Good wishes to everyone.
I do live in Dhaka, Bangladesh.
I would like to know what should be the paradigm for 'Civil Military Relationship'.
Do you think a 'Democratic Control' of Defence and Intelligence Institutions necessary? If yes, how can that be achieved especially in developing countries!
I hope your expert opinion will help me [and others who are interested in this subject] in this regard.
Have a safe and happy time.
Hello Rakeeb;
Let me give you a bit of historical and theoretical input on your question. I'll try to make it as simple as possible.
Historical: The modern state system was established by Napoleon after the French Revolution. Even if some people disagree on Napoleon being the founder of modern state system we still have to give him a credit for bringing it into practice. The idea or the concept of modern state system is however older then Napoleon's era and its birth took place in Florance rather than France. The concept was introduced by Nicolai Machiavelli (though I believe Plato is very much at the basis of his work). It was Machiavelli's theories that inspired Napoleon. Anyways; Napoleon not only revolutionized the state system but also the military system. i.e. Abolished mercenaries and introduced standing army (as advised by Machiavelli).
Theoretical: The theoretical framework, which may answer your question, was done by many strategists and historians during and after Napoleonic Wars but only few are considered as master piece and the top two strategists on this are Jomini and Clausewitz. Karl Von Clausewitz however has payed more attention to Napoleonic "grand strategy." To cut the story short Clausewitz, in his book "On War" (called Bible of War), recognized three important elements in state system which play important role in Wars and he termed them as "trinity"
Trinity include:
i. The population (& its will)
ii. The political leadership
iii. The operational forces (armed forces)
to cut the story and chase further ... Clausewitz states that the Operational Forces must not disobey or do away (takeover/conduct a military coup/over through) the political leadership.
So theoretical answer to your question of whether 'Democratic Control' of Defence and Intelligence Institutions is necessary is "
yes."
From what I understand from Clausewitz's logic was that military forces are not designed for political role and their involvement in it divert them away from their aims and objectives or/& expand their role (dual role) which is not suitable especially during war times (i.e. they would be blamed both on military and political level for the losses). The political leadership is usually backed by popular will and the same will has the right to remove it. If the military performs this job then it will effect the civil-military relations in the long run (this is almost true in all the cases where military has taken over the government).
Important thing to note here is that Clausewitz does not recognize Political Leadership as Democratic Government and he discourages military rule (that takes out dictatorship). Hence the political leadership is the one which is accepted by the people (other then military); it could be democratic, Monarchy etc ...
How can Democratic control of Intelligence Agencies and military be achieved in developing countries? Several developing countries have control over the both but behind the curtain reality is that military and int. agencies do have unspoken black mailing capability. In some cases, where a country has been democratic since its inception and has had a control over Int. Agencies and military, the military does away with
some of the political leadership's statements and policies. Sometimes they do it publicly. Anyways to answer your question ... it all depends on the political leadership. The political leadership is not just the ruling government but also the opposition. The clash between the ruling and the opposition, the ruling and the ruled, the incapability of the ruling and deliberate barriers created by opposition (even if the ruling's policies are in favor of the state) create an anarchic situation in the state. And as one of my teachers once put it "
where there is an anarchy [or political anarchy] there would/will be a military coup." Therefore, the political leadership in developing countries need to pay more attention to state building then on power struggle. The control of military and intelligence agencies is part of state building. Successful state building will lead to successful control over these institutions.
