It was the year 1959. A year before, the then Commander-in-Chief of Pakistan Army, Field Marshal Ayub Khan took over power and declared martial law. Justice Kayani, an eminent judge, was the Chief Justice of Punjab High Court. In one of the days of February, the Civil Servants of Pakistan invited Ayub Khan to a dinner. Kayani was then the President of West Pakistan CSP Association.
Kayani gave a ten-minute speech on that occasion. It is not unlikely that the Chief Justice’s speech has faded from history with the passage of time. But still the message of his speech reverberates with an undying clarity when invoked from the past. The depth of his sentences was clothed in philosophical wisdom. He said that involvement of the army directly into state politics for sheer grabbing of power could be so dangerous for the sovereignty of the country. Kayani reiterated that through the promulgation of martial law, Pakistan Army has conquered its own country. It is widely popular a criticism that ‘every independent state has an army, but Pakistan Army has an independent country. The statement perhaps is made in a satirical tone but in the last about 75 years of the country’s life, Pakistan Army has ruled most of the time, thus obstructing the path to political freedom for their countrymen.
If we make a philosophical analysis of Kayani’s statement, we will discover that it has emanated from a deep wisdom whose cardinal principle in determining the relationship between the state versus the duty of the military becomes very succinct and incorrigible. In 1971, the role of Pakistan Army was very depressing and tragic. In trying to conquer East Pakistan, Pakistan Army turned it into a graveyard of genocide whose memory still haunts our mental space. The story of 1971 is a story of human tragedy of colossal scale.
USA is a close friend of Pakistan. The geo-politics of the US has always taken the side of the Pakistani generals. When the martial law of 1958 was declared, Ayub Khan had the support of the US government. In 1971, when Pakistan Army was conducting the killings of innocent Bengalis, the US knew about the situation but the US administration wanted the Bengali leaders to sit with the military junta and bring out a political solution.
If we critically analyse the history of the US military, we see that even if the politicians want, they cannot use the armed forces against the people in their political interest. This was made clear by General Mark Milley, the 20th Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee.
After his long 43-year military career, General Milley said in his farewell speech that the US Military does not take oath to any king, dictator or power-hungry ruler. The Military Force does not take oath to an individual. The US Military takes oath to the idea of the State named America. And to protect this idea of America, the members of the US Military are always ready to sacrifice their lives at any cost. In his speech, General Milley drew the attention of the US Military to its commitment to the constitution. Every soldier, sailor, airman, marine and member of Coast Guard and National Guard must carry out duty to protect the constitution from the threat of internal and external enemies.
General Milley presumably made the statement directed at President Donald Trump, though there never was any mention of the President in his choice of words or sentences. President Trump wanted to arbitrarily control the Pentagon and cling to power but the General did not let it happen. Certainly, this led the General to become a victim of the President’s anger. After President Trump took office the second time, he revoked General Milley’s security clearance.
Recently, President Trump called for a convention of 800 senior military commanders. In this convention, the Secretary of War Pete Hegeseth ridiculed the generals and the admirals calling them part of a “woke” culture. Understandably, he meant looseness in their putative military bearing. President Trump also spoke as the Commander-in-Chief. He commented that if he did not like any general, he would dismiss him right on the spot. Trump and Hegeseth’s such display of attitude toward the high-ranking generals and admirals is an incidence of misuse of power borne of unmitigated authority, and is undesirable in the political control of the military.
If we think deeply, we will find that Donald Trump is trying to politicize the military by threatening to take way jobs for not listening to him. This is what we call POLITICIZATION OF THE MILITARY. There is a subtle difference with the canon in Pakistan. President Ayub Khan wanted to politicize the military. This is what we know as MILITARIZATION OF THE POLITICS. Both these practices are designed to digress the military from its professionalism, and are harmful to national interests and its security.
In the last Awami League regime, there was a similar attempt at politicizing the military. The result was a harm to the political ideals with the consequence of losing military’s professional commitment, and seriously undermining the image of the soldier’s uniform.
30 army officers including 5 Directors General of DGFI have been issued with arrest warrant. Their offence is abduction, murder and persecution of the people with opposing opinions. Besides, many high military officials have been indicted for corruption, and judicial inquiry is under progress against them after discovering financial fraudulence.
Social pride and professional excellence of the military institution requires a deep introspection into its metaphysical realm. Military is strategically a very important institution of the state being the first among the equals. The reason for such attribution is that the duty of preserving the state sovereignty and territorial integrity falls upon the Military.
The world famous philosopher and economist Adam Smith has stated in his inimitable classical text THE WEALTH OF NATIONS that the first duty of the Sovereign is national defence. National security is more important than affluence. Without national defence, wealth is meaningless. Therefore, the utmost obligation of the Sovereign is to spend money to build a strong military force. Written in 1776, at the time of independence of the United States, the book is still considered an exemplary contribution built upon the wisdom of national economy.
The preservation of territorial integrity of the Chittagong Hill Tracts was inevitable for the statehood of Bangladesh, and in ensuring that, the sacrifice of the military, particularly Bangladesh Army, BDR and Bangladesh Air Force is unforgettable. Innumerable officers and soldiers of the Army and BDR have died, been severely wounded or maimed and having suffered from intractable diseases were forced by poor physical condition to take early pension, and later bore unimaginable travails in the struggle for life. But they did not let a single inch of land of Chittagong Hill Tracts to be usurped by the insurgents.
Now the question is how it was possible for the Military to challenge successfully a strong insurgency operation in Chittagong Hill Tracts. The answer is simple: exceptional professional excellence and social commitment. Professional conviction had indoctrinated every soldier to protect the life of the hill people. When needed, 100 soldiers would be employed just to protect the life of a single hill man. It is for the sacrifice of these soldiers and officers that Bangladesh still has Chittagong Hill Tracts intact in its map.
Sadly, some of the high officials of the Army, whose sacred duty was to protect the lives of the civilians, are today the convicts with the charges of abduction, murder and persecution of innocent civilians. The desecrated chapter of the Army’s truncated moral declension against the backdrop of nine-month long bloody war of independence in which the contribution of the Military will always be written in golden letters, is a painful and heart-wrenching fact. It is constitutionally an irremediable duty of the Military to protect the lives of the civilians. “IF NEED BE HUNDRED SOLDIERS SHOULD DIE TO PROTECT THE LIFE OF A SINGLE CIVILIAN.”
The Author: Air Vice Marshal Mahmud Hussain (retd) is a distinguished expert at Aviation and Aerospace University, Bangladesh (AAUB). He is a former ambassador and Chairman, Civil Aviation Authority of Bangladesh.
Comment
