US and India Trade deals and how they have changed the security balance in South Asia (written in 2010)

“There are many cumbersome ways to kill a man” is the title of a poem by Edwin Brock’s 1997 Poem. He says that ‘in the age of aero planes, one may fly miles above his victim and dispose of him by pressing one small switch. All one then requires is an ocean to separate him, two systems of government…’ and so on. With over 62 years of animosity Pakistan and India do not seem to require the ocean that Edwin Brock speaks of and clearly has a much more complex situation. However the USA through its nuclear technology focused 2006 deals and aircraft focused 2010 deals has no doubt changed the political scenario of South Asia and is continuing to have drastic effects on the entire world. For India Edwin Brock forgot to mention that the equipment should state ‘made in USA’.

 

  However whose interest is the deal in and who is benefiting from it is questionable. There are two aspects to this deal (a) The US is exploiting India by selling weapons and aircrafts to a poor developing country which are in turn being used against Pakistan and other states in the region by the Indian government or (b) the US is supporting Indian military build up and increased importance in the region and is therefore fuelling a militant mindset within India by providing weapons and signing deals.

The first aspect is that of India acquiring weapons for the modernization of its military. These weapons are primarily being brought from the US and include weapons that the US would not supply to any other country. In February this year at the DefExpo 2010 trade fair in New Delhi the Defense Minister A.K Antony stated that the Indian defense expenditure is going to increase. Further he stated “our defense industry is open up to 100 percent for Indian private sector, while foreign direct investment is allowed up to 26 percent.”

Over the next 12 years, India is set to spend a whopping US$200 billion on defense acquisitions to replace its outdated inventory. In this regard, on February 15, 2010, a report of the Indian strategic defense magazine (India Strategic’s DefExpo) revealed that 70 per cent of the inventory of the Indian armed forces is 20-plus years old, and needs to be replaced with the modern technology. It explained that nearly half of this funding ($100b) will go to the Indian Air Force (IAF), which would need to replace more than half of its combat jet fleet as well as the entire transport aircraft and helicopter fleet. The army needs new guns, tanks, rocket launchers, multi-terrain vehicles, while the navy needs ships, aircraft carriers and new range of nuclear submarines. 

The US has emerged as a potential military supplier to India since the two countries signed a deal of civil energy technology in 2008, which lifted sanctions on New Delhi in order to import nuclear technology. India is likely to become a major customer for the US military-industrial complex over the next few years. During the recent visit of the US Secretary of State Robert Gates to New Delhi, American Defence officials, however, have said that US weapons sales to India would not be a focus of the trip. Regardless of such denials, the key reason for the Gates’ visit can be found in the fact that India is planning to raise its military budget by 50% to almost $40 billion. In contrast to India’s planned defence expenditures, Pakistan’s entire 2009-10 budget amounts to little over $30 billion. Such spending on military expenses is very questionable by a third world country with a majority of its population still in abject states of poverty.

India, the largest arms buyer among emerging nations, accounted for 7.5 per cent of all international arms sales between 2000 and 2007. It has spent billions of dollars in the past few years on purchases of planes, radars and ships from US, Britain, France, Germany and Russia and Israel. In recent years, India has bought reconnaissance aircraft from US aerospace major Boeing worth 2.1 billion-dollars, medium range missiles for 1.4 billion dollars from Israeli Aerospace Industries, and signed an upgrade service contract with the Russian Aircraft Corporation to upgrade its MiG 29 squadrons for 965 million dollars. Several deals are planned for the near future including one of the largest arms contracts of recent times—a 11-billion-dollar project to acquire 126 multi-role combat aircraft from the US. 

 Whether this is because India wants to become a mini-superpower of the region and hence it uses the pretext of deterrence against Pakistan and China or is being exploited and coaxed into spending money on acquiring weapons by the US is of course still unknown.

Currently, more than half of India’s budget is allocated for military, paramilitary, various security forces and debt servicing. That leaves less than half for everything else including infrastructure development projects, education, healthcare, poverty alleviation, and various human services. New Delhi’ s latest arms buildup will leave even less for what India needs most to lift hundreds of millions of its citizens from abject poverty, hunger illiteracy and disease which continues to hamper any chances of real economic progress within the country. 

Indian civil society organisations, while complaining of excessive defence spending indicated that the government spends twice as much on defence as on the social sector. The defence budget for 2009-2010 is 29 billion dollars, up 34 percent over the previous one. Indian defence analyst Ravinder Pal Singh, while calling New Delhi’s unending defence spending at the cost of poverty-alleviation—with security requirements competing with socio-economic concerns for money calls it guns-versus-butter question Even some of Indian officials are surprised in relation to Indian defence expenditure which has no bounds. For example, an official of the country’s finance ministry remarked, “There is a dilemma…poverty needs to be eradicated to prevent men from taking to the guns…but more funds for security means less money for poverty alleviation.”

Meanwhile, a report of United Nations pointed out that India ranks 134th of 182 countries on the United Nations Development Programme’s Human Development Index. It estimated that 50 per cent of the world’s undernourished population lives in India. Nearly 31 per cent of the billion-plus Indians earn less than a dollar a day. Secretary General of the Control Arms Foundation of India Binalakshmi Nepram said, “When people are dying of poverty and bad sanitation, what protection will arms provide them?” On the one hand, international community has been making strenuous efforts for world peace in wake of global financial crisis and war against terrorism, on the other, India has initiated deadly nuclear arms in South Asia where people are already facing multiple problems of grave nature. Majority of South Asian people are living below the poverty level, lacking basic facilities like fresh food and clean water. While yielding to acute poverty, every day, some persons commit suicide in India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka etc due to the ongoing wars in the region.

Setting aside regional problems, and resolution of Indo-Pak issues-especially thorny dispute of Kashmir, Indian rulers state that they don’t have any aggressive designs. But it becomes a big joke of the 21st century, reminding a maxim, “armed to the teeth, but no enemy”, if we take cognisance of India’s unending defence expenditure.

However these arms are being used to uphold some devious designs either from the US government or the Indian government. The full transcript issued by the pentagon following the South Asian Tour of US defense Secretary clearly stated that "I would tell you that the United States clearly has not or has ever propped up India. India has not needed us for that purpose and, in fact, those familiar with the history would know that our relationship with India was fairly strained until not too many years ago," These remarks were made when the Defense Secretary was volleyed by questions from Pakistani journalists who accused him of propping India against Pakistan. These questions were thrown at him in response to his statement “India has responded with great restraint and statesmanship after the Mumbai terror attacks. But the ability to continue with it after another attack is under question… It is not reasonable to assume that Indian patience is unlimited in case of another attack”. These remarks were issued after a joint meeting with Indian Defence Minister A.K. Antony.

These statements clearly reveals the admission of a new role for India in the region. There is ample talk of how India is being used to counter China and Russia. The US plans for regional domination can only be achieved through India by keeping other forces in check and accessing the natural resources of Afghanistan, Central Asia and the Caspian region or by denying access to the same to China and Russia. The increased Indian diplomatic efforts in Central Asia and its extremely heavy involvement in Afghanistan with linkages with the US are clear indicators that India is fulfilling a role.

Yet such statements issued by the Foreign Secretary who is the only remaining legacy of Bush in the Obama Cabinet have harkened memories of sadness for Pakistan who were awaiting a change in government and indeed a change in the US policy towards the region. These statements were labeled as ‘very irresponsible’ by the Prime minister Yousaf Raza Gillani. The statement has clear underlying implications. Firstly that non-state actors can easily nudge the states into a total state of war. Secondly the long history of CBM’s and composite dialogue has been futile and the peace of both nations hangs by a thread. Thirdly the US will not intervene if India attacks Pakistan because inevitably the non-state actors will be Pakistani’s and therefore Pakistan will be responsible.

Ever since 2006 two major incidents have taken place in India for which Pakistan was blamed through use of Non-state actors. Firstly the Samjhuata express bombing of February 2007 and then the Mumbai attacks of 26 November 2008. In both cases India was quick to levy accusations against Pakistan in a very unthoughful and impulsive manner. Later investigations have revealed the contrary. The investigations showed that the Samjhuata express bombings took were planned and executed by retired Indian Army officers most prominent of them being Lt. Col P.S.Purohit whose network included ties to Shiv Sena and BJP. Similarly Ajmal Kasab has revealed to the Indian Courts that he was under custody of the Indian intelligence agencies and was brought to the place of the attack and was asked to participate in the attack. Such revelations are vital for understanding the Indian designs and its new found thirst for power.

Indian involvement has been uncovered at FATA and Balochistan within Pakistan. Reports of their involvement were shared with the US and with Indian Governments. Yet the US keeps pressing Pakistan to continue its wars on the western borders against the Afghanistani Taliban therefore denuding its forces on the eastern border. Adding to the military problems is the Indian stance on major unresolved issues like Kashmir, Water, Siachen and Sir Creek on which it continues to be stubborn. Such matters indicate that the security balance has indeed changed ever since the deal. India continues to abstain from signing the NPT and deals with the US have allowed India the quantitive advantage over Pakistan to produce nuclear weapons and fissle materials. Ever since the 2006 deal India is able to use freed up resources to make atleast 280 nuclear weapons a year. Pakistan has questioned the Conference on Disarmament’s only focus on ‘cutting-off’ further production, however it needs to be kept in mind by Pakistan that delays in the same will only exacerbate the nuclear race in India until a consensus is reached.  

Zonked out Zakat

The recent Hajj scandal created copious furor amongst the faithfuls who saw a glimpse of the how klepocratic governance taints a pillar of the religion. Whilst there is not much the government can do with the other 3 pillars, one pillar in particular has been desecrated for too long now. The pillar of Zakat. As a part of his Islamisation package General Zia introduced the Zakar and Ushr Ordinance of 1980 which was supposed to usher Pakistan into a new age of egalitarianism and equality by forcing everyone to pay zakat as a state duty rather than a religious duty. This was to be enforced through all means of state operations and applied to banks as well. A bulky bureaucratic system was established to conduct the affairs and ensure that the faithful do indeed perform their religious duty.   Countless scandals have heaped up with the incorrect use of the zakat money. We hear of it being used to fund frivolous government expenses of cars for ministers and even holiday trips to luxury islands. The Shiites are exempt from this government duty and as a result of this marred ordinance the government books saw a surge in the population of people who identify themselves as Shias.

The system of Zakat was introduced in Islam to reduce the disparity between the rich and the poor. We all hear of the example of Zakat working so well that in the times of Hazrat Umar there were zakat payers but no one wanted to receive it because they had already benefited so much from the zakat. Zakat needs to be differentiated from government imposed taxes. Even the most incorrigible tax evader would happily pay zakat because it is a divine duty and not one that can be imposed by the state upon an individual. Given that it is a divine duty the practice is essentially voluntary. By bringing zakat under the state system the government has gained access to tremendous funds that people pay along with their taxes. The province of Punjab alone had gathered more than Rs. 40 billion in zakat collections last year. Despite such tremendous funds we see that the income disparity is rising and the developmental projects that could benefit the poor are being capped.

There are however several changes that can be fashioned to save the poor of Pakistan and the faithful zakat payers from complete disillusionment from the state. The first and most important amongst these moves is depoliticizing the zakat department. Presently all the officials are government appointees and whoever gets voted into power, appoints their own people. For zakat funds to be spent by biased officials in the PML or PPP constituencies depending on where which votes were cast is fundamentally repugnant to the concept itself.

It is suggested that an alternate zakat system be devised on the ideas of devolution and decentralization. This would involve creation of lists of zakat payer which would be created by the zakat payers themselves in any particular area. These lists would be an electoral college and from amongst them the zakat payers will select officials to spend the zakat on tehsil and district levels. The spending of zakat, rather then being doled out to beggars, needs to be instead utilized in the formation of industries and economic units that generate income and employment for the people.  

The government still needs to regulate the zakat collection and spending to prevent mismanagement by appointed individuals. For this authority however only a monitoring role is needed and therefore calls for the axing of almost all senior positions in the zakat department. The white elephant named the Zakat Ministry also needs to abolished in this detoxification drive. The parasitic ministry and senior positions are all utilizing government funds for functions that could just as well be performed by individuals if not better. For governmental control and the retention of guidance that popular elected governments can impart the zakat departments need to be brought under the Chief Minister. The chairman of the department is to be appointed by the chief minister to ensure government interest and guiding role. The secretary of the department would also be answerable directly to the Chief Minister.

The political interest of parties in zakat collection and implementation needs to be retained because of the zakat has ample effects on the government budget and economic policies. It increases the productivity of a state by improving the health and nourishment and also expands the physical, mental and spiritual abilities of the citizens. It influences the prices of commodities and increases investments in certain areas. Since it increases consumption, the employment rates also rise. It is also an important tool in formulating an economic policy. Its use however must be wise and democratic in nature to ensure fair collection and dispersion.

Diyyat: your route to justice

Protests against the release of Raymond Davis are just the latest in the fiasco caused by the concept of Diyyat. Essentially an ancient pre-islamic practice, they were brought to Pakistan in a box of chocolates named Islamisation that General Zia gifted to us. These were later wrapped into the shiny foil of an Ordinance by Benazir Bhutto in 1990. Forest Gump a visionary no doubt states, that with such chocolates you never know what you get and we keep swallowing the dark ones.

Here’s the skinny on Diyyat, you commit a murder and you can go completely free from any punishment be from the state or a divine entity if you can pay the price, just like what Mastercard says. Countless cases show such desi Raymonds living a life of freedom and peace thanks to the money paid. For the more curious amongst the readers some cases references are PLD 1992 Pesh 187, 1993 PCrLJ 1795, PLJ 1997 CrC 1122, 2000 PCrLJ 116 and 1997 PCrLJ 247. The more advanced Islamic nations have even decided on Diyyat rates that should apply to a particular scenario. As a rule of the thumb a woman murdered is worth half the money as that of a man. Non muslims get lesser than muslims in with the Christians getting the most, followed by the Jews and Hindu’s the least. Yemen makes an exception by giving more to the Jews than even the muslims. Iran improvises by adjusting the rates according to the month in which the murder took place. A flourishing jurisprudence is being developed in the philosophy of Diyyat the world over by scholars and in the times to come we shall all experience the wonders of the justice brought on by the assignment of a monetary value on human life based on strict calculations of gender, age, race, religion, social status, location and even time.        

A justice system based on two parties and how they conduct their affairs in a particular contract independent of any interference by any regulatory authority is a utopian anarchist dream. But that would mean also the complete removal of a state and all state machinery. A state figuratively speaking comes into being when individuals get together and sign a social contract. They decide that they will make a group where they will bestow powers upon certain members of the state and to them they will surrender their freedoms and rights. That they will pay taxes and they will follow the rules and laws set by those power bestowed members. In return, however it the duty of the state to protect them, nourish them, provide them with facilities and amenities and treat them equally. When a crime is committed it is not committed against an individual, it is committed against a state. This is because it is the laws of the state that have been broken and every individual is a component of the state. Therefore the ideals of equality come in where in equal punishment needs to be meted out to every crime that we experience.

When diyyat is followed a state not only refuses to implement its own criminal justice system but goes as far as to absolve itself of any responsibility related to the individual who died. The murdered individual was a citizen of the state and the direct responsibility of the state itself. If the individual was a bread earner of a family then it is the duty of the state to support and nourish the family rather than allow them to receive money for the blood of their relative. Diyyat gives way to a new crime, one that is not a crime at all in fact in Pakistan, the crime of economic duress. If a murderer can murder a person and pay for it, then he will no doubt use all his money and resources to force the family of the deceased into accepting that blood stained money. The concept itself was introduced in a tribal war waging society where a state system to support individuals had not developed. Today in the 21st century such laws are obsolete and downright repugnant to the basic concepts of Islam and equality. If such crimes are to be justified by economics then it won’t be long before crimes of rape, kidnapping, defamation, slavery etc will have a price set on them. If life itself can be quantified then there is no reason why its subsidiaries such as honor, dignity and freedom can not have a price.

Raymond left us in a flash after paying 20 crore rupees in cash, that as per the law were supposedly counted and recounted in half an hour (they make 40,000 notes of 5000 rupees). We now have to decide what will happen in the future.

Raymond Davis the movie

We all love watching hollywood action movies in which our american heroes bravely drift cars too fast too furious whilst shooting expendable bullets in their mission impossibles. Little did we think then how these glorified heroes are actually violating many laws and more often then not have the biggest superpower in the world to support their crazy antics. Today we have such a trigger happy fellow amongst us and for many hollywood movie buffs abroad we are the villians.

In this movie major figures in the politics of Pakistan like Shah Mahmood Qureshi lost their status in the government and caused a massive rift in the foriegn policy due to just one character.When it comes to figures like Raymond Davis little can be said because what we know is scant. Let's see what we do know in the first place about this 36 year old gunslinger. We know that he was driving through the streets of Lahore and unloaded a fully loaded Glock through the windshield on two Pakistani men riding on a motorbike. He ran from the incident and was arrested. To make matters worse a Batmobile (read american consulate SUV) sped to rescue this vigilanti and knocked to death another Pakistani man and disappeared. 

We also know that he gets quite disturbed by the azan during the fajr hours and enjoys food from a well known chinese eatery in jail. What we dont know yet however is this man's real name, perhaps even his age, his job, his diplomatic status, any possible superhuman ability and well just about everything else is shourded in a blanket of mystery. The assialants too were for some unknown reasons perhaps carrying guns, stolen mobile phones and as rumours have it even a wad of US dollars.

The settings are classic for the average action movie director but this dies make a lawyers job difficult doesn't it?

So our mystery man claims that he acted in self defense and from sniper aims, it appears that he had experience in self defense. The Pakistan Penal Code allows the plea of self defense under sections 96, 97 and 100 but ofcourse one has to prove that they had a real threat to their lives first.

Given that the evidence of threat to life is not sufficient there starts a whole charade of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1971 which applies applies to diplomats. But the problem here is that we dont know anything about Davis so does the Convention apply? The US embassy quickly granted him backdated documents makes him a member of the embassy's technical and administrative staff so that he qualifies for section 37(2) of the same Convention. The matter is now to be decided by the ministry of foriegn affairs of Pakistan which is carefully monitoring the pulse and tempratures of public and the american embassy. The tempratures abroad have risen considerably with the surprise visit from Kerry and a call from Obama.The interior minister of Pakistan with its vast resources is already fully in co-operation with the US and is willing to help out when and where needed. For some unknown reasons the Ministry of Information is also issuing statements even though the relevent ministry involved has not made a decision yet.

 So here we have a man who is possibly a member of a dark and fluid private security firm very much like the Justice League in comics. We know that such firms have been recipients of massive contracts and have stretched their operations through out the region. We know from the experiences of Iraq that they can be quite lethal and we know that International Law does not apply to private firms or their members and domestic laws will be used to deal with them. So to protect him there is a need to agree that he was infact a technical and administrative officer and therefore falls into the ambit of the Vienna Convention.

 Would there then be a legal recourse? Apart from the far fetched idea that the US could if they wanted waive the immunity under article 32 of the Convention there are three legal cards Pakistan still has left.

Firstly as per law it is for Pakistan to decide if Davis does indeed enjoy such diplomatic immunity. The incorporation of these international treaties into the pakistani legislations was done with slight amendments affording Pakistan the decision making power.

Secondly there is Article 41 of the same Convention that states that it is a duty of a diplomat to respect the laws and regulations of the recieving state. That they have a duty not to interfere with the functioning of the host state. Perhaps the time has come for Pakistan to ask "Come on Davis, tell us what you were really doing here?"

Thirdly and most importantly Pakistan is also a signatory to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963 which came two years after the above mentioned Convention and supercedes it. Article 41 of which states that "Consular officers shall not be liable to arrest or detention pending trial, except in the case of a grave crime and pursuant to a decision by the competent judicial authority".

One can presume safely that the crime committed was indeed grave and the present courts are indeed competent judicial authorities. But the 1963 convention is dependent on Davis claiming to be a Consular officer. If he claims to be a diplomat under the 1961 Convention he is in violation of the article 41 again by carrying arms specifically when the interior ministry has issued clear regulations disallowing any diplomat from carrying arms.

One can only state here that the law is not supportive of Raymond but I believe that movie fans abroad are at the edge of their seats and biting their nails as they see a couple of rambo-esque figures mount a Chinook helicopter to rescue their brother Raymond. They say the movie will be a blockbuster.

Nuclear Recommendations

The Current US foreign policy views the Pakistani Nuclear arsenal as a direct threat to their national security. An insight into this thought can be seen in the book ‘Seven Deadly Scenarios’ by Andrew Krepinevich who is the president of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assesments. The book states that the most likely and eminent deadly scenario is the collapse of Pakistan wherein radical Islamists will take over the Pakistani nuclear weapons. The second ‘deadly scenario’ mentioned in the book is that the nuclear weapons will be smuggled onto US soil and will be against its citizens. This book is clear suggestion of how seriously Pakistani nuclear weapons are taken by the worlds biggest superpower. Their pressure on the governments of Pakistan is expected to increase with time. It is likely to culminate in economic and political sanctions over time. Signing a treaty such as FMCT can prevent such damage and instead use this as an opportunity to receive development related aid.

The treaty is supported and signed by over 61 countries with notables like Australia, Canada and Germany. It has the backing of several UN general assembly resolutions and is a widely popular. This treaty has also gained prominence after President Obama’s speech in Prague over cutting nuclear weapons. Signing this at this moment will illuminate Pakistan as a responsible participant of the international community. Signing the treaty can be used to leverage more aid and co-operation from the international community for development of civilian nuclear power plants with in the country.

It is estimated that Pakistan has almost as many nuclear weapons as India if not more. The stock pile can be estimated to be approx 100 nuclear weapons and slightly more than Indian stockpiles. These stocks are enough to last several war possibilities with India and other states therefore further production is not required. Increasing stocks result in increased security threats from terrorist elements. India also has more than necessary number of nuclear warheads to wage a war against Pakistan. An increase in their nuclear stockpile will not cause any further destruction than is already possible. Both countries posses enough nuclear weapons to completely wipe out the living population from the sub-continent. The treaty should be signed and Pakistan should try to secure a missile defense system for itself in return.

Pakistan has previously been importing uranium for its nuclear weapons. Mining was started in Baghalchur for uranium where 10 metric tons of ‘yellow cake’ uranium was extracted and mining was closed down in 1998. Tumman Leghari mines were opened in Southern Punjab but not much uranium was extracted. Further exploration is being conducted in Dera Ghazi Khan to look for uranium reserves. Pakistan has no plutonium mines and uranium is the only element being enriched for nuclear power and weapons. The Khushab reactor and the KANUPP reactor both require 10 and 17 metric tons of uranium respectively anually for continued production of weapon grade uranium. It is therefore clear that the country has no uranium reserves to continue the production of nuclear weapons. In this light signing a cut-off treaty will make little practical difference.

The plutonium reactors gifted to Pakistan from China will start producing nuclear grade plutonium after several decades and will involve heavy economic burdens. The country currently needs to spend its budget on development and growth as apposed to research on nuclear weapons. Becoming a signatory to this treaty will re-enforce the Pakistani image of a peaceful nation committed to its development and growth.

In 1998 Pakistan willingly cut back on its nuclear production. It is now a member of CTBT. The CTBT already places more restrictions than the FMCT. Pakistan is under immense international pressure to sign the FMCT and the same can be signed by negotiating deals for buying nuclear material for civilian use from the international community.

What matters in modern warfare is not only the nuclear warhead but also the carrying vehicles. Pakistan has produced missiles considerably better than their Indian counterpart but the use of jets and ships is lacking. Pakistan should use this treaty to negotiate deals for its air force and navy and secure China’s assistance in improving its missile technology.  

Whats up with foreign degrees?

Whilst doing the Bar at Law from Lincoln’s Inn it always struck me and other fellow Pakistanis as peculiar to see that the Pakistani’s enrolled in the course were above 30 in number and there was only one Indian student. I rationalized this fact by assuming that Pakistan as yet does not offer any degree equal to the Bar at Law and perhaps India has developed such courses indigenously. However this assumption couldn’t hold true for long when a similar pattern was noticed in the undergraduate degrees in law. Pakistan does indeed offer undergraduate law degrees and I daresay some are extremely competitive.

We got the answer to the question when the process of looking for jobs in Pakistan started. Every job opening circled red on a newspaper stated requirements to the effect of ‘foreign degrees will be preferred’. This reprehensible trend can be found even in job openings of the public sector and is a classic example of the continuing colonial impact on our society. Why if two students having studied the same degree would a foreign qualified be given preference? The Pakistani student who would have greater knowledge and experience of local language, society and culture is instead penalized publicly.

It is the function of law to afford equal protection to the citizens of a country. The constitution of Pakistan under Article 25 guarantees equality to all its citizens and entitles all its citizens equal protection before the law. It was decided in the case of Sherwani vs Pakistan by the Supreme Court under this article, that reasonable classifications of people may be made but only when there is a reasonable basis and a reasonable distinction. It was further added that such classification must be supported by the objective that can be achieved by enacting such classifications.

All policies made in Pakistan must conform to the basic principles enshrined in the constitution under the Principles of Policy. Article 37(f) of the Principles of Policy affirms that it is the duty of the state “to enable people of different areas through education, training…..to participate fully in all forms of national activity including employment in the service of Pakistan”. When this article is read with Article 25 it becomes obvious that the state allowing preference of foreign graduates is not only unreasonable but even unconstitutional and a flagrant violation of the law which is promoting social injustice. If anything the law states that the Pakistani qualified must be given preference.

We have many examples of laws within the country that promote the resources of the country. For instance the Public Procurement Rules state that where ever available the items in a tender should be brought from within Pakistan. Similarly in the much hyped Mcdonald’s case in the capital it was decided by the courts that during the bidding of the land in F-9 park foreign food chains were given preference and local companies were excluded which was held to be illegal. Such laws and decisions reflect the mindset of the judiciary and the executive.

The Indian constitution guarantees its citizens equality and equal protection before the law under articles 14, 15 and 16 of their constitution. It is pertinent to mention that even though the Indian constitution unlike the Pakistani constitution omits to give its citizens the right to be dealt according to the law, the efficacy of the Indian laws is far more than the Pakistani laws and the courts have given bold judgments to enable greater social justice.

By allowing such unreasonable classifications Pakistan has suffered two indirect losses apart from the direct effect of injustice within society. The first loss has been the brain drain as many of our bright minds leave the country in the quest of ‘foreign qualifications’ and many end up staying abroad after getting better job offers. The second and more subtle loss has been to the education sector of Pakistan. Since those who can afford or otherwise gain access to foreign qualifications leave the country the demand for quality education, the supply of quality educators and pressure on the government to cater to the educational needs of the people is reduced. Presently the education budget is fringing upon barely 2% of the GDP. UK, a favorite for Pakistanis to acquire a ‘foreign qualification’ slashed its education budget by 40% due to the recent recession and yet its education budget is more than 11% of the GDP. By forcing our students to go abroad we are losing not only on our foreign exchange but also on our will to improve our socio-economic conditions.      

The Section 10 of the Higher Education Commission Ordinance 2002 envisages that the government is to formulate policies, guiding principles and priorities for higher education institutions for promoting the socio-economic development of the country.

It is imperative for the government to start giving preference to its Pakistani qualified students to reverse this vicious cycle and to free ourselves from the shackles of mental enslavement of nations abroad. It is not only patriotic but also national duty to promote Pakistani institutions and stand up for national rights. The law is in place but effectiveness is dependent on the mutual will of the people and their determination to implement it.