|
A Talk Programme on "Civil Military Relations in Modernising Democracy"
A half-day talk programme on "Civil Military Relations in
Modernising Democracy" was organized by the Institute
of Foreign Aff airs (IFA), in association with Friedrich Ebert
Stiftung (FES-Nepal), at the Hotel De l' Annapurna, Durbar
Marg on July 17, 2007.
The programme was organised under the chairmanship
of Prof. Dr. Gopal Prasad Pokhrel, Executive Director
of IFA. Mr. Gyan Chandra Acharya, Secretary at the
Ministry of Foreign Aff airs (MoFA), graced the ceremony
as the Chief Guest, while Guests of Honour were Prof. Dr.
Thomas Meyer, Chairman, Political Science Department,
Dortmund University, Germany, Mr. Norbert Meyer,
Deputy Chief of Mission, Embassy of Federal Republic
of Germany and Dr. Daniel Richard, chief of the Division
for International Cooperation and Department for
Development Policy Asia and Pacific.
Addressing the programme, Mr. Acharya said that Meyer's
experiences and ideas as a theorist and practitioner
would help a lot in strengthening civil-military relations in
modernising democracy in Nepal. He further said that Prof.
Meyer had been looking at the development activities of
not only Nepal but of the entire South Asia as well. Recalling
the success of the Jana Aandolan II in Nepal, Mr. Acharya
said that state institutions were being restructured and the
government of Nepal was trying to make the institutions
in tune with the requirement of the day. In terms of
military transformation, the Foreign Secretary said that the
Government of Nepal had started to increase the civilian
control on military. At the same time, he suggested that all
the concerned sectors of Nepal should execute the task of
military transformation. Similarly, he was also of the opinion
that it would be useful for Nepal to learn from various other
countries of the world, who have gained a lot of experiences
in military transformation.
Presenting his keynote address on "Military and
Democracy", Prof. Dr. Thomas Meyer, Chairman of
the Department of Political Science at the University
of Dortmund, Germany, expressed the view that a
professional military with professional form of leadership
under the rule of political primacy would best protect a
democracy.
Prof. Dr. Meyer summed up his presentation in 11 diff erent
points, which are as follows:
- Democracy is not a luxury good for affl uent society
but a practical necessity for developing countries.
- Democracy is not a particular feature of the culture of
the west but a universal method for the integration of
modern or modernising societies and the legitimacy
of political rule.
- Every state needs to have some form of protection from
an outside threat by means of military force. Military
force to fulfi ll this duty must be strong, eff ective, ready,
unifi ed and disciplined. It would be a contradiction
in itself. The democratic state that seeks protection
against outside aggressors through military force
would not be provided for suffi cient political control of this most powerful
institution itself. Democracy, then would, as history shows, be vulnerable
exactly by the same force it created for its protection.
- Democracy requires the political primacy over the military in all basic respects.
The particular pattern of such primacy may diff er, however, from country to
country under the infl uence of history, culture and society.
- Every state is a diff erent case because of its particular history, traditional role
of the military, the record of military institutions and the individual persons
in uniform. There is no unifi ed model of democratic control, but democratic
control as such is a necessity everywhere.
- Political primacy includes all measures that ensure the fi nal control of the
government and the parliament of all relevant military issues.
- In order to prevent, militarism as undue domination of societal structures,
procedures and civil habits by the military culture, it is advisable to
institutionalize additional forms of civil control.
- Some outstanding features of Germany experience with modern military
leadership:
- A new professionalism as a combination of military discipline, modern
values of cooperation and technological necessities.
- Intrinsic motivations of the soldiers by demonstrating that they serve
legitimate goals instead of merely authoritarian culture (external
leadership). This is seen as a guarantee that all soldiers are ready to give
their best.
- Consensus through education and dissuasion about the values and the
objectives to fi ght for and the enemies and values to fi ght against.
- Avoidance of contradictions between the values of broader society and
the values respected in the military.
- Modern leadership as obligation for each individual offi cers.
- Modern leadership is seen as an intrinsic orientation in all military
decisions at all levels.
- Respect of the human rights of each soldier.
- Professionalism is a key to the full compatibility between the military and
democracy in two dimensions—professionalism of the military personnel and
professionalism of those political offi cials who are in charge of the surveillance
of the military.
- A democracy in which the military in one way or another is except from
democratic rule is a defective democracy that neither properly works nor
possesses the full legitimacy as the necessary basis for stability.
- A democracy that remains defective over time will increasingly run into three
problems. The problems include:
- Domestically: destabilizing democracy due to its lack of legitimacy in the
eyes of the society.
- Ineffi ciently: because of increasing cost of repression and thus hampering
motivation for cooperation in the society.
- Internationally: lack of reputation, trust and credibility of the country.
Delivering his speech, Mr. Daniel Richard, chief of the Division for International
Cooperation and Department for Development Policy Asia and Pacifi c,
underlined what FES could do in practice in its work in Nepal. In the context of the
importance of civic education among the military, Mr. Daniel said that FES-Nepal
had already started such programmes not only among the people of Nepal but
specifi cally among the military as well. He assured that the FES Headquarters would
extend its every support in establishing permanent peace in Nepal.
Speaking at the programme, Mr. Norbert Meyer, Deputy Chief of Mission,
Embassy of Federal Republic of Germany, opined that Nepal was at a cross-road
via destiny in establishing peace in the country.
Highlighting the success of the ongoing peace process in Nepal, he said that
discussions of such type were very important to guarantee permanent peace and
the way to democracy.
He also pledged that Germany had been helping and would be helping in the days
ahead in establishing permanent peace in Nepal.
Floor Discussion
Following the scholastic presentation made by Prof. Dr.
Meyer, various scholars and participants raised their queries
on his paper.
Prof. Dr. Mohamad Habibullah asked why a majority of the
countries in South Asia had military rule. Referring to the loss
of democracy for three times in Nepal due to immaturity
of political leadership, he asked how the German scholar
perceive future democracy in the country.
Dr. Som Prasad Pudasaini asked how would the behaviour
and attitude of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)
combatants and the Nepal Army be changed so that they
could be disciplined.
Prof. Dr. Ram Kumar Dahal asked the author to related the
point number 10 of the paper, (which reads: A democracy
in which the military in one way or another is except from
democratic rule is a defective democracy that neither
properly works nor possesses the full legitimacy as the
necessary basis for stability) in the context of Nepal?
Prof. Sadmukh Bahadur Thapa asked the paper presenter
about the possibility of integrating the Maoist combatants
into the national army in Nepal.
Mr. Shambhu Rana inquired about the best practices of
using eff ective tools and techniques in modernising army.
A retired army general asked him how civil-military
relations could help in modernising democracy when no
proper recognition and trust was given to the Nepal Army.
Mr. Bimal Pandey wanted to know how civil-military
relationship could help in modernising democracy
when developing countries were lacking merit-based
professionalism.
Dr. Chuda Bahadur Shrestha asked how could civilmilitary
relationship and development of professionalism
be correlated when there was no room for military doctrine
in Nepal.
Chauyen Lai Shrestha urged the German scholar to shed
light on the provision of the National Security Council in
Germany. He also asked Prof. Meyer how the Nepal Army
would play an important role for the observation of the CA
elections, as they have been limited to their barracks.
Dr. Indrajit Rai raised the following questions: a. The
burning topic is the integration of the Maoist Army into
the Nepal Army. The Maoists blamed the Nepal Army being
fully intoxicated with the old monarchical system and
needed them to be democratized. On the other hand, the
Nepal Army blamed the Maoists for being intoxicated with
politics. Which version do you accept?
b. The distance between the civil and military (Singh
Durbar and the Nepal Army Headquarters) is very wide. The
Members of Parliament are not aware of the military ethics
and the Nepal Army does not know the value of politicians.
In this situation, how can the process of integration of the
PLA (People's Liberation Army of Maoists) into the Nepal
Army be possible?
Prof. Dr. Shreeram Upadhyaya asked the author whether
the demilitarisation of state was possible in Nepal.
Dr. Karna Bahadur Thapa, former army offi cer: It is to
accept that present Nepal is the by-product of the Nepal
Army. There was no provision of security issue in SAARC
(South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation). What
has obstructed our political leaders to draft a national
security policy?
Prof. Dr. Meyer's response: Many of the speakers tried
to lure me into a dangerous trap. This is because if I really
give an advice what to do in Nepal, it would be a sign of
utmost ignorance and arrogance on my part. The only thing
that we can do is exchange experiences and ideas. In my
observation, fi rst, this very event here sitting together with
the people from the military, academia, civil society, political
functionaries and journalists in itself is an act of political
culture. This could infl uence the civil-military relationship.
Had there been discussions of this type for four/fi ve times a
year, they would have been helpful in building up trust and
understanding among the people regarding civil-military
relationship.
The idea of constitution and development of this country
should be shared by all. If you have certain basic ideas of
social democracy in the sense that you introduce and fully
guarantee civil rights, and political basic rights. If people
have access to healthcare and education, this could be a
consensus, which also could be in some elements written in
the constitution. Those forces and actors in the society, who
sign this consensus would welcome it. But those who do not
sign it cannot be legitimate actors in this new democratized
society. When I was asked whether Nepal was a democracy,
you can analyse the country comparatively in terms of political science in
the concept of democracy.
Nepal is a part to be an electoral democracy, which can still be a defective
democracy unless some fundamental components are guaranteed
because elections are not enough to make democracy. Democracy requires
more than elections, responsive government, rule of law and inclusion of
all relevant interests into the political process. In this respect, Nepal is till
now a defective democracy; it is on the way to become a consolidated
democracy. It needs to become a better and eff ective democracy. This is
desire and need of the people. When you tell the village people about the
discussion of the constitution, most of them will ask what comes after the
constitution. They may also ask what the political leaders do in order to
cater their needs. In order to deliver our basic needs, democracy needs to
be instutionalised in such a manner that it could deliver the needs of the
people eff ectively.
While integrating the two armies (PLA and the Nepal Army), the concept
must be clear fi rst. The concept needs to be signed seriously by the
concerned parties. The concept needs to speak about democracy,
democratic value, a culture that is to be introduced in the integrated army
and provision of check and balance. This is not the question of west. It is
the business of understanding. We had times when there were big tensions
between the military and civilian powers in Germany. And then, we had
also time where there was no tension between the military and civilian
powers. When people say that it was only possible in the west, it is just an
excuse and a way to avoid responsibility.
Next, a commission in parliament is necessary in which civilian experts and
the parliamentarian parties should work together and obey, control and
check while initiating a dialogue with military. Of course, military deserves
recognition and respect. To some degree, they stick to this rule because
they off er a very essential base to the country.
Delivering his vote of thanks, Prof. Gopal Pokharel, Executive Director
of IFA, said that it was a great privilege and a rare occasion for IFA to have
Prof. Dr. Thomas Meyer, a great friend of Nepal and scholar and expert of
international repute, at the talk programme.
Prof. Pokharel, who was also speaking from the chair, said that Nepal was
passing through a historical transition that the Nepalese for the fi rst time
in their history had taken their destiny in their hands.
Recalling the historical proclamation of Nepal's Parliament, he said that
the commitment on the part of the Maoists to join the mainstream politics
was quite encouraging. "The vigilance on the part of the civil society to
safeguard the gains of the movement has inspired us all. If we look at
the going trends carefully and analyze them rationally, one can be fully
assured that the Nepalese people are moving towards right direction and
better future," he added.
Highlighting the changing scenario of the Nepalese society, he said that
no section of Nepali society or segment of the population - whether they
be women, Madhesis, ethnic and marginalised groups or
Dalits, were prepared to live in status quo.
"The Eight-Party Alliance Government has been eff ortful in
managing the great transition by resorting to restructuring
the traditional feudal order of the Nepali society. The societal
order has to under go drastic change to cope with the rising
expectations of the masses as soon as possible," he said.
He said although the Nepali people stood fi rm, courageous,
and rendered sacrifi ces with resolute determination to move
forward for the modernisation of the country, the irony was
that nothing as yet had changed the material reality of the
people in terms of basic needs and services.
"The on-going trends pose a great challenge to the Nepali
ruling elites, and if timely remedial measures followed
by concrete actions are not contemplated immediately,
managing the revolution of rising expectations of the
people would even be a greater threat and challenge to the
Nepali politicians than, perhaps, managing the political or
the constitutional processes," he warned.
According to him, that called for a clear vision and sincere
dedication to initiate the process of systematic and scientifi c
re-structuring of Nepali society, giving a rightful place to
all the stakeholders, ensuring social justice, promoting the
universally acclaimed values of human rights, discarding
all discriminatory practices and exploitation. "These
theoretical propositions would warrant the provisions of
transparency, accountability and the rule of law with a fare
and equitable distribution of national wealth, which are the
cardinal principles of good governance and democracy in a
practical sense of the terms," he mentioned.
Delving on Prof. Dr. Meyer's observations, he said the German
scholar had dealt with at length and correctly diagnosed the
problems likely to be commonly found in any emerging new
democracy. "In reference to this he has elaborately analyzed
the civil-military relations in modernising democracy while
examining its pros and cons," he observed.
He expressed the hope that the ideas and suggestions put
forward by Dr. Meyer would help Nepal tremendously in
arranging and managing civil-military relations in a new
context taking into account the forthcoming constituent
assembly polls.
"In every developing society, a harmonious relation needs to
be assured while readjusting or restructuring the traditional
structure with utmost caution followed by timely reforms,"
he said.
Emphasising the need for harmonous relations among all
organs of the state, i.e. political parties, bureaucracy, the
public institutions, including the security apparatus, he said
that they needed to make concerted eff orts to make the
transition easy and smooth.
He called for all to set aside all petty diff erences and come
out with an open mind and heart to contribute in making
the stupendous task of national building a success.
"We should not stick to hardening of attitudes, get rid of
parochialism and prejudices and re-dedicate ourselves
showing collective wisdom to fulfi ll the dreams of peaceful,
prosperous and democratic Nepal without further loss of
time," he said.
At the end, he said that the erudition, expertise, and
experience of Dr. Meyer would greatly help in fi nding a
clear direction to our journey of nation building.
Earlier, welcoming the guests, scholars and other invites,
Ms. Anjan Shakya, Deputy Executive Director of IFA,
said that civil-military relations in modernising democracy
deserved special attention of all concerned sectors at a time
when Nepal was making national re-construction a reality.
Shedding light on the importance of retransformation
and rearrangement of the organs of the state such as
bureaucracy and security set-ups, Ms. Shakya said that all
the organs of the state needed to be re-adjusted and rearranged
for the smooth socio-economic transformation of
Nepali society.
"Despite the several attempts made by the Nepalese people
for the massive modernisation, nothing as yet have changed
the material reality of the people in terms of deprivation
and livelihood," she added.
She further said that it had been a call of time that the
century-old social structure had to undergo a tremendous
change which could facilitate the modernisation of
traditional structure of Nepali society.
She admitted that Nepali people had taken a bold historical
step of going for the Constituent Assembly (CA) polls in
forthcoming November in their bid to make New Nepal
with all sincerity and dedication. At the function, Ms. Shakya
urged all the political parties to be capable enough to show
political acumens with absolute determination to manage
the people's high expectations created by the April People's
Movement.
At the end of the programme, Mr. Gyan Chandra Acharya,
Secretary at MoFA, off ered Nepali caps to the Guests of
Honour on the dais as token of love and Prof. Dr. Gopal
Prasad Pokhrel, Executive Director of IFA, off ered the
logo of IFA to Prof. Meyer.
|
|
|
