| August 7, 2003 | Thursday | Jumadi-us-Sani 8, 1424 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
The Swiss verdict
Planting palm trees
INDIA’S Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen’s criticism of his country’s massive defence budget should provide some food for thought to Pakistan’s policy makers as well. True, in absolute terms India is spending much more on its armed forces than we are on ours and “harming its human development programmes” in the process. Few people would quarrel with Professor Sen’s assessment of the situation. It has now been well established that a country which neglects its human resources is not usually in a good position to defend itself. Poverty, ignorance and despair are the worst enemies of a nation and the most sophisticated and modern weapons cannot guarantee a state’s defence if vast sections of its population suffer from lack of contentment and drooping spirits. An eloquent testimony to the truth of this assertion is the implosion of the mighty Soviet empire which, when it collapsed, possessed a military machine equalled in size and sophistication only by the US.
It is this aspect of the nation’s financial management that should be a source of serious concern for Pakistan. The proposed defence outlay of Rs 160 billion for 2003-04 is nearly a quarter of the revenue expenditure. Only recently, the UNDP launched its Human Development Report 2003 and its findings on Pakistan confirm that the country is sliding towards a state which can only be described as a human disaster. From 127 in the 2001 Report, Pakistan’s ranking has come down to 144 in the index of the 2003 Report. What is most worrying is that the slide has been greater in the education index.
One can honestly ask if Pakistan truly hopes to develop its defences with a population which is impoverished — more than a third living below the poverty line. According to the UNDP report, we are now spending only 1.8 per cent of GDP on education (2.4 per cent in 1990) while defence gets 4.5 per cent. It would be relevant to look at India’s spending in these areas too. India spends 4.1 per cent of its GDP on education and in absolute terms this amounts to a very huge sum. Its defence spending comes to 2.5 per cent of GDP.
One only hopes that the government in Islamabad which appears to be reassessing its geostrategy and foreign policy will also consider this dimension of its budgetary priorities. One of the crucial issues meriting consideration is the lessening of dependence on a large standing army. According to the UNDP report, Pakistan had 620,000 men in uniform in the year 2001. This was 8,000 more than the previous year and 40,000 more than what it was a decade ago. There is also the fact of the armed forces being top-heavy — thanks to a disproportionately large officers cadre and the quick promotions given at the higher level — which simply adds to the defence expenditure. This lop-sided structure is apparent from the fact that of the government’s pension bill of Rs 33 billion in 2001-02, Rs 27.7 billion went towards the pensions of the armed forces’ personnel. Foreign and defence policies are two sides of the same coin. They are inter-dependent. But conversely, a dynamic and proactive foreign policy which is successfully implemented can help a government streamline its defence mechanism and make it trim and cost effective.
IRRESPECTIVE of the many legal loopholes and political overtones marking the case, it is sad to see a former prime minister of our country being convicted by a magistrate abroad; sadder, that it should be on account of charges of corruption. The suspended sentences handed down in Switzerland against Ms Benazir Bhutto and her husband, Mr Asif Zardari, will be greeted by those who tend to accuse the country’s politicians of loot and plunder as confirming their perceptions. On the other hand, Ms Bhutto’s followers and admirers will undoubtedly look at the development as only one more link in the campaign of political victimization initiated against her by the Nawaz Sharif government and assiduously followed up by the Musharraf regime. The fact that, despite this campaign, the People’s Party remains the country’s largest party in terms of the popular vote will again be cited by many as proof that corruption is not an issue where ordinary people are concerned. But this carries the disturbing implication that electoral popularity somehow provides a licence for misuse of office and power, which is not an acceptable proposition.
That said, there will be many reservations about the manner in which the whole case has been handled, as indeed other cases against both Ms Bhutto and Mr Zardari. Their lawyer has already pointed out the many technical flaws involved, not least that neither Ms Bhutto nor her husband was asked to appear before the trying magistrate. Why the magistrate, an elected official, gave his verdict on his last day in office also needs an explanation. Ms Bhutto’s lawyer has said that an appeal will be filed against the Swiss court’s decision, and one can only hope that the next stages will be marked by greater transparency and adherence to accepted legal norms.
It should be interesting to recall that this particular case was tried by the Lahore High Court, and the trial judge’s approach was later found by the Supreme Court to have been marked by glaring bias. A retrial was ordered. All this happened during Mr Sharif’s dispensation, with much hard work put in by his accountability czar, Mian Saifur Rahman. Both were themselves later accused of corruption. In our muddied political context, it is often difficult to differentiate between the accuser and the accused and get to the truth.
THE city administration is doing now what it should have done long ago — planting palm trees on Sharea Faisal. The task of planting 200 date trees in four days on one of Karachi’s busiest roads is part of the administration’s 10-day cleanliness drive which, after the recent downpour, the city desperately needs. While the idea is a welcoming one from an environmental and aesthetic point of view, one cannot help but wonder whether the city fathers have thought this plan through. For starters, planting date trees, as opposed to the eucalyptus, may seem like a smart idea, as the palm tree does not need that much water and requires less maintenance because it is native to Sindh’s desert. The eucalyptus tree grows tall, swings with Karachi’s strong sea breeze and is supposed to have medicinal qualities. It has been planted extensively in Karachi and given the city a greener look. There is, however, room for variety. From an aesthetic point of view, how befitting is it for Karachi to resemble the desert-like cities of the Gulf countries where much care and importance is given to urban forestry?
During Nawaz Sharif’s second stint in government, he too planted rows of palm trees in Lahore with the result that the cultural capital resembled a bad version of Dubai. All this was done at the cost of beautiful, old trees that were cut down to make way for the alien ones. This is wrong for ecological reasons. New trees must be planted, without the old ones being felled. Karachi, this jungle of concrete, needs trees so that they could help check environmental degradation, improve the ecology and add to the city’s aesthetic looks. One only hopes the city fathers will be able to plant more trees — and a greater variety of them — and maintain the existing ones without further taxing the city’s residents.