Dr Siddiqa is a noted author, academician and analyst on defence and security issues. She has authored two books on Pakistan's military: 'Pakistan's Arms Procurement and Military Build-up, 1979-99: In Search of a Policy' (2001), and 'Military Inc, Inside Pakistan's Military Economy' (April 2007).
Siddiqa was the inaugural Pakistan Fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, DC, and a Ford Fellow at the Bonn International Center for Conversion. She was the correspondent for the prestigious 'Jane's Defence Weekly' (2003-04) in Pakistan. Siddiqa is a Ph.D. in War Studies from King's College, University of London. She has taught at the School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University and University of Pennsylvania.
"The military is an independent driver," says Ayesha Siddiqa alleging that the institution utilises constant propaganda to ensure expansion of its budget irrespective of the proportional costs and benefits. Speaking exclusively to BR Research, the military procurement expert adds that the institution has a vested interest in its continuous expansion which often means replication of resources and wastage of tax payers' money.
"In our case, one problem is defence spending. The other is the military's indirect influence on the policies, including the foreign policy," says Siddiqa. She cites the "military's hawkish attitude" towards Pakistan's eastern neighbour, which she considers to be "one of the biggest impediments" between enhanced trade with India.
The expert rubbishes the assertion that faced with a larger adversary; Pakistan must not compromise on defence spending. Eventually, the directionless competition with India will drive us under. "All militaries across the globe look for a bogey and India is ours," she says. Siddiqa cites the traditional rivalry between the militaries of China and the Unites States of America, adding that despite this adversarial environment, trade between the two economies is booming.
The problem, according to her, is that the same mindset has permeated the country's bureaucratic establishment because "the military does not only have huge economic and military power but it has intellectual control as well". She asserts that there is a lack of civilian supremacy in the country as "there's a political government for political issues while the military is running the rest of the things like foreign and strategic policy".
Asked about the heavy military presence in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh; she contests that Sri Lanka has developed a large force mainly to battle internal conflict in its restive northern region while Bangladesh and India maintain heavy military presences on their borders to curtail rampant smuggling.
"In Pakistan, the business sector is repeatedly saying that India is a far bigger market so if you open up trade with them; Pakistani businesses stand to benefit more," asserts Siddiqa. However she laments that vested interest of internal stakeholders as well as external lobbies such as Dubai's are opposed to direct trade between the two countries.
The excessive influence of the military in commercial operations in the country has left the corporate sector "habitually dependent" on them for contracts and revenue. "If you are getting the business from the state then why bother pursuing private business opportunities is the mindset among many corporations here" she emphasises, adding that such involvement is hampering the growth of private enterprise in the country.
RATIONALIZING DEFENCE EXPENDITURE
Siddiqa debunks the assertion that discussing military spending in the Parliament can undermine sovereignty and reveal strategic plans to the enemy. "This is not the day and age where you can hide money in your pocket and fool others about your financial position," she says.
Before debating on cuts in the defence budget, she contends there is a need to "rationalise expenses" says the expert. "Duplication leads to wastage; for example we have the Margalla Institute of Electronics and then the Kamra Avionics and Radar Factory which is essentially doing the same work", she elaborates. While stressing on the needs for rationalising defence spending, she contends the task cannot be left to the military itself. "You will need an independent expert commission to work out how to rationalise it " adds the former military consultant.
She highlights that prior attempts to audit military spending were derailed because military regimes replaced politically elected governments, stalling the reforms process. "The first and only time we had a white paper on defence was in 1973," says the expert.
Another impediment between civilian supremacy over the country's military stems from the lack of authority instilled in the defence ministry. "Till the 1980s, the secretary defence used to be a civilian but now that has changed and it's either a retired or a serving army person," she points out.
"There is also a lack of expertise in the general bureaucracy that deals with the military so we need to develop a cadre of qualified civil servants," adds Siddiqa. "The army personnel also have to go from secretary and additional secretary level positions," adding that in her experience she has found that civilian experts are much better qualified for introducing efficient and effective reforms in the military. "If you're spending over sixty percent of your defence budget on salaries of personnel; there is something seriously wrong there," she sums up.
CIRCLE OF INFLUENCE
"In 1985, another organisation called DG Audit Defence Budget was established, however this was soon run into the ground as the parliament was sent packing," recalls Siddiqa. Since that time, scrutiny of military spending has been wanting. She adds that "performance audits are also direly needed, but absent".
The analyst explains that given its vast circle of influence, the military's doctrine prevails in media and circles of civil society as well. She asserts that most journalists covering militancy maintain strong links with the armed forces and often take cue for their coverage from them too.
She warns that this exposes members of the media to presenting a skewed and one-sided narrative to the country's problems. Citing the example of unrest in Baluchistan, she says that "those practising desktop journalism" fail to understand the dynamics of the struggle of the people of that province. Consequently, the voices of urban, middle-class Baloch are seldom heard or given the due importance.
Asserting that "our problem is that we have a military that not only runs its own show but runs policy making as well; specially the foreign policy". She insists that civilian supremacy must prevail and the influence of the armed forces must be restricted to relevant areas so that the economic interests of the nation can be given their due importance.
Siddiqa refutes the assertion that national crises drive people towards supporting the armed forces. Instead she says, "people don't get behind them (the military), they come together to face the calamity". She warns that using tools of propaganda to present a rosy state of affairs in Baluchistan and other restive areas will only alienate the indigenous people further. Instead, she asserts better representation of these people should be guaranteed to address the sense of depravation that is spreading in these areas.
INTERVIEW BY MOBIN NASIR AN INTERVIEW WITH DR AYESHA SIDDIQA
Comments
Comments are closed.