Issue 39 Vol II, May 15, 2007

F O C U S

Pakistan Military Inc. How it Keeps Democracy at Bay
Gobind Thukral

WE all know the power of military in Pakistan. It has ruled more than half the years during the last six decades of independence. It has an unprecedented control over country’s political, economic social spheres like no other army. It is a dominant class by itself. Entrenched in the corporate sector and it is also the biggest land owner with thousand of hectares of fertile land. Pakistani companies and their assets are largely in the hands of serving or retired military officers. The line between the military and the corporate sector is very thin. What future democracy and elections have in the circumstances?

People in Pakistan broadly know how the military bosses rules and what wealth they have stolen. But sadly lack details and here is how a researcher painstakingly provides those chilling details. Ayesha Siddiqa in her book Military Inc. — inside Pakistan's Military Economy by (Pluto Press, London; Oxford University Press, Pakistan) provides some evidence how powerful the Pakistani army is and also, how difficult it would be to get it out of power politics.

Ms. Siddiqa is a strategic affairs analyst presents the seamy side of the army’s in great detail. `Milbus' or military plus business are responsible not only for the military's political predatory style but its increase disproportionate influence over society. It is the direct result of a non-democratic political system.

`Milbus’ refers to all activities that transfer resources from the state to an individual or a group within the military. These neither figure in the defence budget nor are they suffer accountability measures of the government. Ms. Siddiqa asserts and rightly so that the beneficiaries are primarily officers, both serving and retired, but harvest is reaped by traders and their agents and politicians who have help the military in variety of ways. This can also explain the repeated military rule. Milbus' is present in agriculture, manufacturing, and services.  It operates at three levels: as an institution, through its subsidiaries, and through individuals.  And, all profit by this except the common people of Pakistan.

The military runs National Logistic Cell, the biggest freight transportation company in Pakistan. Its fleet of 1,689 vehicles is one of the largest in public sector transportation in Asia. The company is also engaged in construction of roads, bridges, and wheat storage facilities. The NLC is technically a department of the Ministry of Planning and Development but its operations are run by the army. Its net worth in 2000-01 was about $68.35 million.

The Frontier Works Organisation established in 1966 to construct the 805 km Karakoram Highway. It is a trade organization. It is now the biggest contractor in the country for constructing roads and collecting tolls. Managed and run by army engineers and is directly controlled by defence ministry. Their businesses range from bakeries to poultry farms and markets, commercial plazas and gas stations.

to serving and retired officers. The Pakistan military, as a single group, owns 12 per cent of total state land. And unlike other state institutions, the military can convert this land for private usage. They also get subsidies and other benefits to develop the land. Says Ms. Siddiqa, “The estimated worth of the legally acquired assets of Pakistan's generals, is in the range of $ 2.59 million-$ 6.9 million, based primarily on the value of rural and urban properties of these new land barons. Of the 11.58 million acres of land under its control, more than half is owned by the armed forces, mainly officers. Ms. Siddiqa argues that the "monopolisation" of land by the armed forces is aimed not just at increasing the financial value of individuals or groups within the army, but also to add to its social and political influence. She writes, "The military owes it authority to change the usage of land to its phenomenal political clout. The land redistribution policy has an impact on the relationship between the powerful ruling elite in the country — of which the military is a part — and the masses."

Then there is the well talked about Fauji Foundation besides the Army Welfare Trust, the Air Force's Shaheen Foundation, and the Navy's Bahria Foundation.  Officials of the respective services or officials of the Defence Ministry control these organisations.

Military manages some 100 different projects. These include heavy manufacturing industries like cement and fertilizer. One makes cereal. Some of the foundations are involved in education, insurance, banking, and information technology.  When the military rules, these projects get preferential treatment in obtaining public sector business contracts and financial and industrial inputs. Their apparent gain is more visible in real estate development.

The author provides details like the tri-service Fauji Foundation, with its 25 projects, has declared assets of $169 million. It employs 6,000-7,000 retired military personnel and is run by a governing board dominated by the army. The Army Welfare Trust began in 1971 with slightly over $12,000. Its specific purpose was to generate jobs for disabled soldiers, army widows, orphans. Today the Trust boasts of five financial sector companies listed on the Karachi Stock Exchange, out of a total of 41 projects. It has assets worth $62.1 million, and employs 5,000 ex-servicemen. No doubt the Musharraf regime has placed between 4,000-5,000 military officers through a system of preferential appointments. Again, defence contracts are the most common. Ms. Siddiqa cites the example of the former ISI boss Lt. Gen Hamid Gul's daughter running a private bus company, which was able to get privileged access to profitable bus routes between Islamabad and Rawalpindi. In India, this privilege is enjoyed by politicians in a big way. The only difference is here one corrupt and u inefficient regime is rotated with the other and people enjoy greater degree of freedom to protest and pressurize the government. Otherwise the ruling oligarchies function in a similar fashion to enrich themselves.

Under this system what the military desires it takes. It controls all aspects of Pakistan’s life. It can start a jihad anywhere and then try to close it if paid for. And it validates this in terms of its role as the saviour of the nation, positing an external threat from India so great that over the years, "national security has developed into a dogma at par with religious ideology." In fact, both dogmas feed each other. These are all patriotic welfare activities.

Politics has always been about limited choices. In Pakistan, there are four possible groupings currently on offer: the military, the mullahs, the loose collection of opportunists under the accommodating umbrella of the Muslim League, and the PPP. But for the persistent interference and intervention from the army, a process of weeding out among political parties and their leaders might have taken place. No doubt Transparency International concluded that Pakistan was a more corrupt country now than it was when Musharraf seized power in October 1999.

BACK