Submission
All of the problems that have led up to
this point in Fiji's timeline are inextricably linked to the military. They are
the gun-bearers; they are the mighty, the coup-plotters, and the conspirators.
The question is what to do about it? No constitution in Fiji's short history
has managed or dared to approach this issue - that of providing safeguards
against the juggernaut of the Fiji military. Has everyone has forgotten that
fear, that overwhelming sense of oppression, that powerlessness, that we
do not have a voice? Just a while ago the media was censored, the internet was
muzzled, and just a while ago people were being taken in for questioning the
regime, for daring to take a stand for their beliefs. Well at this juncture in
Fiji's history, we get the chance to right a few wrongs. The new Constitution
should ensure that we, the citizens, never get taken unawares. There should be
a system of checks and balances that protect the people from power-hungry
tyrants or this will become another Libya, another Iraq.
Consequently, the question becomes -
exactly what sort of military should we have -- a small military, adequate for
homeland defense and little else, or a large and robust force, capable of
projecting power around the globe? However, if our military
is too big and powerful, if civilian authorities show it too much respect, then
there's a real danger of militarism. But if the military is too small, if it
has too little influence over decision making by civilian leaders, that too can
lead to disaster. We need a military that’s not too big and
influential, not too small and voiceless, but one that strikes just the
right balance between deference and accountability.
Now striking that delicate balance is no
doubt a job for some wise policy-maker. But we citizens, collectively, need to be the ones
to decide about the proper role, size, composition and degree of accountability
of the armed services. This fact should be entrenched in a valid
constitution and goes to the very heart of democracy.
Are we going to be a society where
the military functions as an instrument of will of the people at large or a
society where it functions as a special class unto itself, with its own agenda,
answering to no one except perhaps a narrow civilian elite? If we are to remain
a true democracy, we can’t afford to leave these questions to the military, nor
even just to our elected leaders. We all have a vital stake in
them. And as proactive thinkers, it’s our job to dig deep and
uncover the fundamental issues and assumptions which inform, or ought to
inform, our collective decisions about the nature and role of the military.
Executive control,
management and administration
In a democracy,
partial executive control over the national military organization is given to
an elected political leader, i.e. the Minister of Defense. It is my contention
that he should be made subservient to the President which allows for more
collective decision-making when it comes to policy and such.
The Military Council
should then come under these two heads, made up of different sections and/or
branches of the military. When it comes to hierarchy, it should be explicitly
stated that the RFMF Commander and the heads of Land Force Command and
Strategic Command serve under the
President. Also, because the Minister of Defense is an elected official, there
should be a law prohibiting the RFMF Commander from holding both portfolios at
the same time.
The mere size of the
Fiji armed forces, at present around 4000 (International Institute for Strategic Studies, 2001), compared to its population of about 837000 (Fiji Population
Census, 2007), means that the military makes up about 0.5% of the population. Combine
this with its Reserve Force of around 6000 (Wikipedia, 2012) brings the total
to 10000. This makes up about 1.2% of the total population.
At present the military also accounts for 1.04% of the total
labor force (IISS, 2001) and so one can just imagine the budgetary expenditure
for such a military year in and year out. These facts, that the military is
unreasonably large for its population, and that it consumes a large percentage
of the government budget each year, upwards of $8m in the 2012 Budget.
This should warrant a revision of military size and
composition. If the consensus is that the military make up only 1% of the
population, then the number of enlisted men should comprise only 0.4% of the
total population and the Reserve Force the remaining 0.6%. Hence, working with
the figures we have, at present the military should downsize “regulars” from
4000 to around 3300 and reserves from 6000 to around 5000.
While these reduced figures might not take away the coup
mentality that is rampant in military culture as a necessary evil, it is a step
towards easing budget constraints and giving people peace of mind.
While reducing the
size of the military is a more prudent choice when it comes to preparing the
national budget every year, this does not stop the army from going to arms when
it wants to or deems it required. The sure-fire way to do this is gun control.
At present, firearms
are illegal in Fiji unless you have a permit or you are legally permitted to
carry it in the course of your duties, such as with the Police or FMF. But who
watches the watchdogs? There should be in place stringent rules at any and all
armories to prevent a reoccurrence of the 2000 mutiny or the military coups.
To conclude, I hope that the above recommendations are enough
to digest. Remember any singular act in history that may have been viewed as
treason in one time may later be viewed as patriotic in the annals of eternity.
Erami Tokalau
California
USA
For more reviews: 
