Arms spending in Asia
A REPORT in this newspaper on Wednesday on a seminar held in conjunction with the Ideas-2002 exhibition has thrown up some interesting ideas. It quotes experts taking part in the seminar as saying that Asian countries, although among the poorest in the world, are the largest in terms of defence expenditure. Pakistan and India were major spenders, with India leading. One participant said while overall military expenditure shrank between 1992 and 2000, it increased by 15 per cent in the Asian region. Another pointed out that the military build-up in the region was due to a number of uncertainties, including the nature and extent of the US military presence in the area, potential competition and conflict between China, Japan and India, and regional tensions. It was stated that some Asian countries have developed an indigenous capacity to manufacture and export defence equipment and feel happy that they have acquired the expertise to compete in the international market for military hardware.
One of the questions raised by this is, of course, why Asian countries feel compelled to allocate major chunks of their budgets for defence expenditure, which includes the salaries and perks of huge standing armies, when their social sectors are starved of funds. The answer has perhaps as much to do with the weakness of civil societies and political institutions in several Asian countries as with sources of tension such as the Kashmir dispute between India and Pakistan. Insufficiently developed polities have seen power flow to military establishments, which often have gained a life of their own and do not feel themselves accountable to their people. In many newly independent countries in the past half a century, the military has not only been seen as necessary for defence but as an institution symbolizing national pride, a mind-set inherited from the erstwhile colonial rulers. Even in countries where the principle of civilian supremacy has more or less been established, government leaders take pride in being surrounded by ramrod stiff military men in starched uniforms.
But a second question, not raised at the Ideas seminar, relates to the sources that feed the military establishments of Asian and other developing countries. These sources are all located in the industrialized world, with the United States leading the pack. The American military-industrial complex has become a cliche, but it is a powerful and dangerous reality. Russia has also found the export of military hardware a lucrative source of income in its present economically straitened circumstances. The West’s political involvement in many countries in Asia, the Middle East and Africa has itself been a leading cause of militarization. The cold war period led to massive US military aid to states that Washington deemed to be its allies. The US arming of Israel, whose mass-destruction weapons capability is seldom mentioned, has led to its own debilitating dynamics in the region. The need to counter China means supplying weapons to Taiwan. The ‘war on terror’ will require more injections of military aid to the security forces of many countries. There is the whole bullying philosophy of seeking to disarm others while feeling free to develop more sophisticated and deadlier weapons systems.
Some countries may innocently derive some satisfaction from being able to export a few items of military hardware, but the arms bazaar is a complex phenomenon that is designed to further western domination. Poorer countries will do better by seeking to reduce military spending and concentrating on economic development as the source of real strength.
Sri Lanka’s peace challenge
THE Norway-brokered peace talks between the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam came to a positive conclusion after three days of deliberations at a Thai resort. The LTTE agreed to abandon its demand for a separate Tamil state in the north-east of the island, and settle for a semi-autonomous province comprising Tamil-majority areas. Also, for the first time in 19 years, the LTTE moved to mend fences with the Muslim minority living in the Tamil-controlled areas, accepting them as an integral part of a peace settlement. Many Muslim families were forced to flee their homes by years of violent clashes between the LTTE guerillas and the Sri Lankan army, claiming a toll of over 60,000 lives. The next round of talks is scheduled for next month and the two sides have agreed to reach a final settlement by January next.
The on-going peace process was started by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, who was elected in December last promising an end to violence and a revival of the economy as his main electoral pledges. Estranged brother of President Chandrika Kumaratunga and belonging to her rival political party, Wickremesinghe has also sought to amend the constitution which gives Kumaratunga sweeping veto powers over his decisions, and the right to dissolve parliament. The bitter rivalry between the two has led Kumaratunga to accuse Wickremesinghe of conceding too much to the LTTE in recent months, even though the peace plan offered by him is not much different from the one Kumaratunga herself had offered when she was prime minister back in 1994. In the final analysis, locked up as they are in an uneasy ‘co-habitation’ government with a bitter baggage from the past, the ruling parties in Sri Lanka must learn to work together if the island is to achieve a lasting peace, and see a revival of the civil war-battered economy.
Confusing accounts
SOME extremely sensitive matters are being treated in a most cavalier fashion. The truth about Ramzi bin Al Shibh is still not known. Has he been flown out of Pakistan and given over to US custody? Is he really who he is said to be? The day he was reported to have been sent out of the country, the interior minister had said the man would first be tried here. The president’s spokesman, however, said that Ramzi had been handed over to the US. One newspaper asserted that the operation that netted Ramzi was watched by FBI officials, but there has been no official comment on that. Similarly, who were the people who allegedly snatched the man away from police following the Defence Housing Authority raid? Now we have some sections of the press claiming that another plot to assassinate the president has been foiled. This relates to the arrest of eight militants in Karachi on Wednesday. The president’s spokesman is quoted as denying that any such plot was involved, but the interior minister said those arrested were part of the gang implicated in the conspiracy to attack the president. The minister was presumably referring to the plot that was unearthed during the president’s previous visit to Karachi. But between them the minister, the president’s spokesman and various police officials have succeeded in thoroughly confusing the newspaper reader. The multiplicity of agencies dealing with arrests related to terrorism and militancy perhaps makes for delays in the collection of all the relevant facts, but on issues of this nature, it might be best to have some form of centralized briefing that presents a coherent and credible picture of each episode.