Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: The General does what Pakistani Generals do : Musharraf rules out defence cut

Expand Messages
  • Ahmad Faruqui
    Yes, he has given an entirely Pavlovian response. And he won t retire from the army either any time soon. When he came to New York for the UN meetings,
    Message 1 of 5 , Oct 31, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Yes, he has given an entirely Pavlovian response. And he won't
      retire from the army either any time soon. When he came to New York
      for the UN meetings, someone asked him about whether or not he would
      take off his army fatigues in 2007. He said, "George Bush has not
      asked me to take it off" and eliminated all doubts about who is
      calling the shots in Pakistan.

      Reminds me of the "good ole days," when those black gramaphone
      records made by RCA carried a logo of a dog listening to music with
      the caption, "His Master's Voice."

      On the topic of not cutting the defense budget, he also said he won't
      raise taxes to finance the earthquake relief program. So what
      expenses is he going to cut? Something has to give. The worst thing
      to do would be to resort to deficit financing and leave behind an
      inflationary legacy. I am half hoping that Shaukat Aziz will give
      his uniformed master a well deserved Econ 1A lecture on why "there is
      no such thing as a free lunch."

      --- In Writers_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Munir Saami <munirsaami@y...>
      wrote:
      >
      > Hello friends,
      > In some of my previous messages I suggested that Pakistan should
      review its military expenses to help find money for helping affected
      Pakistanis. Several other opinion makers in Pakistan also asked the
      same independently.
      >
      > This is the response from the head of the Junta: entirely
      predictable.
      > -----------------
      > Musharraf rules out defence cut
      >
      >
      > ISLAMABAD, Oct 31: President Gen Pervez Musharraf on Monday
      categorically stated there would be no cut in the country's defence
      budget in the aftermath of the Oct 8 earthquake but clearly indicated
      that the government would buy fewer F-16 fighter jets from the US.
      >
      > He was responding to questions at a press conference at his camp
      office in Rawalpindi on Monday afternoon.
      >
      > When asked if the government was contemplating a cut in the defence
      budget given that billions of dollars were required for relief and
      reconstruction work, he said: "No, we are not at all contemplating
      any defence cut."
      >
      > "There is a security requirement which is separate and there is an
      earthquake requirement which is totally separate," he argued.
      Continuing on the subject, the president emphatically said: "We don't
      want to do one and jeopardise the other. This would be most unwise."
      He added: "We carry on with defence and we will carry on with the
      earthquake (efforts) also."
      >
      > In response to another question, the president did say that
      budgetary cuts would have to be considered if sufficient funds were
      not raised at the national and international level for relief and
      reconstruction activities. Resuming the press conference after the
      iftar break, the president revisited the question pertaining to the
      defence budget and pointed out that defence expenditure of Pakistan
      did not consume a major chunk of the revenues and was in fact only
      the fourth largest expense head.
      >
      > Giving a broad breakdown of the expenditure he said: "I hope this
      audience knows that the biggest expenditure of Pakistan is the
      establishment cost which is about 30 to 33 per cent, number two is
      debt servicing which is about 33 per cent and the third is Public
      Sector Development Programme which is 17.8 or 17.6 per cent, fourth
      is defence which 17.1 per cent or something."
      >
      > He underlined: "Defence is our security concern, please understand
      where the money goes."—Q.A
      >
      > http://www.dawn.com/2005/11/01/top8.htm
      >
      >
      > -------------------------------
      > "There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not
      reading them. "-- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-
      American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996). Please
      visit: http://www.forbiddenlibrary.com/
      > Munir Pervaiz (Saami)
      > munirsaami@y...
      >
    • Ibrahim Hayani
      ... Hi Friends: The greatest mistake people, any people, make is when they mistakenly believe that the army is the answer and/or the solution; the army IS the
      Message 2 of 5 , Oct 31, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Munir Saami wrote:
        Hello friends,
        In some of my previous messages I suggested that Pakistan should review its military expenses to help find money for helping affected Pakistanis. Several other opinion makers in Pakistan also asked the same independently.
         
        This is the response from the head of the Junta: entirely predictable.
        -----------------
        Musharraf rules out defence cut


        Hi Friends:

        The greatest mistake people, any people, make is when they mistakenly believe that the army is the answer and/or the solution; the army IS the problem and can never be the solution. As is the case in many Arab countries, people were led to believe that the intervention of the army in politics would solve their socio-economic and political problems. But through unbelievably ugly and painful experiences, the vast majority of the people living in the Arab world today (including Egypt, Sudan, Libya, Syria, and...who else, Iraq) have finally realized the huge mistakes they made when they cheated themselves into believing that the army is the answer. When the army intervenes in politics, it damages both... the army becomes utterly useless when it comes to "defending" the country (which is supposed to be its only objective and the main reason for its existence), and it corrupts politics too because it destroys the very fundamental principle of LEGITIMACY.

        To me, no matter how "bad" or "slow" or "expensive" a democratic system is, it is still " better,"  "faster,"  and "cheaper"  than any military dictatorship. This is why I was very disappointed when many of my Pakistani friends expressed joy and happiness when General Musharraf took over and toppled the democratically elected government of Nawaz Sharif (... I know that Sharif, as well as Buto before him, were not perfect, far from it, but one should always remember that Democracy is a process, it becomes better with practice; without practicing it you can never learn to govern democratically.. and that is the tragedy facing many countries which were ruled by dictators for a long time... look at what is happening in the Central Asian countries for example.)

        Regarding  Pakistan (a country which is not mine, but I feel very strong affinity to the people of Pakistan and their struggle for freedom and a better future; they are part of the great UMMAH to which I belong), its failure is a four-fold failure: (1) Pakistan failed to maintain its unity, and the army was the main reason for that; (2) Pakistan failed to eradicate illiteracy (let alone poverty); more than 50% of the people of Pakistan are still illiterate after more than half a century of independence, again the army is the cause because military expenditures absorb a significant proportion of the country's resources. This is a country whose foundation is Islam, the very religion that emphasizes knowledge and reason... The first verse revealed in Islam's Holy Book, the Qur'an is IQRA' or READ (not fight!); (3) Pakistan  was and still is a very tribal society; tribalism was the curse of the Arabian Peninsula before the advent of Islam. Tribalism is not only divisive, it is very, very destructive force and that was the reason why the Prophet Muhammad is reported to have said "THERE IS No Tribalism in Islam."  (incidentally, Tribalism and Nationalism are NOT the same thing; Nationalism can be a perfectly constructive and normal force in human life; Tribalism has always been very destructive and verges on racism). In Islam the unity of faith replaced that of tribal affiliation..Unfortunately British colonialism in the Arabian Peninsula managed to "restore" tribalism to its "glory" by establishing "states" or to be more precise, semi-states, on the basis of tribal affiliation. Most, if not all, the states of the Arabian Peninsula, including Saudi Arabia, today are nothing more than tribes with flags. and finally (4) Pakistan has allowed itself to be ruled by military dictators for most of its history. In this respect, the difference between India (now the ninth largest industrial country in the world) and Pakistan (now a client state of the United States) cannot be more striking. The people of India (or shall we say, the political, economic, and social elite there) refused to allow the army to take over, hence the strengthening and deepening of the roots of democracy in India. Pakistan was, and still is, very unfortunate because the people were fooled to believe that the likes of General Yahya, Zia Ul-Haq, and Musharraf would solve Pakistan's economic, social, and political problems. They have failed miserably in all fronts, including the military front. Is there no end to a lesson?

        Regards,

        Ibrahim Hayani



      • syed saghier ahmad jafri
        Bhai Munir Saami ! Assalam O Alaikum, Ummeed hai keh Aap aur sub saathi khairiat sai hain. Ref. first two lines of your letter,kindly refer to a letter of
        Message 3 of 5 , Nov 1, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Bhai Munir Saami !
          Assalam O Alaikum,
          Ummeed hai keh Aap aur sub saathi khairiat sai hain.
          Ref. first two lines of your letter,kindly refer to a letter of
          which the link is given as under:-

          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Writers_Forum/message/14279

          For the kind information of all the well wishers of Pakistan and
          also of this region, experts on Indo-Pakistan Relations,Defence
          Studies,Political 'Utaar - Charaao',India-Pakistan Friendship --
          Present Best Relations and Wonderful Friendship among the Pakistanis
          and Indians etc., I quote as under as to what was written about the
          Arms Race in this most important region where the two countries
          India and Pakistan are known Atomic Powers and,India had initiated
          the first two Atomic Tests thus,forcing the others to follow the
          same dangerous path in a region where , even the UNO could not
          implement sixty years old UN Resolutions.Why???Let the UNO answer
          those who love PEACE ? in this TERRIBLE WORLD.
          ALLAH HAFIZ.

          " As far as arms race is concerned,it is a well known fact that
          India was the first who carried out the Atomic Test (1974),we lost
          our beautiful East Pakistan (Brotherly Country Bangladesh-1971) for
          that,who did what and who involved in training the people is a
          historical fact and,what happened to all the characters involved
          should serve a lesson to all.India again carried out Atomic Tests in
          1998 and then,Pakistan had no choice or was forced to react in a
          much bigger way.India accumulated nearly one million heavily armed
          troops with all the necessary latest fighting/destroying
          equipment,machinery,arms,ammunitions etc.on our borders for nearly
          one year (a few years ago).The peaceful Pakistan and the UNO,World
          Leaders and the entire PEACE LOVING People of this difficult/
          terrible World kept on asking them not to do such kind of acts
          (rather spend those billions of dollars of unnecessary/extra
          ordinary expenditure ( power ka mazahera kernai walai siasi
          hatkandai )on improving the condition of millions of
          poor,hungry,shelterless,sick people and,millions of children not
          having money to have milk and one time food what to say of having
          even the primary education in villages,cities etc.,in this century
          which has already taken off with very bad start as,it may by
          accident or by any foolish act etc. ,result in any horrible war or
          God forbid, any world war like situation.
          Ahmad Bhai,what to do under such circumstances,past over fifty
          years experience where,there is always "talk" /
          conferences,cricket/bus diplomacy etc.only of cbm's,improving
          relations but,the main disputes such as Kashmir,Baglihar Dams etc.
          (known as the real causes of troubles/wars etc.) practically remain
          pending for decades.Can Pakistan afford to keep eyes closed knowing
          that the new orders for procurement of latest fighter planes,
          submarines,arms,equipment etc. may be involving billions of dollars
          have been placed and may be,in a few years Pakistan will face the
          situation with most modern fighting/destroying machinery across the
          borders for use against whom or for use where??? "
          Syed Saghier Ahmad Jafri , Sabiha Saba,
          http://www.urdumanzil.com
          Urdu Markaz.

          --- In Writers_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "Ahmad Faruqui" <faruqui@p...>
          wrote:
          >
          > Musharraf wants the world to give him $5 billion in aid. He is
          angry
          > at the world for only giving him a tenth of that amount. Well,
          all
          > he has to do is cancel the order for 77 F-16s and he will save at
          > least $2 billion. At no other time has the opportunity cost of
          > defense spending been more apparent than at this time.
          >
          > Pakistan's national security does not need F-16s, tanks and
          > destroyers. It needs much more basic things, like food, clothing
        • Munir Pervaiz
          Hello Ahmad, No Free Lunch is Shaukat Aziz Mantra. And he keeps giving free lunches. The best and the most conscientious course is that he gives up the
          Message 4 of 5 , Nov 1, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Hello Ahmad,

            "No Free Lunch" is Shaukat Aziz Mantra. And he keeps giving free
            lunches. The best and the most conscientious course is that he gives
            up the service of the Junta.

            But Alas, he may not be the statesman that our friend Nargis is
            looking for.

            Being an economist you may agree that cuts will come from people's
            shredded pockets, either thru further development reduction or thru
            deficit financing. This is the last term of Master Bush.

            Let's see where the tails wag in future.

            Thanks. Munir



            --- In Writers_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "Ahmad Faruqui" <faruqui@p...>
            wrote:
            >
            > Yes, he has given an entirely Pavlovian response. And he won't
            > retire from the army either any time soon. When he came to New
            York
            > for the UN meetings, someone asked him about whether or not he
            would
            > take off his army fatigues in 2007. He said, "George Bush has not
            > asked me to take it off" and eliminated all doubts about who is
            > calling the shots in Pakistan.
            >
            > Reminds me of the "good ole days," when those black gramaphone
            > records made by RCA carried a logo of a dog listening to music
            with
            > the caption, "His Master's Voice."
            >
            > On the topic of not cutting the defense budget, he also said he
            won't
            > raise taxes to finance the earthquake relief program. So what
            > expenses is he going to cut? Something has to give. The worst
            thing
            > to do would be to resort to deficit financing and leave behind an
            > inflationary legacy. I am half hoping that Shaukat Aziz will give
            > his uniformed master a well deserved Econ 1A lecture on why "there
            is
            > no such thing as a free lunch."
            >
            > --- In Writers_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Munir Saami
            <munirsaami@y...>
            > wrote:
            > >
            > > Hello friends,
            > > In some of my previous messages I suggested that Pakistan should
            > review its military expenses to help find money for helping
            affected
            > Pakistanis. Several other opinion makers in Pakistan also asked
            the
            > same independently.
            > >
            > > This is the response from the head of the Junta: entirely
            > predictable.
            > > -----------------
            > > Musharraf rules out defence cut
            > >
            > >
            > > ISLAMABAD, Oct 31: President Gen Pervez Musharraf on Monday
            > categorically stated there would be no cut in the country's
            defence
            > budget in the aftermath of the Oct 8 earthquake but clearly
            indicated
            > that the government would buy fewer F-16 fighter jets from the US.
            > >
            > > He was responding to questions at a press conference at his camp
            > office in Rawalpindi on Monday afternoon.
            > >
            > > When asked if the government was contemplating a cut in the
            defence
            > budget given that billions of dollars were required for relief and
            > reconstruction work, he said: "No, we are not at all contemplating
            > any defence cut."
            > >
            > > "There is a security requirement which is separate and there is
            an
            > earthquake requirement which is totally separate," he argued.
            > Continuing on the subject, the president emphatically said: "We
            don't
            > want to do one and jeopardise the other. This would be most
            unwise."
            > He added: "We carry on with defence and we will carry on with the
            > earthquake (efforts) also."
            > >
            > > In response to another question, the president did say that
            > budgetary cuts would have to be considered if sufficient funds
            were
            > not raised at the national and international level for relief and
            > reconstruction activities. Resuming the press conference after the
            > iftar break, the president revisited the question pertaining to
            the
            > defence budget and pointed out that defence expenditure of
            Pakistan
            > did not consume a major chunk of the revenues and was in fact only
            > the fourth largest expense head.
            > >
            > > Giving a broad breakdown of the expenditure he said: "I hope
            this
            > audience knows that the biggest expenditure of Pakistan is the
            > establishment cost which is about 30 to 33 per cent, number two is
            > debt servicing which is about 33 per cent and the third is Public
            > Sector Development Programme which is 17.8 or 17.6 per cent,
            fourth
            > is defence which 17.1 per cent or something."
            > >
            > > He underlined: "Defence is our security concern, please
            understand
            > where the money goes."—Q.A
            > >
            > > http://www.dawn.com/2005/11/01/top8.htm
            > >
            > >
            > > -------------------------------
            > > "There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not
            > reading them. "-- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-
            > American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996).
            Please
            > visit: http://www.forbiddenlibrary.com/
            > > Munir Pervaiz (Saami)
            > > munirsaami@y...
            > >
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.