year. The Americans have now approved about $1.5 billion/year. If you are to make bold statements (e.g. 5 times as much money in aid from the US) please back them up with some sources rather than blindly posting them.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/08/pak istan_aid_numbers.html
“Not only the Americans but the Europeans are also giving aid to Pakistan, and Chinese/Saudi assistance is also there, the same if not larger than Musharraf’s time.”
These so called Friends of Pakistan pledge much but actually deliver virtually nothing. Only the Americans are actually contributing.
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-l ibrary/dawn/the-newspaper/front-page/pakistan-hope s-for-major-help-to-end-economic-crisis-499
“Despite 80% of the budget and billions in aid/assistance”
Even assuming that your numbers (20% for the military ) are correct (not sure where you got them from) that does not include the fact that until recently most of the aid from the Americans goes to the military anyhow. As for you numbers according the Pakistan’s FY (fiscal year) 2009-2010 budget (you can find it at http://www.finance.gov.pk/), the military is getting about 343 billion Rs. in funds (up from 311 billion Rs. the year before). This dwarves the meager amounts for Education (31 billion Rs.), Security/Police (35 billion Rs.), and Healthcare (6 billion Rs.). The only item that is larger than the military allocation is something deceptively called General Public Services. The breakout of this item reveals that it is mostly repaying foreign/domestic debt (of which military spending probably caused a lot of). Of course these are the “official” numbers, who knows how much is pocketed by the army staff. Is it any surprise that the army is the only viable institution?? The army is corrupt as much or even more than other institutions in Pakistan, but so much money is dumped on it that some of it filters down.
The following vid gives a good example (though it was made 2 years ago):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6rn2ex0Wh8&feature =related
Some comments from the ATP Facebook page:
– “Yes, our real crisis is of law and order and thugs killing Pakistanis. The security and safety of ordinary Pakistanis should be the top priority. And the real enemy are those doing bombings and suicide attacks etc. in or cities.”
– “helo maan thats not the solution of of pakistan’s problem if we want to stay alive as a proud nation then our defense has to be the most powerful part of our nation”
– “once your army is shrinked….outsiders will find easy to attack in pakistan…..”
– “Well Frankly speaking!! What our country’s defender are doing? XE is in Pakistan!!”
– “We should look into the example of Korea / Singapore where the citizens get trained in the art of military and are classified as Reserves. Then we may be able to self manage our affairs.”
– “aray babbb ray babbb”
– “incrase police with out shrinking army. Because we have a great danger from forien enemies”
– “There is no need to reduce Army, we need Army for our survival.”
– “Well point made in this article is two fold. Firstly we are marred by internal unrest at this time that balloons into a major problem as it happened in Swat. If we have strong police in first these problems will be dealt in their infancy. Even if you need Army to deal with extremists/internal wrong doers, once they are done as in Swat you need police to keep the order as Army is NOT trained to take care of things afterwords. Secondly, Army is consuming lion’s share of our GDP. In modern times no one can survive just having big Army .. best example was USSR. They had one of the biggest armies but what was the reason of their downfall, economic collapse. We are made to believe that we need army to survive … actually thats wrong what happened in 1971 is a good example. If the people are not happy and prosperous no nation/country can survive. We need to provide basic needs to the people and get our economic situation better and for that we’ll have to stop spending humongous amounts on Army. I doubt this will happen as we are forced to live as “national security state” so it’ll need a herculean effort on part a leader to turn it into people’s welfare state. In our history there was only one time when it was possible and we came close to it … after 1971 and ZA butto had the mandate and ability to do it but unfortunately he used army against his opponents and then the dark era of that “murd-momin good for nothing” fellow started !”
– “No need to shrink the army. Expand the police : yes and pay them better.”
– “”
@MQ
Sorry for the repeat comment, but the percentages you quoted about Pakistan can be easily raised by using the 80% of remaining budget plus the billions of $ in aid the country gets from USA/EU, and assistance from China/Saudi.
Those who wish to cut the strength and capabilities of Pakistan Armed Forces, and instead rely on US or Indian good wishes, or UN or OIC to ensure security of Pakistan, are the ones engaged in emotive thinking.
Sorry for a repeat comment, but some of the discussion here is more emotive than rational. Here are some facts from the World Bank data for 2003(?) that might clear the picture a bit:
Percent of GDP spent on defense:
China =2.1; India = 2.3; U.S. =3; Russia = 3.8; Pakistan = 4.6;
Percent of GDP spent on Health, Education and defense, respectively:
India : 0.91, 4.1, 2.3; Pakistan: 0.9, 1.8, 4.6
@Aziz
Pakistan faces conventional threats from India, which has 80% of its military deployed on the Pakistani border, and unconventional threats from terrorists, against whom only Army and intelligence agencies have shown results.
In the face of these genuine threats, it is not advisable to degrade the one institution that actually both these adversaries fear.
I don’t believe that India is no threat, or that abandoning the Kashmiris will lead India to love Pakistan, or if Pakistan cuts its military and is attacked, the US will come to defend Pakistan. US has better things to do, like defend Israel.