The defence secretary announced the action plan, which was drafted some months ago by a cabinet committee led by the defence minister, in a meeting of the State Action Committee. They say that charity begins at home. To start with, let us have some transparency in the formation of this committee itself. Who ordered the formation of this committee? Is this committee capable enough to carry out tasks given to it? Did they have competent advisors? Are they conversant with global, regional and national strategies? We seem to be in a hurry to put the cart in front of the buggy.
The NA is under the defence ministry, under a civilian defence minister, which is totally controlled by the civilians. So, when they say that the army has to be brought under civilian control, what do they mean? Do they mean that they are unable to control the army? By controlling, do they mean to control the recruitment, training, promotion, posting, UN assignment, etc? We can see the results of government control in institutions like Nepal Airlines Corporation, Nepal Oil Corporation, National Trading Limited, etc. Do they mean to carve out such a future for NA?
DARFUR FIASCO
In the meantime, the government does not talk about civilian control of Nepal Police, Armed Police Force or National Investigation Department. Look at the Sudan Armored Personnel Carrier (APC) fiasco of Nepal Police. And they still do not mention about putting the defaulters in the dock. They are eagerly looking forward to ordering new APCs and equipment for the hapless policemen suffering in Sudan. The investigation team has already spent millions of rupees travelling to and from Sudan. I am sure civilian control does not mean only spending government’s money.
NA has been participating in the UN peace support missions since 1958 and has vast experience of qualifying close scrutiny of UN contingent-owned equipment inspections. Thus, how can civilian control be better than the present scenario?
The army must not be made loyal to a post, an individual or a party. Like in India, the army must be made loyal to the constitution and asked to protect it at all times. NA has to be reorganized but not at the whims and fancies of an individual or a party. Correct procedures need to be followed and wide discussions need to be carried out before that.
NA contingents are serving in Sudan and neighboring Chad too. It is thus surprising that the Nepal government neither consulted nor sought advice from NA regarding procurement and supply of military hardware to the UN mission areas. That would have of course saved the country a lot of international embarrassment. In the worst case scenario, NA could have provided some of its reserve APCs to Nepal Police for patrolling purposes. Clearly, there is lack of coordination amongst various government agencies due to incompetence oozing out of so-called civilian control.
PROTECTION OF DEMOCRACY
In Crimson Tide, a popular Hollywood thriller, a submarine of the United States Navy is without any communications with its higher headquarters. The occupants believe that the war has already started with the Soviet Union and they want to use their nuclear weapons as per their standing orders. Gene Hackman, the submarine’s captain, starts the procedure to fire the weapon. Denzel Washington, his executive officer and second in command, refuses to follow the procedure and says, “Majority of officers do not agree with you. It’s a majority decision so you better stand down.” Captain replies, “Gentlemen, We are here to protect democracy not to practice it. I am the captain and you better obey my orders.”
The NA being the national instrument of power has repeatedly safeguarded democracy and no further proof is required of its credentials. It was NA which prevented the complete takeover of the country by the Maoists and thus protected democracy that we are enjoying now. Even in the military of the most democratic country in the world, the superior’s orders are to be obeyed, otherwise there will be total chaos. You don’t run the army to please everyone and win votes for elections. You run the army to achieve given goals no matter what the consequences.
The report states that the task of fixing the size of NA, organizational restructuring and review of mandate and other issues will be completed in three years. Why three years? Why not more or less?
First of all, national interests have to be identified. And this is not the responsibility of the uniformed military only. And just because the army is under the defence ministry, it does not mean that only it should be involved in determining the shape, size and mandate of the army. Ministries like foreign, finance, home, education, forest, communications etc should be equally involved in formulating the shape, size and mandate of the national army.
Once the interests are identified, then threats to those interests are identified and steps formulated to neutralize those threats. Some threats are neutralized by posturing, some diplomatically and in some cases, force might have to be applied or at least the readiness to use force should be displayed. And to analyze the threat, intelligence has to be of a very high standard. All these things are necessary to arrive at the right size of the army.
The size of the army should be sufficient to carry out the mandate given to it. All the necessary tools must be given to it so that it can carry out the given tasks. Army is not a zoo where one goes to see all kinds of birds and animals. It is not necessary that the army should have representation from each and every ethnic society of the country. It should be a volunteer army, which is trained well and led well, and provided with the right equipment and tools to fulfil its given tasks. The army must never be used as a vote bank or a provider of employment. It is a national instrument of power that has to be effectively used in the time of need.
CIVILIAN CONTROL
The army must always be under civilian control in a democracy. NA is a volunteer professional army and will always obey orders and follow the chain of command. The army trains its soldiers well and prepares them for every foreseeable task and every level of command. All the officers of higher rank than lieutenant colonel have got good international exposure and have undergone training in democratic countries as well. They fully understand the meaning of democracy. Therefore, the civilians who are supposed to command them must be equally competent, if not better.
The army follows chain of command strictly and the civilian control must not disturb that. Promotions and postings depend upon the performance of an individual and he or she has to be loyal to his or her superior. The annual confidential report (ACR) of an officer dictates the future of that officer. Thus, at present, the officer concentrates on his job instead of running around secretaries, ministers or political parties and works hard to improve his ACR. What is the guaranty that civilian control will not change all that?
LOYALTY
The army has to be under civilian control in a democracy. NA has been under civilian control for a few years now. Civilian control should not mean abuse of authority by the civilians. They must not interfere too much with the normal regular routine work of the army. Procedures have to be followed by every one. Of course, the ministry of defence, the prime minister’s office, the president’s office has to be reorganized and military experts and advisors got to be posted there too.
Transparency is required at all levels and offices. The civilians and the political leaders have to be accountable too. Rules and regulations have to be appropriately amended. Human rights training is already in place. But there is no need for having cells at each and every level. Already, the tooth to tail ratio of the army is in favour of the tail. A separate study has to be carried out to increase the bayonet strength of the army. Accountants, cooks, waiters, etc can comprise of civilian professionals in order to increase the actual combat capability of NA.
Steps must be taken to prevent the misuse of the army. The army must not be made loyal to a post, an individual or a party. Like in India, the army must be made loyal to the constitution and asked to protect it at all times. NA has to be reorganized but not at the whims and fancies of an individual or a party. Correct procedures need to be followed and wide discussions need to be carried out among experts, politicians, intellectuals, civil society members, bureaucrats, diplomats and even media professionals. The consensus arrived at will make everyone responsible toward it!