Monopoly of the Legitimate Use of Force
The military is one
actor in state society relations which holds the most blatant manifestation of
power – martial might. And in the
context of state building there are two important questions to consider:
- How much power must
the military hold?
- should government
be arranged or structured by the law to ensure this power be properly wielded?
Schulzke (2010)
cites Tilly (2007) that weak states have a tendency to become undemocratic due
to the presence of distrust in the state-society relationship, along with the
situation of the need to contend with non-state centers of power. In this situation the ultimate power of
monopolized use of force must be properly balanced. Too much power in the hands of state makes it
abusive with the power to control elections, and almost every aspect of the
life of the people. On the other hand,
too much power in the hands of non-state actors can not only lead to a weak
state but to a collapsed state since the state loses power and other
institutions and agencies jockey for social control.
But why the need
for the armed forces in the first place?
It is essential to maintain security both from within and from outside
of the territory. Security at its basic
form within the borders is to help control crime and maintain order. However, certain factors rise up that
complicate simple governance. In the
Philippines these belong to geographic, historical and economic areas of
politics.
Philippine Political Geography and Geopolitics
Castillo (2011) in
his thesis described Philippine political geography as:
“The Philippines is an archipelago composed of 7,100
islands. Several of these islands are
populated by peoples of unique cultures, languages, and traditions. Governing over all these
territories and peoples is a central government located in Metro Manila. Manila
is a metropolis, center of both government and economy, at the heart of the
largest island located to the north of the country. Observing the Philippines,
one would notice how unequal the regions are. It is noticeable that Metro
Manila and its immediate adjoining cities enjoy greater opportunities of
development. In contrast, the farther one territory is from the capital, the
less opportunities for development it has.”
This describes
geographic, socio-cultural, and economic sources of tension with the borders of
the Philippines. Because of thes
tensions of differences, and economic disparity, armed rebellions are produced. To add to this, geopolitically - the
Philippines’ islands are scattered across a territory of 300,000 km2. Most of the dry land is covered with thick
jungles (Schulzke, 2010). More so, the
islands get more scattered, more mountainous, more thickly forested as one goes
farther away from the plains of Luzon in Manila.
The Arms Race History
The power to
monopolize the use of force has been maintained as much as possible within the
state by the authoritarian rule of the former colonizers. However, Schulzke cites (Van der Kroef, 1987)
that the coming of the United States and the involvement of the Philippines in
World War II allowed the spread of weapons to local resistance fighters. These fighters once fought against the
Japanese, but eventually, new groups arise after the war. These new groups now fight against the
Philippine state. Kessler (1989) as
cited in Shulze observed that these local resistance fighters replenish arms by
stealing from the national military itself, buy them from soldiers, or from
actual arms sellers.
Non-state Weilders of Force (illegitimate wielders)
A reading of
Shulze’s article allows us to enumerate the following autonomous agencies who
jockey for power using military might:
- National
Liberation Front (MNLF) / Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) – raises arms
due to socio-political conflict.
- Communist Party of
the Philippines-National People’s Army (CPP-NPA) – raises arms due to widespread economic gap
between the rich and the poor in the country.
- Officials
with private armies – to maintain their grasp upon government.
The Military Itself
The Philippine
military itself had three prevalent illnesses coming from within and outside
its ranks. These according to Schulzke
are:
- The military itself
lacks legitimacy in the areas where they get assigned within the
Philippines. The local citizenry resent
or do reject their presence. This is
usually due to their conduct and manner of treating the residents.
- The military has
poor counterinsurgency tactics. It is
not that they lack technology, but they lack “cohesion, loyalty, and
morale”. The leaders are unable to
instill these traits among the soldiers.
- The military is
politicized. They are personal tools of
those who seat in government, and the various politicians (whichever is more
influencial, usually in terms of money payments) are able to pull their
strings.
The Solution
For all three
problems, Schulzke proposes that the military arm of the government must be
depoliticized. Politicization is the
effect of politicians, not statesmen, who try to use politics as a game to
pursue their own personal agendas (usually either to enrich themselves or
maintain their government positions).
Proper depoliticization of the military will bring about professionalization
both in skills and conduct. A professionalized
military can then focus on training. A
professionalized military can focus on doing their constitutional mandate
rather than obeying the commands of their patron politicians.
Sources:
Castillo, R. M.
(2011). Federalism and Its Potential Application to the Republic of the
Philippines. MA Thesis. Manila:
University of Santo Tomas Graduate School.
Schulzke,
M. (2010). Democratization and Military Reform in the Philippines. Journal
of Asia Pacific Studies, 1(2), 320-337.
______________________
For the class
The first question was answered by Schulzke
through Tilly. For todays blog
discussion, I want your own professional points of view on any of the topics
covered. That includes the second
question as raised above, along with all the boldfaced subheadings. Note that you are not to discuss every topic.
Focus only on one. Your task is to give substantial explanation
on the phenomenon (e.g. What is the true reason behind a particular
insurgency? Are there other private
armies in the Philippines?).
Or give a
particular example of one of the topics (e.g. How is the military politicized?
How poor is the military’s strength or counterinsurgency tactics?).
Since you are
focusing only on one topic, ensure no duplication of discussions and samples,
and use sources to establish your claims.
Each student gets
one paragraph, 3-5 sentences. This is
considered as an online class recitation (75-100 pts to be factored in the
individual recitation grades). Deadline
of comment posting is until August 28, 2012 (7:00 p.m.).
Ps.
First two rounds of
debates start on Sept. 3, 2012.
Here’s the complete
list of groupings and their motions:
Round 1 – N vs F :
Juvenile criminal laws should be made harsh.
Round 2 – G vs C : Religious
symbols must be prohibited in government offices.
Round 3 – M vs D :
Gay couples should be given a chance for legitimate relationship rights.
Round 4 – H vs B :
The Philippines should maintain friendly relations with China.
Round 5 – L vs I :
Employer’s must accede to worker’s demand for higher wages.
Round 6 – J vs E :
The control over utilities such as power and water supply should be returned to
the government.
Round 7 – K vs A : The
Philippines require a bloody revolution.
(May be defined thematically)
