Azad_ Kashmiri
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2021
- Messages
- 409
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Excellent article:
When you assist the military in creating an air of invincibility by using fallen soldiers as a shield, you empower bad actors to take advantage of that invincibility to do as they wish. When corrupt people are let off the hook for whatever reason, they believe they can repeat their actions, and they have.
Over the years, the Pakistani military has involved itself in everything but defense.
Large parts of the military budget go towards construction projects, welfare, media enterprises, land holdings, businesses, commercial enterprises, and various other ventures. In no well-developed country in the world will you find a military that functions like a conglomerate.
You might believe that the military is providing valuable assistance where the government falls short, but this perception is misguided. Consider, for instance, when the military constructs a school in your neighborhood. Where does the funding come from? It comes from the budget allocation, sourced from taxes, just like the government's funds. In such cases, why not allocate those resources to the government, allowing them to manage such projects? The military's involvement in government affairs surpasses its intended role and demonstrates a concerning level of influence over non-defense-related matters. This is just one example of the military's influence; there are more significant instances where it directly impacts politics.
You may think the government is inefficient with its resources and that the military does a better job.
Once again, this is incorrect. In the 20th century, the biggest lesson learned from industrialization was delegation. Every entity focuses on what they are best at, and it all runs together like a well-oiled machine. The military's involvement in numerous industries disperses its focus and efficiency, rendering it a 'jack of all trades but master of none!
Foreign affairs should be handled by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, not the military. Education should be the responsibility of the Ministry of Education, and so on. These ministries should be given the budgets that the military has taken to expand its influence and present a favorable image. The military is no less prone to corruption than the government; there are no adequate checks in place to prevent corruption, just like in the government. The only advantage the military has over the government is its financial resources and influence.
Criticizing the military does not automatically equate to being anti-military; it is possible to express concerns and offer constructive feedback.
Similarly, holding the government accountable through criticism does not make you a separatist; it reflects a desire for positive change and progress.
When people shield the military from criticism, we end up in this situation. When Imran Khan criticizes the army, there's no need to get offended. He isn't anti-military; he simply wants change. The military should focus on its duties and allow the other ministries to focus on theirs. This inefficient machine is showing its limitations, and it can't continue to operate without repairs; otherwise, it's heading toward self-imposed destruction.
And on the government, I find it interesting to come across news articles speaking of how Pakistan is falling behind in the race for Al, Blockchain, Web 3, etc. It confuses me that Pakistan is so invested in the 4th industrial revolution when it still hasn't learned or applied any principles of the previous revolutions. You can't just magically skip to step 4 when you've only half-applied the previous 3 steps.
The foundations of progress don't exist, and yet we dream of flying cars.
Do you know what we are? We are like little children easily distracted from the bigger picture. When the military or government announces a small project, we get excited. However, it should concern you that the government is trying so hard to publicize a small project. In developed countries, similar projects are announced by specific ministries and local leaders, not the prime minister or general himself. Initializing projects isn't the government's primary job; its primary job is to create a perfect environment for projects to succeed. The government formulates policies to ensure the funding of projects is well-utilized, the correct projects receive funding, the right amount of money is allocated, international and domestic standards are met, and domestic standards are established. These cheap tricks of project announcements are detrimental. The focus should be on policies. Without a framework for development, it's as if the country is wandering in the dark with no clear path or direction. Everything becomes short-term.
I've seen the PMLN manifesto and instead of convincing the public of their ideas and listing their plans and policies they instead brag about past achievements. They have no vision of the future they only care about the present and past and they will continue to live in it.
When you assist the military in creating an air of invincibility by using fallen soldiers as a shield, you empower bad actors to take advantage of that invincibility to do as they wish. When corrupt people are let off the hook for whatever reason, they believe they can repeat their actions, and they have.
Over the years, the Pakistani military has involved itself in everything but defense.
Large parts of the military budget go towards construction projects, welfare, media enterprises, land holdings, businesses, commercial enterprises, and various other ventures. In no well-developed country in the world will you find a military that functions like a conglomerate.
You might believe that the military is providing valuable assistance where the government falls short, but this perception is misguided. Consider, for instance, when the military constructs a school in your neighborhood. Where does the funding come from? It comes from the budget allocation, sourced from taxes, just like the government's funds. In such cases, why not allocate those resources to the government, allowing them to manage such projects? The military's involvement in government affairs surpasses its intended role and demonstrates a concerning level of influence over non-defense-related matters. This is just one example of the military's influence; there are more significant instances where it directly impacts politics.
You may think the government is inefficient with its resources and that the military does a better job.
Once again, this is incorrect. In the 20th century, the biggest lesson learned from industrialization was delegation. Every entity focuses on what they are best at, and it all runs together like a well-oiled machine. The military's involvement in numerous industries disperses its focus and efficiency, rendering it a 'jack of all trades but master of none!
Foreign affairs should be handled by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, not the military. Education should be the responsibility of the Ministry of Education, and so on. These ministries should be given the budgets that the military has taken to expand its influence and present a favorable image. The military is no less prone to corruption than the government; there are no adequate checks in place to prevent corruption, just like in the government. The only advantage the military has over the government is its financial resources and influence.
Criticizing the military does not automatically equate to being anti-military; it is possible to express concerns and offer constructive feedback.
Similarly, holding the government accountable through criticism does not make you a separatist; it reflects a desire for positive change and progress.
When people shield the military from criticism, we end up in this situation. When Imran Khan criticizes the army, there's no need to get offended. He isn't anti-military; he simply wants change. The military should focus on its duties and allow the other ministries to focus on theirs. This inefficient machine is showing its limitations, and it can't continue to operate without repairs; otherwise, it's heading toward self-imposed destruction.
And on the government, I find it interesting to come across news articles speaking of how Pakistan is falling behind in the race for Al, Blockchain, Web 3, etc. It confuses me that Pakistan is so invested in the 4th industrial revolution when it still hasn't learned or applied any principles of the previous revolutions. You can't just magically skip to step 4 when you've only half-applied the previous 3 steps.
The foundations of progress don't exist, and yet we dream of flying cars.
Do you know what we are? We are like little children easily distracted from the bigger picture. When the military or government announces a small project, we get excited. However, it should concern you that the government is trying so hard to publicize a small project. In developed countries, similar projects are announced by specific ministries and local leaders, not the prime minister or general himself. Initializing projects isn't the government's primary job; its primary job is to create a perfect environment for projects to succeed. The government formulates policies to ensure the funding of projects is well-utilized, the correct projects receive funding, the right amount of money is allocated, international and domestic standards are met, and domestic standards are established. These cheap tricks of project announcements are detrimental. The focus should be on policies. Without a framework for development, it's as if the country is wandering in the dark with no clear path or direction. Everything becomes short-term.
I've seen the PMLN manifesto and instead of convincing the public of their ideas and listing their plans and policies they instead brag about past achievements. They have no vision of the future they only care about the present and past and they will continue to live in it.
Last edited:
