A small step
The initiation of a debate on defence spending in parliament, as the leader of the Senate, Raza Rabbani, presented a break-up of the Rs295 billion defence budget for the next financial year before the house, is a welcome step. Till now, the country's defence spending has appeared in budget documents only as a single-line figure, leaving open no possibility of insight into quite how this massive amount is spent.
Such questions today are of course all the more relevant given that our military has struggled to deal with militants in the northern areas, is regarded by most ordinary citizens as enjoying an unfairly large slice from the limited finances of the state and has been accused of adopting a domineering manner when dealing with civilians, for example in earthquake-hit areas. Steps taken by the COAS, soon after he took office, to remove serving and retired military personnel from the civil centre was intended partially to reduce such feelings of angst over the taking over of key posts in WAPDA, the education sector and other departments by men in uniform. Allowing parliament to discuss defence spending thus falls in line with such efforts to re-build trust between people and the armed forces, though it serves, at present, a symbolic rather than a real purpose, indicating that the military is answerable to the people it is intended to serve.
There are of course many aspects of defence spending that still remain secret. While the budget was broken into large heads, including allocations for the different services, Senator Rabbani himself conceded all the details had not been made available and were still being provided to the Senate. He hoped there would be an improvement in this situation next time round. It then seems evident that the prevailing mindset within the giant military establishment still rebels at allowing the elected representatives of people access to too much information about the expenses of the country's largest institution. Indeed, senators were permitted only two hours to debate the defence budget, barely allowing them time to assess and understand it.
Nevertheless, one must realize that it will take time to introduce the greater transparency on defence spending and the notion that parliament, as the sovereign body of state, has a right to question and criticize this. Information, for instance, on quite how much we spend on maintaining an intelligence network that is said to have grown manifold over the past three decades would be fascinating and possibly reveal a great deal about the nature of the state. Indeed, parliament needs also to consider the broader issue of whether such massive spending on defence can be justified in times when millions in the country lack adequate food and over a third of children suffer malnutrition. But naturally, it will take time to create an environment within which such questions can be asked and argued out at a public forum. The breaking of the taboo which barred any discussion on defence is an important accomplishment in this regard and puts in place a foundation that can be built on in the future.
Posted on: 18-June-2008
Share:
Source: The News (http://www.thenews.com.pk)
Such questions today are of course all the more relevant given that our military has struggled to deal with militants in the northern areas, is regarded by most ordinary citizens as enjoying an unfairly large slice from the limited finances of the state and has been accused of adopting a domineering manner when dealing with civilians, for example in earthquake-hit areas. Steps taken by the COAS, soon after he took office, to remove serving and retired military personnel from the civil centre was intended partially to reduce such feelings of angst over the taking over of key posts in WAPDA, the education sector and other departments by men in uniform. Allowing parliament to discuss defence spending thus falls in line with such efforts to re-build trust between people and the armed forces, though it serves, at present, a symbolic rather than a real purpose, indicating that the military is answerable to the people it is intended to serve.
There are of course many aspects of defence spending that still remain secret. While the budget was broken into large heads, including allocations for the different services, Senator Rabbani himself conceded all the details had not been made available and were still being provided to the Senate. He hoped there would be an improvement in this situation next time round. It then seems evident that the prevailing mindset within the giant military establishment still rebels at allowing the elected representatives of people access to too much information about the expenses of the country's largest institution. Indeed, senators were permitted only two hours to debate the defence budget, barely allowing them time to assess and understand it.
Nevertheless, one must realize that it will take time to introduce the greater transparency on defence spending and the notion that parliament, as the sovereign body of state, has a right to question and criticize this. Information, for instance, on quite how much we spend on maintaining an intelligence network that is said to have grown manifold over the past three decades would be fascinating and possibly reveal a great deal about the nature of the state. Indeed, parliament needs also to consider the broader issue of whether such massive spending on defence can be justified in times when millions in the country lack adequate food and over a third of children suffer malnutrition. But naturally, it will take time to create an environment within which such questions can be asked and argued out at a public forum. The breaking of the taboo which barred any discussion on defence is an important accomplishment in this regard and puts in place a foundation that can be built on in the future.
Posted on: 18-June-2008
Share:
Source: The News (http://www.thenews.com.pk)
Comments on this article
No comments yet.
Be the first to post comments on this article.
Be the first to post comments on this article.
Please leave comments below
More articles
Go to search articles (All articles)
- A president at large(11-August-2010)
- Sartor Resartus(13-March-2009)
- State of confusion(22-February-2009)
- Chinese peace initiative(31-December-2008)
- Daily Press Summary(6-December-2008)
- Sectarian curse(23-November-2008)
- Daily Press Summary(24-October-2008)
- DAILY PRESS SUMMARY(22-October-2008)
- Getting it right on China(21-October-2008)
- Safe Water Scheme(14-October-2008)
