On 19/03/2008, ss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Monday 17 Mar 2008 6:10:04 pm Udhay Shankar N wrote:
> > Tarun Dua wrote: [ on 04:18 PM 3/17/2008 ]
> >
>
> > >http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21194
>
>
> This article does not gel with this one
>
> http://www.brecorder.com/index.php?id=708905&currPageNo=1&query=&search=&term=&supDate
>
> There is some financial fiction in one or the other. Apart from  a
> suggestion
> to me that the Pakistan Army may have paid Dalrymple to speak of "corrupt
> Pakistani politicians" with not a chirp about the Pakistani army itself
> which
> has a huge role to play in Pakistan's current cheerful situation. That is
> typical Pakistani army apologist language and it looks like Dalrymple may
> have joined a long list of Western journalists who have been "magically
> convinced" to speak "Pearls" on behalf of the Pakistan army.
>
> shiv
>
>
The Tehelka version of Dalrymple's story is a bit more explicit on the army:

http://www.tehelka.com/story_main38.asp?filename=Ne080308on_the.asp

THE SECOND force that has shown a remarkable ability to ignore or even
reverse the democratic decisions of the Pakistani people is of course the
army. Even though Musharraf's political ally, the PML-Q, has been heavily
defeated at the polls, leaving him vulnerable to impeachment by the new
parliament, the Pakistani army is still formidably powerful. Normally
countries have an army; in Pakistan, as in Burma, the army has a country. In
her recent book, *Military, Inc*., the political scientist Ayesha Siddiqa
attempted to put figures on the degree to which the army controls Pakistan
irrespective of who is in power.

Siddiqa estimated, for example, that the Army now controls business assets
of around 20 billion dollars and a third of all the manufacturing in the
country; it also owns 12 million acres of public land and up to 7 percent of
Pakistan's private assets. Five giant conglomerates, known as "welfare
foundations", run thousands of businesses, ranging from streetcorner petrol
pumps to sprawling industrial plants, from cement and dredging to the
manufacture of corn flakes. The army has administrative assets too.
According to Siddiqa, military personnel have "taken over all and every
department in the bureaucracy — even the civil service academy is now headed
by a Major General, while the National School of Public Policy is run by a
Lieutenant General. The military has completely taken over not just the
bureaucracy but every arm of the Executive."

Yet for all this potential power, the army has now comprehensively lost the
support of its people — a dramatic change from the situation even three
years ago when a surprisingly wide cross-section of the country seemed
prepared to tolerate military rule. The new army chief, General Ashfaq
Kayani, who took over when Musharraf stepped down from his military role
last year, seems to recognise this. He has issued statements about his wish
to pull the army back from civilian life, ordering his soldiers to stay out
of politics and give up jobs in the bureaucracy. He has also ordered that no
army officer may meet with President Musharraf without his personal
sanction.

Reply via email to