Read on Twitter
1. Some commentators, such as Dr. Farrukh Saleem, continue to claim that Pakistan's military expenditure is not that high when compared to countries like, for example, the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia. The argument can be found here: https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/676291-
2. There are a couple of problems with the approach Dr. Saleem takes. In a nutshell, the argument understates the actual amount spent on the military, does not compare Pakistan with 'similar' countries, and does not consider where Pakistan's money may be better spent.
3. Many defending the level of Pakistan's military expenditure start with two claims. First, levels of spending are not 'that' high at 2.86% of GDP and second, levels of spending have actually been decreasing over the past two years. Prima facie, both claims have merit.
4. However, dig a little deeper and a more complicated picture emerges. For example, the claim that defence spending is 2.86% of GDP is based on the 'official' defence budget. What this figure does not include is pensions, supplementary grants, and nuclear weapons.
5. When you add those on, defence spending goes up considerably. For example, in 2019-2020, the government 'budgeted' Rs. 1153 billion for defence - 2.76% of GDP. However, military pensions were an additional Rs. 327 billion and there was a supplementary grant of Rs. 11.7 billion
6. Put together, you get an 'actual' expenditure of Rs. 1491.7 billion, which was about 3.5% GDP in 2019-2020. Note that this figure still does not include other expenditures that may be hidden - such as money spent on the nuclear programme.
7. Similarly, Dr. Saleem and others often point out that levels of spending have been falling and do not represent the 'biggest' portion of the budget. Again, this requires some context. In the first nine months of 2019-2020, the FBR collected Rs. 2.72 trillion in revenue.
8. In that same time period, debt servicing required Rs. 1.9 trillion! The defence budget for that year was, as shown above, Rs. 1.49 trillion! In 2019-2020, Pakistan's fiscal deficit was ultimately around 7.5% of GDP, or Rs. 3.127 trillion!
9. What this means in practice is that very little revenue is left for expenditure on everything else. The Pakistan government runs huge deficits every year which are financed by even more debt. Yet, when austerity measures are introduced to cut costs, defence remains untouched.
10. As such, cuts in expenditure tend to fall in other areas, such as social welfare, public infrastructure, and so on. This brings up another important point; when you combine provincial and national expenditures on health and education, they tend to approach almost 4% of GDP.
11. For some, this is evidence that defence is not prioritized over welfare. Yet, one could make the argument that Pakistan should be spending EVEN MORE on welfare than it currently does. Indeed, the statistics support this claim; Pakistan lags behind on social development.
12. Let's look at these numbers in comparative perspective. Pakistan is classified as a 'lower middle income' country, with a GNI per capita between $1026 and $3995. India and Bangladesh also fall within this category.
13. My comparison also includes Ethiopia and Iran. Ethiopia is poorer than Pakistan and Iran is richer, but both might be interesting as points of comparison because they both have historically had to deal with threats to their security (through war, sanctions, and so on).
14. Here is how much these countries - Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Iran, and Ethiopia - spend on their militaries as a percentage of GDP. I have also included stats for lower middle incomes countries as a whole.
15. As can be seen, Pakistan spends more than all of these countries as a %age of GDP. More importantly, while Pakistan's levels of spending have declined, the reduction is relative - compared to other countries, Pakistan's spending has remained consistently well above average.
16. Another way of looking at this might be to compare per capita military expenditure. Here is what the data shows.
17. Again, except for Iran, Pakistan spends more per capita on defence than the other countries in this comparison. India is close, but this is why it's important to remember that both Iran and India are also richer than Pakistan with much larger economies.
18. Here we can see a comparison of GDP per capita for these countries and of their economic growth rates. India has now eclipsed Pakistan and is likely to widen the gap in the years to come. Iran has been richer than Pakistan for quite some time.
19. We gain even more context from this comparison of the rate at which GDP per capita has been growing for these countries. As is clearly evident, Bangladesh, India, and Ethiopia are all experiencing faster growth than Pakistan.
20. Therefore, even though India, for example, may spend almost as much per capita on the military as Pakistan, it has a larger and faster growing economy, meaning that this level of expenditure will arguably be more sustainable for India than it is for Pakistan.
21. What about other national priorities? Many may argue that Pakistan's unique security needs necessitate high military spending. We can return to this point, but it is important to first see how Pakistan lags behind other countries on different social indicators.
22. Here, we can see a comparison of literacy rates. Not only does Pakistan lag behind countries with similar levels of economic development, it's rate of increase is also lower. Just compare the situation with Bangladesh.
23. How about under-5 child mortality? This is a useful indicator because it is one area where the entire world has made progress over the past few decades. Yet Pakistan ranks near the bottom and has even been overtaken by Ethiopia, which is still much poorer than Pakistan.
24. The debate here is not about why Pakistan is poor, or why it is not developing at the same rate as other countries. It is obvious that Pakistan's politics and institutions require radical reforms for the country to prosper. For example, simply providing more money to an...
25. Inadequate healthcare system will be of limited value if reforms are not introduced to make better use of the resources that are available. There are also important questions that need to be addressed about waste, leadership, accountability, and so on.
26. Yet, keeping all that in mind, is there still a case to be made for reducing the defence budget to fund greater investments in healthcare, education, and other areas? After all, increasing spending on these areas does not preclude efforts at reform.
27. Here, many often invoke the idea of 'threat perception' - that Pakistan's security needs are unique and that the dangers of military aggression from India and/or other hostile actors means that more resources need to be diverted towards defence.
28. It is certainly the case - especially with an antagonistic BJP in power in India - that Pakistan faces external threats. However, there are a few important caveats to bear in mind. First, Pakistan is not unique in terms of its security needs.
29. Iran, Ethiopia, and South Korea are three countries that face serious security challenges and which have, nonetheless, been able to balance military needs with those of social development. Yes, there economies may be larger (Iran and South Korea) but then so are those of...
30. The USA, Saudi Arabia, and Israel - countries whose military expenditures are used to justify Pakistan's by analysts like Dr. Farrukh Saleem. Second, pinning blame on hostile foreign actors often prevents an honest and critical appraisal of what Pakistan could do to...
31. Improve its security environment. Yes, the country had to fight militancy on its own soil, but this was at least partly due to the continuation of a misguided policy that led to militants being nurtured domestically as proxies to be deployed to secure broader strategic aims.
32. Similarly, emphasizing the 'uniqueness' of Pakistan's security shuts down any and all debate of how defence spending itself could be better utilized. If there is waste in other areas of government spending, could that not also be the case with the defence budget?
33. Third, are investments in social development also not a crucial component of security? Assuming Pakistan's defence needs are indeed paramount, how can Pakistan hope to maintain strategic parity with India if its lacks the requisite economic strength needed to do so?
34. Without investing in its people, Pakistan will not be able to secure its long-term prosperity. While conflict is often seen in terms of military assets and strategy, the reality is that without a longer-term vision for economic growth - one that emphasizes...
35. Social development and the equitable dsitribution of wealth, Pakistan will lose its wars without a single shot being fired. No number of fancy jets and bombs can save Pakistan if it is unable to deal with the poverty, disease, and deprivation that afflict its citizens.
36. People who invoke 'threat perception' forget that it is ultimately a subjective concept, one based not only on 'hard' military facts but also ideology and politics. How 'threats' are defined and weighed is subject to debate and the fact is that Pakistan needs a more...
37. Transparent and participatory debate about how its resources are allocated and how 'national security' is defined. Is there too much defence spending? Can defence spending be rationalized to be more efficient, doing more for less? Can cuts be made?
38. Should more investments be made in health and education? These are questions that should be settled by democratic debate, not the executive fiat exercised by a largely unquestioned military establishment.
