The New Nation - Internet Edition

Mohd Aminul Karim, Ph.D

Bangladesh that should boast of its democratic ethos has been plagued by confrontational politics. It resulted in the democracy to limp. The upshot of this chain reaction is weak institution building. Politicisation and corruption have also spawned a kind of value-deficient syndrome. Security forces, especially the defense forces, being an organised force has been contributing, as and when called upon by the government, in upholding and consolidating democracy. The incidents of October 2006 jolted the very foundation of democratic fabric of the country. As a sequel both dimensions of security i.e. external and internal, carried the potential of being threatened. The defence forces could not be a bystander. It is now backing a Caretaker government to hold a free, fair and credible election within a stipulated time. The government, in order to fulfil its objectives, have undertaken certain reform programmes. The response suggested in the paper, that may reinforce the government programmes, could include measures like enriching political culture, strengthening state institutions, ensuring complete separation and independence of judiciary, a revamped bureaucracy, developing beter military-media relations, creation of an advisory security council and cabinet commitee on security affairs, providing more powers to the institution of the President, and ensuring certain protection and remodelling of the military. What is of prime importance is ensuring legitimisation of the elected government that is expected to come into being by the end of 2008. Without legitimacy no government can be stable and be able to keep the military away from geting embroiled in civilian affairs and make it professionally more efficient to be able to beter handle any crisis that may overwhelm the country at any point in time.

Bangladesh was born through a bloody War of Liberation ; the objective of the war was to create an egalitarian, pluralist democratic, and prosperous sovereign country. New Statesman of London commented about the bloody war, "If blood is the price of people's right to independence then Bangladesh has overpaid it". The war brought in its trail the depredation that made it difficult to sustain itself economically which ultimately impacted on its democracy also. A fully functional pluralist democracy could not also be sustained for a long time ; although it did in 1990s, after a mass upsurge that toppled an autocratic military dictator, it was constrained by many hiccups. Although perfect democracy is, in fact, a myth, nonetheless there was enough scope on the part of the political leadership to make it more functional and perfect Bangladesh's core values are, directly or indirectly, affected by democrative way of governance. Bangladesh is placed disadvantageously geostrategically. It suffers from the tyranny of geography which gives rise to the concept of defence vulnerability. Such geographic tyranny is, at least, to some extent, responsible for its political, social and economic state. Availability of Bangladesh's resources especially its water-that is responsible for life sustenance and ecological balance- are determined by its geographic location. Bangladesh's political culture and weak governance structure determine its internal national security whereas the unique geostratetic location directs its focus to its external national security.

Given these peculiarities as could be true to any country and the context, Bangladesh's security forces have been playing a somewhat right or distorted role, as perceived by different scholars and nations differently, actuated by its political culture and geographic location. Security, in its broader sense, concerns many dimensions in the spectrum where security forces have a lasting role to play. However, diplomatically Bangladesh cannot be ignored. Bangladesh can be called a geostrategic pivot in the South Asian sub-system where active geostrategic players like China and India will have to count Bangladesh in order to play their power game of geopolitics. Bangladesh cannot afford to play into such game of geopolitics mainly because of the following factors ; overwhelming military and economic superiority of the players, economic, political and geostrategic vulnerability of Bangladesh, Bangladesh's lack of sophisticated military wherewithal, and the apprehension of disturbing the state of equilibrium. Bangladesh is further constrained by the degeneration of value system which goes to make its political, economic and governance system almost dysfunctional and imperfect

A word of caution to be noted here : Bangladesh's security forces should also not be seen beyond the ambit of this degeneration which has, in fact, infected the entire body politic of Bangladesh. However, they have relatively a cleaner slate than other institutions mainly because it has a more credible accountability system. It again receives accolades for two of its commendable jobs like containing insurgency in south-eastern Chitagong Hill Tracts and participating in UN policing job of peace support operations around the globe. Both the jobs have the tinges of development which is so vital for the sustenance of uninterrupted economic and social life of a nation. Another word of caution may be pertinent here : the military should be strong enough to protect a society ; it should be sufficiently strong and properly oriented to meet any threat that a nation may face. The military should conduct its affairs to keep itself free from the corroding influence of the prevalent political culture so as to be able to protect the society ; otherwise it may fail in this noble role with unpredictable consequences to the society and the nation at large.

Given this backdrop, this paper atempts to delineate the role and contribution of the security forces-for convenience it would mean the defence forces only-in upholding democracy and find out beter modus operandi, in a holistic environment, to fit in the dispensation. The responses suggested would be confined to the methodologies that would beter harmonise the societal values and the military values. Such methodologies, it is hoped, would optimise military's role and contribution to nation's development and security. Development has a very wide spectrum : it includes political development, institutionalisation of civil and military system, democratisation, value regeneration, creative and innovative ideas and national security, etc. Elite contradictions are but natural ; this paper would, however, atempt to suggest measures that may minimise such contradictions. The paper covers areas like Democracy in Bangladesh Perspective, Atributes of Defence Forces, Adaptability of the Defence Forces and Response with emphasis on institutionalisation of systems. The ideas given by the author are outline in nature and those need to be further scrutinised and validated by the concerned experts.

Democracy is one of the finest ways of governance in the modern- day world. What it ensures is the defined method of succession after a regular interval. However, it has varieties. Even the Chinese have their own brand of democracy, which is, often times, called democratic centralism or the democracy with Chinese characteristics. Confucianism might have probably impacted greatly in their way of governance. Be that as it may, Bangladesh has generally inherited the Westminster type of democracy although it has also experienced controlled presidential type of democracy which some scholar might call it dictatorship under the grap of democracy. What is important : democracy may provide an outlet for the realisation of people's hopes and aspirations in meaningful, creative and innovative way., Once it is stunted, mass upsurge or military intervention takes over and tends to upset the normal economic and social life of the country. Bangladesh has experienced such episodes quite a number of times. Institutional building has been neglected by almost all the regimes of Bangladesh polity.

The Government of India Act 1935 and the famous Lahore Resolution of 1940, mooted by the famous Bengali leader Sher-e-Bangla Fazlul Haq, had foreseen parliamentary or Westminster type of democracy in the horizon for the post- colonial India. Most of the political leaders in the then Pakistan had been clamouring for parliamentary system of governance. The 1956 Constitution of Pakistan, where important political leaders from East Bengal, especially Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy made immense contribution in its drafting, restored the basic structure of parliamentary form of government However, both the military and bureaucratic elites were the stumbling blocks in operationalising the concept The famous six-point programme, mooted by Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, talked about parliamentary system and practically all the political parties were commited to parliamentary system of government during Pakistan's general election in 1970. Bangladesh started with parliamentary system of government but as an after effect of the War of Independence the country fell into a serious famine- like situation when Sheikh Mujibur Rahman thought it prudent to impose one-party rule in the country with almost all executive, legislative and judicial powers reposed in the person of the President of the Republic. The sad end of this episode was the military intervention where the country's President was brutally killed. As a mater of fact, military's command and control got greatly weakened as a follow-up to this military putsch. One coup was countered by another and a chain reaction followed. This was a really critical scenario for Bangladesh's existence, since military forces got disarrayed.

However, General Ziaur Rahman camp up to face this challenge and he faced it squarely. He salvaged this nation, apart from giving a new vision, by reorganising and revamping the military forces. He, however, followed a controlled presidental form of democracy where multiparty system was restored. Bangladesh started to move forward ; but inner contradictions within the military continued although at a much less scale. President was again brutally assassinated in a coup by the miolitary forces based in Chitagong in 1981. This was another stigma in Bangladesh's political history where another siting president was brutally assassinated.

Now the question arises : why is the country's military, which spearheaded country's military operations of the liberation war that aimed at establishing democracy, is allegedly involving itself in the politics of the country time and again. Some of the reasons that could be ascribed are : there was lack of institutionalisation, low political culture, and divisiveness both within the nation and the military, and authorities not paying enough heed to military's corporate interests resulting in their frustration. President Ziaur Rahman's regime was followed by another coup which was imposed by General Ershad in 1982. General Ershad was a dictator per se and he was finding it extremely difficult to gain political legitimacy by Bangladesh society. Ershad, however, carried out lot of reforms for the development of Bangladesh's military. Bangladesh military was geting more professional and a window of opportunity was opened for Bangladesh military to contribute in the First Gulf War, Kuwait Reconstruction and UN Peace Support Operations around the world. Bangladesh military was coming to good shape even in terms of acquiring higher military and civil education. Military officers got beter exposed to modernity, values of security and democracy and requirement of uninterrupted peace and system for the country's overall development Military officers started realising : it was not the job of the military officers to rule the country. A kind of Huntington's prescription of 'objective control' of military was being replicated in Bangladesh. With the fall of autocratic rule of President Ershad, as the politicians called it, an era of real democratic rule started to hold ground. As a mater of fact Bangladesh military tacitly and positively supported the fall of Ershad regime and installation of a real democratic rule.

In the first tenure of parliamentary democratic government of 1991, the ruling elites used both the options of Huntington i.e. subjective and objective controls, in varying degrees, to exercise control over the military. The military, by and large, supported the democratic system of government Such controls continued during the later two successive democratically elected governments. However, subjective control started geting an upper hand as the days passed by. During the tenure of 1996 Caretaker Government another coup atempt was made by the then Army Chief which was repulsed by the pro-democracy forces in the military. Military again, by and large, welcomed the democratic dispensation ; although all pervasive corruption and bad governance did draw the atention of the military elites and the ranks and file. Generally, military is not interested in running the politics of the country. Some of the strong reasons could be : military's strong professionalism, military's beter understanding of international globalised scenario, military's deep commitment to UN Peace Support Operations and country's overall general economnic prosperity. The subsequent political imbroglio that almost crippled the normal life in Bangladesh in October 2006 was another tragedy in the political history of Bangladesh. The whole nation was awestruck and it could not expect the military to be a bystander. The political infighting tended to cross the threshold that had the potential to affect the security of the country, both internal and external.

Security can be examined at different levels and dimensions. It can be viewed at individual, societal, national, international and global levels. At different levels are linked up different dimensions like human security, traditional security, cooperative security, collective security, environmental security and internal security, etc. When the entire gamut of different dimensions of security is considered we may call it comprehensive security. One may think one dimension is different from other; it is altogether a misconception that one dimension of security can be delinked from the other. Today's non-traditional or environmental security may turn out to be a traditional security--it might even turn out to be a vital national interest--which would merit the employment of military forces ; it might even take the shape of a total war.

Bangladesh's security concerns are multidimensional as already indicated. Bangladesh's vital national interests could involve its territorial integrity, political sovereignty, democracy, religious and social values, and economic and social progress. Bangladesh's security forces fought a counter- insurgency war in Chitagong Hill Tracts in order to preserve the territorial integrity of Bangladesh. Bangladesh's security forces are usually employed by the Election Commission to conduct different types of elections which facilitates in restoring or consolidating democracy. Consolidation of democracy goes a long way in ensuring both internal and external security of Bangladesh. Over the last more than a decade democracy is the way of governance in Bangladesh ; one would, however, say it is limping. Reasons for such limping could be many like : confrontational politics, criminalisation of politics, division of the nation on two-party lines, all pervasive corruption, weak bureaucracy, weakness in the judiciary, Election Commission, etc. Institutionalisation of different organs or components of a nation ensures beter internal security. But, sad enough, it didn't work that way. It is mostly the partisan role of the political leadership in Bangladesh that is impinging on the sustenance of democracy in Bangladesh.

Bangladesh defence forces may not expand its role to cover varied aspects. Such varieties may not bring desirable results in the long run. "The expansion of the role of a modern army seriously impairs its military efficiency. Present-day military officers can indulge in politics only at the cost of their fighting skills. "But in order to ensure comprehensive security of the country, Bangladesh's security forces have to, at least, play a catalyst role. It may not cross the threshold ; it should take lessons from 1971 War of Liberation where because of Pakistan military's recurrent overt involvement in the national politics that contributed in Pakistan's, as Prof Rounaq Jahan called, failure in national integration. Talukder Maniruzzaman substantiates his hypothesis when he says, "Egypt's total military fiasco is also generally atributed to the political role expansion of the Egyptian armed forces". He further shows, quoting Brown, as core professionalism suffered, "the large part of the Egyptian air force was destroyed on the ground and the rest was completely incapacitated by an Israeli pre-emptive atack on the first day of the war (1967). Indian democracy is a good model which has contributed immensely in ensuring the territorial integrity of the country which is otherwise plagued by insurgencies in many nooks and corners of the country. Indian military's non-involvement in politics has ensured its beter professionalism. Such professionalism also ensures beter security for the country.

Military, especially its officer corps, is a profession which is characterised by its expertise, responsibility and corporateness. Defence forces are an organised body whose basic job, as Lasswell said, is the management of violence". Thus because of their centralisation, hierarchy, discipline, inter communication and esprit de corps, armies are much more highly organised than any civilian bodies". It follows a hierar chical system of command and control. It follows a vertical organisational system which is contrary to flater organisation that is generally followed in the present day corporate world. Military's war requirements preclude the introduction of flater organisational system.

Military is a 'closed' society like that of a church, as the management specialists brand it However, in the globalised world where information flow has overwhelmed most of the facets of life and especially when Bangladesh military is going around every nook and corner of the globe to restore peace and development, it is gradually turning into a relatively more open society. Military's 'closed' concept, many times, make it a victim of the national and international media. The media is not to blame because they are not provided adequate information at least about its routine day to day activities. The military is generally seen to be an elitist organisation. Bangladesh's military has, these days, greatly come out of this point of reference. The military has entrenched corporate interests like bureaucracy. The government in power, in most of the third world countries, fails to make a balance between the corporate interests of these two vital institutions of the state which creates fault line in the smooth functioning of the system.

Indian Ministry of Defence, staffed by the elite civil service, during the Kargil War, delayed the procurement of some vital equipment for mountaineering warfare for which Indian Army had to pay a very high price in terms of loss of hundreds of human life. It really affected the morale and motivation of the soldiers who were in the batlefield to sacrifice their lives for the cause of the nation. Indian government realised the lacunae and formed an investigation commitee called Mishra Commitee to suggest remedies. Hopefully Indian military has been given more initiative and freedom in the field of procurement of equipments. Wartime exigencies should be seen differently from than that of a peace time requirement During the First World War the German Military's General Staff Branch even used to control the foreign propaganda and economic policies. Today's Bangladesh's military, or for that mater any military in a democracy, may not even imagine running such policies although it may provide inputs. Military may, as part of botom up approach and by devising certain methodologies, formally or informally put forward suggestions to the government especially when it relates to national security. and as already indicated national security entails both external and internal security.

Leadership is the product of diagnosing the environment, adapting to the environment and communicating it to the stakeholders. Leadership as practiced in the defence forces is to be judged in relation to different context where contingencies are mostly involved ; it has to however fit into the holistic spectrum of the nation. Now this leadership should be seen differently from the political, business, civil society, press and media and donor agencies. This leadership tends to get embroiled with the political or economic mess of a third world country. But it is strongly inferred hat military, in the long run, can not be a change agent for the political and social development Famous political scientist Janowitz said, "in all cases, military operates as incomplete agents of political change." Many African countries have miserably failed to practice interposing military leadership with political leadership. However, in those countries political leadership had also miserably failed. Now if somehow both systems fail any country is likely to turn into a failed state.

This is ominous for Bangladesh also which is, otherwise, called a soft state. Now the one has to accept some imperfections in almost all strata of national life. Such imperfections- may be to a much less degree-are afflicting the military system also. Colonial legacy has really eaten into the perfectionists' creativity in the systems. Southeast Asian countries had really accepted the challenge and made spectacular strides in modernisation. Even India is suffering from this syndrome. Pakistan has continued to remain as a swing state orbiting from one end of the pendulum to other. It has hardly seen stability ever since it was created. Political stability and institutionalisation of the systems are sine qua none for the ultimate development of a country. Veena Kukreja has shown 'if the level of the institutionalisation of civilian political procedures, the level of military institutionsliation, the domestic socio-economnic and international environment showing level of social mobility and economic mobility are high, then there would be integrated boundaries displaying civilian control and if these are low then there would be fragmented boundaries displaying tenous civilian control'. This is further reinforced by Dankwart Rustow who concludes, in case there is a military intervention and it wants to withdraw, that "the ultimate success of a military regime depends on its skill in allowing or promoting the rise of effective civilian institutions that will render future military intervention superfluous." This is also substantiated by Finer who says, "where civilian associations and parties are strong and numerous, where the procedures for the transfer of power are orderly, and the location of supreme authority is not seriously challenged : the political ambit of the military will be circumscribed."

In spite of such systemic requirement, the messnge that is conveyed here is: one has to accept the reality that perfect or puritan system may be difficult to obtain in a third world country like Bangladesh. Military's unity of command or chain of command hierarchy where everything lawful is implemented in an organised and controlled manner may be a misnomer in the messy political, administrative, social and econonmic life of Bangladesh. But still the country has to move forward like India is doing, Sri Lanka- heavily batered by decades' long insurgency- is sustaining and recently Nepal is trying to setle its political scores. Military has to remain professionally vibrant, pulsating and progressive organisation as it is true to its counterparts in other countries. It cannot afford to get embroiled in the messy political affairs of the country for long. That may not bring any good both for the military and nation as a whole. Ultimately, it is the military which is the custodian or the last resort when country's security or normaley gets threatened or disturbed. Military can, under no circumstances, afford to slip out of its course even for a while. It should remain prepared with the latest technologies, as much as the nation can afford, and doctrines to face any eventualities that may be imposed like this military faced in 1971, in Chitagong Hill Tracts counter insurgency warfare, UN peace support operations around the world and in assisting the government in ensuring internal security and national development and the Election Commission in conducting free, fair and peaceful polls.

Political Culture.-Finer has classified political culture into four categories like: mature, developed, low and minimal. Bangladesh's culture probably straddles between low and minimal. Since Bangladesh practiced parliamentary democracy since 1991 it had the potential to graduate to developed political culture but the politicians couldn't withstand the test This, however, doesn't necessarily mean we can do away with the system. United Nations could hardly stop the outbreak of the major wars that impacted on the development of the world at large but it doesn't necessarily mean we should do away with the system. United Nations itself is seriously thinking of reforming itself to make it more representative. United Nations has done spectacular jobs in humanitarian, development, human rights issues, and in restoring peace between warring parties in different parts of the world especially in Africa, Liberal democracy has many pitfalls but which other system of governance can supersede democracy? Pakistan is a good example where controlled democracy is nose-diving when even the Americans-who called Pakistan its most important non-NATO ally-are thinking of bombing Pakistan, may be to return it to the Stone Age?

The message that is conveyed here: Bangladesh- by an inclusive method should devise ways and means to graduate to a higher level of political culture which would give beter legitimacy and representative character to the government in power. This would also keep the military engaged in its primary professional job. This goes in line with Huntington's prescription of objective control of the military. Intricatply linked to it is the strengthening of democratic institutions. Militdry's role would then be customised and focused to professionalism.

Presently state/democratic institutions are in disarray. Political interference has really done a lasting damage to these institutions. Parliaments couldn't deliver adequately or even, at times, couldn't come up to the expectations of the nation. Political squabbling was the root cause. Parliamentary standing commitees were not that effective due mainly both to systems' fault and political divisiveness. Parliamentary standing commitees are merely recommending bodies. They lacked the teeth.

And country's bureaucracy is quite adept in hoodwinking the commitees', whatever, recommendations were forwarded to the ministries. Election Commission, Public Service Commission, Anti-Corruption Commission etc. should be made fully independent and be manned by competent and honest people. A set of clearer criterion or standards should be clearly spelt out for selection as chairman or members of such commissions. However, a modus operandi should be also devised where they may also be made more accountable. This would generate beter credibility in ensuring legitimacy of the powers that be which would ultimately impact on the professionalism of the military forces. Bangladesh's enlightened military today would like to see an enlightened forward looking Bangladesh. Bangladesh military would then habitually be subservient to such enlightened legitimate government in power. Bangladesh military's training curricula cover areas like politics, economics, human rights, national development, rule of law, civil administration, international relations etc. Such education and awareness would beter contribute in institution building which would help consolidate democracy in the country.

The nation has suffered tremendously by not making the judiciary completely separate and independent Probably the nation would not have been in such a mess had there been a truly independent and separate judiciary. The governments in power played 'cat and mouse' game in delaying the implementation of the famous 12-point directives of the Supreme Court in respect of separation of judiciary especially the lower judiciary. Corruption has also engulfed the judiciary-especially the lower judiciary-which has, in fact, smeared the ethics, values and demand of the justice system. Political parties may think of devolving the power of appointment of all the judges of the Supreme Court with the President, of course, on the recommendation of the Chief Justice. Presently, the President can only appoint the Chief Justice without the advice of the Prime Minister. This power can be extrapolated to include all the judges. This would greatly preclude political interference in the judiciary including the lower judiciary. Even for the selection of the judges, a set of clearer and more enlightened criterion or standards may be spelt out in the Constitution. Let us, at least, make sure judiciary and military of the country remain far above pety party politics which would take care of much of the ills that the country is presently experiencing. Two repositories of last resort for the nation should be upheld in high esteem of the people. However, some kind of stricter methodologies may be worked out to make them accountable especially the judiciary.

Professor Mohabbat Khan of Dhaka University has labeled Bangladesh bureaucracy becoming increasingly inefficient and incompetent He posits that the bureaucracy suffers from tunnel vision thereby implying they would fail to perform as transformational leaders. He is rather, giving a total dismal picture which is probably not fully correct However, there are areas for improvement like efficiency and motivation level of the bureaucrats. They need to be trained and groomed like transformational leaders. They may be made beter experts on the subjects they are handling. More dynamism, motivation, creativity, innovativeness, vision, commitment need to be instilled in the consciousness of the present-day Bangladesh bureaucracy. Their decision making power may be further sharpened to be able to deliver beter goods. An efficient, capable, dynamic, commited bureaucracy would contribute greatly in ensuring a beter political milieu in the country. This would also act as a restraining factor in politicising the administration. This would also keep the military happy and thereby ensure beter civil-military relations. Beter civil-military relations are sine qua non for a functional democracy and national security. There would be beter role clarity for the military. Military's role and contribution in 'Aid of Civil Power' would be more effective. Bangladesh military's expertise in disaster management is internationally acknowledged which would find meaningful manifestation in such relations. A word of caution may also be pertinent here: Laski sees bureaucracy as a threat to democracy since, as he sees it, the power of the bureaucrats continues to grow to the extent that democratic instruments cannot possibly control it The answers could be: thorough motivational and atitudinal change curricula and crafted the training institutes, more control from the judiciary and parliament and more inspection by the political masters and the senior bureaucracy.

In Bangladesh media-military relations may not be called healthy, if not apathetic. The responsibility for the fault line lies with both the actors. Military, as already indicated, is relatively a closed society, would not like to share even its unclassified information with media which makes it proportions for the media to speculate. Such speculations even go to the extent of damaging the image of the military. Media, on the other hand, is not well equipped to understand the nuances and technicalities of the military systems and culture. This serious communication gap needs to be bridged for both the media and military to contribute effectively to the democratic dispensation. Military may be more forthcoming when media should be more positive and enlightened about military system of work. For beter democratisation of the polity bridging military-media communication gap is a necessity.

An Advisory Security Council is suggested which can harmonise the requirements of democracy and security. This body would suggest the Cabinet on maters which may impinge on different facets of security. The council should be headed by the Prime Minister with key Ministers, the Services Chiefs and Cabinet Secretary as members. Members from the civil society, media, and intelligentsia may also be' co-opted as members as and when necessary. It is deliberately suggested that the security council should be advisory in nature in which case it would not conflict with the Cabinet decisions. This will also work as a feeder institution to the cabinet commitee on security affairs.

Rules of Business of the Government permit creation of sue a commitee. If there are such commitees for other ministries, there is a dire need, as practiced in India, U.S.A and other countries, of creation of such a commitee Bangladesh. It would executive body dishing out security policies for the implementation by the concerned agencies. This commitee, as and when felt necessary, may call for the advice of the Services Chiefs, Chiefs of the Paramilitary Forces and Intelligence Chiefs. It should be headed by the Prime Minister's with other concerned ministers as members. Its terms of reference should recognize security in its comprehensive sense.

Although Bangladesh should basically continue with parliamentary system, a deviation may be made, as was done while introducing the Caretaker Government, and as somewhat similarly practiced in France and Sri Lanka, to elect the president directly by the people. This would act as a kind of check and balance in the parliamentary system. As already suggested President will have exclusive powers of appointing all the judges of the Supreme Court on the recommendation of the Chief Justice.

Constitutional experts may also think of extending president's power in appointing the chairman and members of other constitutional bodies President may take the support of a search commitee for the selection of the chairmen and members of the constitutional bodies. In South Africa it is the parliament which first ratifies such appointments and President then approves those. As supreme commander of the defence forces President's consent may be made binding while selecting the Services Chiefs. Services Chiefs, however, would continue to be responsible to the Government for all their actions. President may meaningfully be consulted regarding appointments, transfers, and promotion of the officers not below the rank of Major Generals or equivalents. President would have the prerogative of declaring emergency in the whole or in parts of Bangladesh whenever the security and economic life of Bangladesh will be in jeopardy without being; advised by the Prime Minister President may also have the prerogative of sending subjects affecting national security for consideration by the advisory security council and the cabinet commitee on security affairs. President himself will head the Non-party Caretaker Government to conduct a free, fair and credible parliamentary election within six months with the help of a council of advisors as given in the Constitution. However, on all other maters the President will act on the advice of the Prime Minister. Basic executive powers would continue to be wielded by the Prime Minister.

The government should, in right earnest, try to make the military politically sterile and make it truly professional. Party political consideration should not influence the promotion of the military officers. Bangladesh military may need to be modernised, especially in maters of procurement of state of the art equipment without which the military cannot be made truly professional. A professional military is generally seen to be more politically neutral, and subservient to the legitimate government as observed by Huntington. A truly modern professional military would greatly strengthen the bargaining power of the government in inter-state or multilateral negotiations. And when it is an elected democratic government, its legitimacy would provide the process a multiplier effect

Security of jobs for the military personnel in a democracy is a long felt demand. A thorough reform of military laws, rules and instructions is a necessity for the 21st century in order to come out of the legacy of the British colonial system. Administrative disposal may occasionally be used in firing the military officers and men. In certain cases the aggrieved officers and men may be allowed to appeal to the Supreme Court This is, as understood, practiced in Indian military. However its knity grities have to be worked out

All promotions to the selective ranks- except three stars level in the army and two stars level in the other two other services-may be done through the Boards constituted by the respective Services Headquarters and as prescribed in the Rules. However, the government will have the option to approve the promotions 'up to certain level. This will greatly reduce political influence in selecting more professional, competent senior commanders for the armed forces. This will help the armed forces to be more professional and politically almost sterile. This would rather strengthen both security and democracy in the country. Military's role clarity would be beter crystallised.

Legitimacy of the government in power, in the perception of the citizens, be it democratic, monarchy, dictatorship, is the greatest locus standi for continuance in power. Whenever this legitimacy is questioned by the people at large and the international community the country tends to slide towards crisis and disarray. In a scenario like this both the dimensions of security i.e. internal and external tend to get affected. It may lead to reaching the level of a failed state. Now this legitimacy has to be ensured in the system of succession of power by any means. President Ershad continued to suffer from the stigma of illegitimacy and the country paid a heavy price to restore legitimacy. President Ayub Khan, although was welcome in the initial days, even to the extent that an internationally reputed scholar like Huntington almost called him a semi-god, suffered from legitimacy crisis that resulted in high pitched political turmoil followed by an internal war where international powers got involved. President Parvez Musharraf is in crisis which even tends to impinge on country's sovereignty and territorial integrity. Even a democratic dictator (for a certain period of time) like Indira Gandhi, after imposing an emergency in the country in 1977 was thoroughly routed in the election that followed. Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhulto, a popular leader in Pakistan, could not sustain when the mass upsurge swept the country in 1977 after the election rigging allegations were leveled against him. Similar situation brew when Begum Khaleda Zia's (another popular leader in Bangladesh) coming to power in 1996 in a one-sided election which was perceived to be not legitimate. This legitimacy also helps in keeping the. military under professional control and as already said a professional military remains subservient to a politically legitimate government The final message is Bangladesh may never lose sight of this legitimacy. Country is vulnerable in many fronts; and also it has many windows of opportunity. Legitimacy will take care and take advantage of both the strengths and weaknesses of the country and bring the country to a medium-sized economy in not-too-distant a future. Bangladesh, endowed with a huge politically conscious and patriotic people, potentialities and heir to one of the finest values, civilisation and humanism, could be a model of tolerance, pluralism and vibrant democracy.

(Major General Mohd Aminul Karim, ndc, Idmc, psc is the military secretary to the Honourable President of Bnagladesh)