In Asia, the military is very involved in politics : Pakistan, Bangladesh, Thailand, Indonesia, Burma, the Philippines (by coup attents, and even in China

Do you think that the military has a role to play in politics ?

Dear Jacques,

Definitely, if you want your country to head towards ruins.

If the role of a country's military is for defence then one will be reversing that role into one that not only defend or protect the country but to lead a country which was regarded as 'the rice bowl' of Asia into 'the begging bowl'.

Where in history can you find a country doing well with military at its helm? If military is involved in politics then it becomes like the body's immune system acting against like AIDS; sooner or later the health (and wealth) of the country will withered away.

If politicians were corrupt, they have less pockets than their military to fill. Unlike their military counterpart it is not in the nature of civilian to be united in doing things, good or bad, together.

To what I recalled, Pakistan was the first country where the military led by Ayub Khan usurp power by coup d'etat and that it the 'Pandora's box' for military involvement in politics. A number of Asian, as well as African, militaries have learnt their lesson - even though not without great losses for them and for the country - but some of them don't even in this era.

Jacques, did you have a nightmare or got out from the worng side of your bed to be asking this question?

Dear Warazein

It was just a question. I did not said my personnal position. Guess it

When I rised this question, Iwas expecting a lot of answers considering so many countries in Asia with this problem. Why are you not expressing you point of view ?

I am a little bit disappointed

My view on this is very clear: The military has no role to play in politics!

Rather the military should be an arm of the government, ruled by politicians elected by the people.

That is not the reality in many countries, of course. But I believe it should be the goal every country should move towards.

John

Sandvand wrote:

QUOTE:
My view on this is very clear: The military has no role to play in politics!

Rather the military should be an arm of the government, ruled by politicians elected by the people.

That is not the reality in many countries, of course. But I believe it should be the goal every country should move towards.

John

agreed,

the military is a powerhouse that should submit to civilian rule. but when civilian authority neglects its duty to uphold the betterment of a nation and is involved in corruption then the civilian rule gives reason for the military to get in. on the other hand when the leftist threats the security of a nation, the civilian government has the power to declare emergency state or martial law-using the military to command a greater discipline and secure a nation from chaos.

a balance is must.


<br><br>Post edited by: linsi, at: 2007/09/24 03:08

For me, as an ex-French army officer for many years in charge to watch security problems in Asia, my position is firm for Asia and everywhere :

THE ARMED FORCES MISSION IS TO KEEP THE INTEGRITY OF THE COUNTRY, NOTHING ELSE

If there is internal trouble in a country, it is the mission of police force. I understand that when there is important insurgencies, like in the Philipinnes, Army could be involved in police operations, but without to intervine in internal politics.

In Asia, a lot of civilian civil politicians are corrupted, but when the militaries are in charge, are they less corrupted ?

In addition of what I wrote about of corrupted armed forces when in charge of the country, there is also the problem of corruption in the defence equiptment as in Malyasia

Hi Jacques

Did you see that among the most corrupted countries in Asia are the ones leaded by the Military ?