A poor attempt at a balancing act
Asma Jahangir has spoken on the issue of military-civil imbalance today. Quite rightly, any deference to the words
of General Kayani and Pasha that compromises individual rights doesn't
say much for either the supremacy of the law, or a “free
judiciary”.
Back in May, right after the Abbottabad
raid, a lot of people quite excitedly, heralded this as a
unfortunate, but at the same time fortunate opportunity to put the
military in its place. Get it back into the confines of its
constitutional mandate. Then came the in camera briefing in the National Assembly, but after a few weeks it was obvious that the military was running the show.
The PPP government started off by emphasising
its determination to guide Pakistan's security and foreign policy.
Zardari spoke of a grand free trade area and our then foreign
minister SMQ smiled sheepishly with Hillary Clinton as Kayani looked on from the margins. Alot of choreographing, but Zardari's ideas didn't come to much and SMQ is well, batting for the other team now. Even then, few
believed that the Army had relinquished influence over foreign and
security affairs. Effectively, it could exercise its veto over
civilian decisions if and when it wanted.
In the recent past, one has to be quite
naive to still believe that its Zardari who shapes Pakistan's
foreign policy. Unlike most PTI supporters and reactionary critics,
its not as if Zardari allowed drone strikes or handed over Pakistani
airbases to US control. Neither was it Zardari who extra-judicially
handed over foreign and Pakistani citizens to the US without due
process who later ended up in Bagram, Guantanamo etc. And before I
forget, the most hated of documents, the infamous NRO was facilitated
and negotiated by our very own COAS General Kayani, however, being in
khaki he's above criticism or responsibility.
That said, whenever the issue of
civil-military relations come up and people talk about balancing it,
a lot of emphasis is placed on politicians doing the “right”
thing and exercising their mandate and forcing the military to relent
before there constitutional superiority. That's why the mere mention
of the possibility of the PM sacking Kayani and Pasha unleashed a
storm. Mind you that storm was much louder in regards to a possible
decision that a sitting PM might which is his prerogative and
constitutional, while a coup, orchestrated by the military unleashes
jubilation and a fiscal stimulus for mathai shops.
The biggest slice of the cake
I
would argue that any balance between the civilian side and the
military side of the state can only be achieved if the military
economic influence is decreased. The military through its various
arms has its fingers in every commercial pie. Resources are skewed
favourably in the hands of those in khaki and their institutions; for
the industrial, capitalist class knows who to deal with if they want
to get things done.
Now
the military property empire is a ubiquitous part of Pakistani urban
life. The nexus between Bahria Town-HRL-DHA for a few is “national
progress” but for those forcibly displaced, the state that misses
out on tax revenues, the banks that are forced to offer concessional
loans and later write them off, the abrogation of the constitution
within these areas; the costs are massive and they keep on piling up.
The following DAWN Reporter Episodes paint an ugly picture of the
cartel that is now the military-commercial interest which is a law
unto itself. (Thanks to @shahidsaaed)
You
can tick through a list of industries in Pakistan, and one way or the
other, either through outright ownership or in partnership the
military is a major stakeholder. Nothing comes of cases of
corruptions against generals, so there is no surprise that
ex-military types pack commercial organisations. Capitalists vote
with their feet, and it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that
they vote for the team with the bigger stick.
Incentives in action
Now
politicians are a fragmented and competitive group. Sure, they make
poor decisions and may be corrupt, however, they act in their self
interest, where ever that might take them. Given the might of the military, its monopoly over the use
of force, coupled with its huge economic clout, a fragmented group of
politicians have no chance to exercise their will over the military. Instead, they are co-opted by the military to do their bidding, and why wouldn't they?
Now
the next obvious question is: Do we want these incompetent civilians
dictating policy to the military?
The
answer to that is yes. The simple reason is this: Given Zardari's 11%
approval rating, the dismal approval rating of the PPP, and overall
image of politicians as incompetent, we can be assured that every
decision they take is the talk of the evening news cycle. Columns are
written, opinions are formed, news is shared and retweeted.
However,
decisions taken by the military fall under two categories. Either the
military makes a decision, and then civilians are made to face the
negative fall out of it. Or the military makes decisions and no one
is the wiser. When questioned, you are not offered a policy outline.
Instead you get a long emotive speech about sacrifices and bravery
which somehow qualifies someone to make decisions on a nations
foreign policy or other associated matter that is not even that
persons job.
Do as the Chinese do
In China the Divestiture Act of 1998
banned all the commercial activities of the People’s Liberation
Army (PLA). Like their Pakistani counterparts, the PLA had invested
itself in banks, hotels, factories, property developments, retailing
etc. During the Tienanmen uprising in 1989, China came dangerously
close to a military coup. As the vanguard of the revolution the PLA,
was a central part of the Communist Party and the Party heavily
invested in the PLA. The PLA eventually sided with the pulitburo and
the Tienanmen protesters, and protesters across the country were
crushed. These events helped accelerate the PLA's independence from
CCP control and widen its economic activities. By the mid-1990s as
China bombed, so did the PLA's financial interests. In an effort to
encourage professionalism in the PLA and in a display of its
authority, the CPC promulgated the Divestiture Act of 1998 banning
its commercial activities. Without it, the PLA would have gained
undue influence, both by wielding weapons and cheque books.... Sound
familiar?
Without reducing the military's
economic dominance and access to resources the dream of civil
authority over the military will not come to pass. This is not a
matter of budgetary allocations. Its about a parallel economy that
sucks away resources without any accountability. It rewards itself
for taking the risks, but given that its “too big to fail”, the
costs are passed on to the losers. The military and those associated
with it, sail through bureaucratic red tape, judicial and legislative
oversight, and political interference.
This is also why, I don’t agree with
suggestions that the only way to save the Railways or PIA is to
privatise it. Pakistan has toothless regulators that are easily
co-opted. Recently, a newspaper report claimed that the National
Logistics Cell, which has single handedly destroyed the Railways
freight transport market is going to take over parts of the
organisation to run as a “private” initiative. Then again, NLC,
with its association with the military is above any critique. Until the state has a capacity to regulate privatised industries, there is no point in transferring a public monopoly to a private one. Tax payers keeping a state organisation afloat for better or worse is one thing, however, tax payers of inflationary borrowing doing the same to prop up a privatised industry to line the pockets of shareholders is criminal.
If I may digress for a paragraph, this
is also another reason why I dont buy Imran Khan's and PTI's rhetoric
on jusitice and ending corruption. How can they talk about justice
and reducing corruption when they remain silent on the military and
its role in the economy? Why the silence? PTI supporters like to talk
about Turkey's example and the Erdogen model of gradual civilian
dominance, but Erdogen as an activist and campaigner would not shy
away from putting the Turkish military in its place.
Given that the military is the “winning
horse” in the race to the bottom, its not surprising that those
seeking an economic advantage find one way or another to cling to it.
Some argue, that this proves that the military is a disciplined
institution and people trust it with its money. However, the flip
side is that no competitor is allowed a fair chance to compete with
the military's might. And those individuals and organisations who are
lucky enough to tag along under the khaki umbrella...well not only
are they minting money, but they are also called national heroes. And
when there great money making enterprises go belly up, it will be the
patriotic duty off every Pakistani to bail them out.
Am watching the video, but am also impressed with you going through the effort to lay out the case for controlling some military purse strings, to control the military's actions. This is definitely the opening chapter of "Military Inc." for the blogging set :-)
ReplyDelete