Spectacular display of arms: But concerns over handling of national security issues
Amoving showcase of military hardware that helped defeat Tiger guerrillas nearly ten years ago was on display as 5,699 troops marched the paved roads of the Galle Face promenade to mark the nation’s 71st Independence anniversary. Joining them were a further 1,405 police officers, civil defence force members and school cadets. The 7,104 of them outnumbered those around the secure venue but thousands saw it live on television in their bedrooms and living rooms. It was a national holiday.
Special Forces, often unheard elite and well trained unit of the Army, clung to their Israeli-built Uzi sub machine guns as they marched. Another equally efficient similar unit, the Army’s red beret commandos weilded their MP 5 Sub Machine Guns, made both in Germany and in Pakistan. The Navy’s relatively new Special Boat Squadron and its Marines, trained recently by the United States counterparts, carried the American built M-16 assault rifle and a cloned version made in China.
Men and women of the Sri Lanka Air Force Special Airborne Force paraded with Chinese built Type 97 Bullpup rifle. Women Police Constables displayed their British made Sterling Sub Machine Gun, a model no longer built there but used extensively in neighbouring India. Infantry, Police Officers and others who formed a large number used the Chinese built T-56 assault rifles, the much cheaper Chinese copy of the AK-47 or Kalashnikov.
In addition, the Army put on display its Russian built BTR 80 troop carriers, the older British-built vintage Saladin armoured cars, Chinese-built artillery guns, Chinese-built radar systems and Slovak-built Multi Barrel Rocket Launchers (MBRLs). The Air Force displayed most of its assets – US-built helicopters, Russian-built AN 32 transport aircraft, Russian Mi-17 helicopters and Chinese-built K-8 trainers. The Navy showed its British-made 30mm guns -- rear weapons on the gunboats -whilst the Special Task Force (Police) showed its armoured vehicles (Buffels) and the locally produced 122 mm rocket launcher.
The troops militarily defeated the Tiger guerrillas some ten years ago, thanks to their trained skills and weapons they received from the countries listed above and others. Some was for money and others gifts. There is now a different paradox. Some of the countries that helped Sri Lanka are now fighting a proxy war of sorts on our own soil. They not only want to gain dominance over one another but also to gain supremacy. This is all in the name of helping an economically impoverished Sri Lanka to earn more foreign exchange. Some politicians and bureaucrats concerned have concured in this. So do some of the bureaucrats in the Ministry of Defence which has seen four different Secretaries since President Maithripala Sirisena took over four years ago.
The role of foreign powers in military activity in Sri Lanka, some described by them in fruity language not related to defence or security, seems to pass scrutiny. It is only from recent times that the Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute for International Relations and Strategic Studies (LKIIRSS), the legally vested organisation for strategic studies, is paying attention to this aspect. It has a long way to go since the growing phenomenon is new and the issues are more complex. There is also a wide gulf between those at the highest levels of the defence establishment, including politicians, over what the LKIIRSS has found or will find. There are wide fears that political considerations and personal leanings overshadow them. It has happened in the past in disturbing proportions because of sheer ignorance and poor judgement.
Making matters worse is another issue that surfaced under the present Yahapalanaya or good governance government. An aspirant who sought re-appointment to a high position at LKIIRSS began his own outfit, ironic enough, with the full support and financial backing of the government. The tasks of the legally assigned LKIIRSS is not only being duplicated but also in some cases seriously undermined.
This is how it happened. The person concerned succeeded in urging a highly controversial cabinet minister, whose sub- jects did not in any way relate to foreign affairs, defence or security, to put up a memorandum. It was to oversee national security matters. The proposal, as expected, was approved even without any study or comment. The one who dealt with LKIIRSS was abroad. The person, who has not served in any armed force or the police, heads this outfit now.
It has a member of the board of directors, employed elsewhere in Singapore. He takes part in board meetings through skype. He is serving another government and has access to sensitive information. Some retired commanders have been taking part in meetings which deal with sensitive security issues. That the government set up this body without a careful study since it relates to the country’s national security is one thing. The other is the request the official has been making to military officials. Sometime ago, the Army hierarchy rejected his request for a detailed breakdown of its strength including the number of officers and other ranks.
Yet another important aspect surfaced this week in the budget estimates tabled in Parliament by Finance Minister Mangala Samaraweera. Allocations for defence expenditure in 2019 is placed at Rs 393 billion. In 2009, when the Tiger guerrillas were defeated, the amount was Rs 177 billion. The year before that, in 2008 it was Rs 164.4 billion. Perhaps inflation plays a part in this but not altogether.
There is absolutely no gainsaying in the fact that a military should always remain in a state of preparedness. It is, therefore, incumbent on any government to ensure that the military’s requirements are provided. Herein lies a key issue. It is equally incumbent on any government to formulate a defence policy taking into consideration the different threat perceptions. With the defeat of Tiger guerrillas, is a resurgence of similar activity possible? Would people in the north or east ever allow such activity to proliferate. The obvious answer is “No”. On the other hand, the perceived threats from other quarters, who may try to disturb ethnic unity, cannot and will not reach such high proportions. They will not receive the support of the very community they want to defend. Thus, they are only handful and could easily be nipped in the bud.
Unfortunately, these are areas that have not drawn the in- depth attention of the Ministry of Defence. Sadly, those who have taken charge in the past four years have not had the acumen to understand such issues or the different nuances involved in them. Hence, they have been neglected as the taxpayers’ money is spent both for good and for bad. Some even to pay for luxuries.
A professional study of threat perceptions would have brought home an important reality -- the strength required to meet them. This is why, some countries that have faced an internal conflict, have down sized their military strength and diverted moneys for development. Of course, as said before, the emphasis has to be on a study of the threat perceptions and how much downsizing is required. The ill-informed notion that forces are required even for flood relief and disaster management alone is no answer.
It is time that political leaders devote more attention to these issues. Only then could the military become more and more professional and be modern than now.