POTW (Timepass) : Mamoon

[Muhammad10]

A well written post on an interesting subject.

Congratulations to [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION].

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...kistan-had-a-coup-today&p=8928144#post8928144

Pakistan Army is highly respected and rightly so, but when in politics they lose it. Hence, they should keep out.Yes initially, sweets are distributed but then they are cursed.

This is a direct consequence of inheriting a disproportionally bigger army than our population and other resources in 1947. The British Army had more representation from what is now Pakistan. In order to continue paying for it we have run our country into the ground.

To elaborate further, The British comissioned soldiers in the army by dividing the ethnical groups in the sub-continent into martial and non-martial races. The Pashtuns and the Punjabis from what is now Pakistan had the highest representation.

In 1947, Pakistan inherited (approximated figures) 21% of the population, 17% of the revenue but more than 30% of the military. Under the agreement, Pakistan got 30% of the army, 40% of the Navy and 20% of the Air Force.

70% of the first Pakistani budget was allocated to pay salaries for military personnel.

I have disagreements with Hussain Haqqani, but I would like to pull out a very interesting quote from his book.

"Pakistan was not like other countries that raise an army to deal with threats they face; it had inherited a large army that needed a threat if it was to be maintained."

His analysis is interesting in the sense that it is true. However, I am a structural realist when it comes to International Relations Theory, and I believe the only way countries can survive is to maximise military power. However when that comes at the expense of economic growth and social development, it is more damaging than it is beneficial.

Economic growth is hampered in states that fail to implement a sustainable form of government and an open market. Military growth may actually increase growth if it takes the form of weapons industry, but in some cases like Pakistan's, that does not happen.

It takes an open market, and 4-5% growth over a period of 25 to 30 years to transform a state. Pakistan never really got that because of political chaos and Foreign investment never really took off. On the contrary, India sky rocketed after 1991.

 

[Pakistanian]

That's a bogus quote from Haqqani, any large military would need constant conflict to stay in business, this case of India and Pakistan it takes two to tango, so it isn't just Pakistan's fault., they thrive as much from conflict as we do.

 

[Indiafan]

That's a bogus quote from Haqqani, any large military would need constant conflict to stay in business, this case of India and Pakistan it takes two to tango, so it isn't just Pakistan's fault., they thrive as much from conflict as we do.

Indian army has no where near as much power nor do they seek it. What business does Indian army stay in. No Indian will even know the name of the army chief unlike Pakistan where he is a celebrity. Modi has more power than any army, navy or airforce.

Pray tell me how many times have Indian army taken over power or removed PMs? 65 years of continued democracy has made the government strong and army answerable to it. There is no comparison

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

Ha! Since time forever my father has always said that Pak Army is eating all Pak budget each year.

Good post

 

[Mamoon]

That's a bogus quote from Haqqani, any large military would need constant conflict to stay in business, this case of India and Pakistan it takes two to tango, so it isn't just Pakistan's fault., they thrive as much from conflict as we do.

The problem is that more often than not, it is the Pakistan Army that is the catalysts of these conflicts, especially the internal conflicts. Not talking about India here.

 

[Mamoon]

Ha! Since time forever my father has always said that Pak Army is eating all Pak budget each year.

Good post

Your father is right.

Thank you.