Generally throughout the entire history of Pakistan, the defence budget has been continuously increasing. Particularly in the last decade the budget allocated to defence expenditures has witnessed enormous growth, from $ 2.5 billion in 1999 to around $ 5 billion in 2011. The reason cited by defence experts is the various external and internal threats, especially evolving after 9/11 and the initiation of the war on terror. The finance for this growing expenditure is supported through the earnings of the citizens of Pakistan. Let me make it clear to everyone that here I am not making a case against the budget allocated to the security of the country, as security is the foremost issue for Pakistan nowadays. My concern is that if the people of Pakistan are contributing for the defence budget and are willing to sacrifice the financial requirements of other sectors for safeguarding the country, then they also have the right to know what policies are being employed by the security apparatus for this purpose. Pakistan has been outsourcing its defence activities to civilians or non-military groups since the outset. Starting from the war in Kashmir immediately after independence, during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the Kashmir movement and finally in the current war on terror where tribal lashkars (militias) are being formed to battle militancy. Numerous platforms have been invented in various eras according to requirements, whether it is the Pak-Afghan Council, Muttahida Jihad Council or the latest talk of the town, the Pakistan Defence Council (PDC). This last mentioned amalgamation of right-wing mainstream political parties and banned militant outfits has received colossal limelight in the aftermath of the NATO attack. The recent rally held in Lahore on December 18 by the PDC was attended by thousands and was under the very symbol synonymous with the sovereignty of the country. The rally was not only attended by mainstream political figures but also the leaders of banned terrorist organisations. Ijazul Haq, Sheikh Rashid Ahmed, General Hamid Gul and Syed Munawar Hasan shared the stage with Hafiz Saeed, head of Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD). The reason for the sudden rise of these organisations is very simple. As I mentioned in my previous article, these militant outfits are pouncing on the opportunity to exploit the sentiments of the already enraged citizens for their own vested agenda to regain their foothold. A successful rally staged at Minar-e-Pakistan by any party has always been termed as a significant event, where the ripples are felt all over the country. This event has created the same effect and perhaps signals a fight back by the militant organisations through a show of force. What has been most disturbing for me is that all this took place under the very nose of the authorities. Although reportedly the organisers ignored the instructions of the administration in every manner, from posting of banners regarding the event to the inclusion of banned outfits, still there was no action taken against them. What message can be interpreted from all of this? Why was the event permitted in the first place? If 500 seminaries termed to be illegal by Interior Minister Rehman Malik are to be shut down by January, due to their association with militant outfits, then why has any action not been taken against the elements involved in this event? Not only was the event highlighted by the media, but also the fiery rhetoric of Hafiz Saeed given special coverage. Is it not so that the media by law is barred from the coverage of banned outfits and terrorist organisations? The very fact that these banned organisations are still working so openly in our society, without any fear or even a slight concern for the rule of law and state authority, makes evident the will of the authorities to tackle extremism. One thing is certain that we are again working towards outsourcing of our defence to yet another consortium known as the PDC. Outsourcing or privatisation of defence is not a phenomenon only restricted to Pakistan. Perhaps the pioneer in this regard is the US, where private military contractors and private defence contractors are present in strong numbers and are not only operating within the US but worldwide. These military contractors are active in conflict zones, providing assistance to the US military. Companies such as Xe Services (Blackwater), Vinnell Corporation and several others are all participating in operations, security and training assignments worldwide. Worldwide these private militaries are also notoriously known as mercenaries and these mercenaries have also been linked to human rights violations; one reason being they are not under the direct authority of any government. In Pakistan we are repeating the same mistake that we made during the Afghan war during the 80s and 90s. The private armies created then from a strategic perspective came back to haunt us. The difference between the case of the US and Pakistan is that in the US at least the people know what policy is being implemented through their money, while in Pakistan the people are ignorant of how much money is being diverted to these groups and why. More finances are acquired by them through private donations, again by misleading the people. Is our military, 500,000-strong, not competent enough that we have to turn towards these notorious groups for assistance? The simple and obvious answer is no. Not only the conventional forces but the added nuclear capability is more than enough to deter any threat facing Pakistan. Then who are the real defenders of Pakistan? These mercenaries fuelled by misguided religious zeal, financial gains and other vested interests or those who have laid down their lives at Salala, at Mehran Base and in operations against the terrorists in the tribal areas? How could the militant outfits, which have been involved in terrorist activities and responsible for the deaths of innocent people, become the defenders of Pakistan? At least we should decide whether the security and defence of Pakistan is to be delegated to private armies or not. If the decision making echelons want to go down this lane, then they will have to be honest with the people and become answerable to them. The writer is a development consultant. She can be reached at coordinator@individualland.com