| Sports |
by TREVOR
MEAURI
Does national security really matter?
THIS question was implicitly raised
in recent articles by Anthony Sil (“Military Equation Does Not Add
Up”, The National, March 9) and Yaura Sasa (“Australia Declares
War on PNG”, The National, March 16).
When the Moti saga emerged, it was in the context of national
security but it did not interest people enough as their lives were
not threatened.
Julian Moti, unfortunately, was never a national security risk to
PNG under the definition and interpretation of the National
Intelligence Organisation Act (1983) and the Prime Minister & NEC
Act (2002).
The argument that PNG’s external sovereignty was violated by
Australian agents employs a naďve, if not a myopic understanding
of the correlation between national security, sovereignty and the
rule of law.
As such, it may be apt to ask whether national security really
does matter at all or are we simply using it to abuse it for some
diplomatic points scoring?
While the fate of the Moti report now stands in limbo, the central
issue is whether the National Security Council (NSC), National
Security Advisory Committee (NSAC) and the Office of Security
Coordination & Assessment (OSCA) were the appropriate authorities
to deal with the case.
OSCA is an administrative body set up to facilitate and provide
secretarial and advisory functions to the NSAC.
It deals in policy and not in operational areas. Its involvement
in an operational issue as the Moti case is a blunder that should
not be repeated.
If the OSCA is to survive as a central coordination mechanism for
the NSAC, a line must be clearly emphasised demarcating what is
policy from operational.
Above OSCA is the NSAC, which is chaired by the chief secretary,
Key members are drawn from the police, the defence force, the
National Intelligence Organisation (NIO), etc. These are
implementing agencies.
The chairman cannot under any circumstances unilaterally give
directions on such cases as Moti except NSAC’s decisions.
Likewise, the Prime Minister as chairman of National Security
Council cannot unilaterally act unless they are the council’s
decisions or the NEC.
Any action outside of this either would be deemed illegal and
thereby constitute abuse of power and leadership breach.
In summation, the director-general of the OSCA reports to the NSAC
chairman who is responsible to the NSC chairman.
Nothing under the PM & NEC Act nor the NIO Act allows for the
Prime Minister to give directions to OSCA director-general, let
alone unilaterally.
The director-general is not the chief national security adviser to
the Prime Minister as depicted in media reports. That role belongs
to the NSAC chairman.
The nature of security in PNG has changed quite dramatically.
Its traditional role of focusing on threats against the State and
its sovereignty is gradually giving way to a new sense that
focuses on development.
As threats of foreign military aggression dissipates, threats of
corruption, crime, drug and guns, ethnic conflicts, etc, now
demand good governance, law and order, and sustainable development
practices to improve the economic and social conditions of the
people and ultimately guarantee security, at least in the human
dimension.
While PNG focuses on its security as a matter requiring
developmental solutions, the overall regional (South Pacific and
Australasia) geo-political and strategic security environment is
somewhat driven by Australia’s actions and reactions to the threat
of global terrorism and other forms of transnational crime.
The “pre-emptive strike policy” and the Enhanced Cooperation
Programme (ECP) clearly demonstrate Australia’s proactiveness and
also reinforce the view that countries of the Pacific are
frontlines for its own stability and security.
Furthermore, because of its economic might and political leverage,
Australia has been able to maintain a diplomatic reign in the
region as a “regional policeman” with its own rules of
engagements.
Consequently, while Canberra may appear genuine in its concern for
the welfare and development of Pacific Island countries, it is
quite a difficult task to dispel arguments alluding to Australia
re-colonising the Pacific.
A major concern for Australia and its Western allies also is the
ever-growing influence and power of China regionally and globally.
Are we anticipating a peaceful or aggressive China?
Australia’s governor-general Michael Jeffery commented in one of
the editions of Jane’s Defence Weekly, saying PNG needs to look to
Australia rather than China for support.
This is serious statement as
it comes from an eminent Australian, who is not only a retired
major-general, but also a key person in the group that recommended
for the downsizing of the PNG Defence Force.
Australia and its Western friends are caught in a state of
indecision as to what is or are
the best approaches to engage with China given this widespread
assertion that China will become a world superpower by the 2020s.
PNG’s growing bilateral relations with China is indeed worrying
for Australia.
What then should be our immediate security focus?
The Government firstly must not allow itself to get so absorbed in
the promises development may bring for national security.
National security is a paramount obligation that is important to
state-building, legitimacy and effective government.
Furthermore, achieving security through the conduct of foreign
policy must not only be pursued economically but also
strategically, for economic wealth and development tends to work
counterproductive to security interests.
Finally, the Government must seriously consider developing a White
Paper on national security that would form the basis for various
other security programmes.
This will give the Government a sense of direction and
coordination in the way that allows it to fulfil its
constitutional obligation.
It’s about time we learn to be assertive and take national
security seriously.
Note: The writer is a former director
(coordination) of the Office of Security Coordination & Assessment
at the National Security Advisory Committee. He was also a senior
political analyst with the National Intelligence Organisation.
 
|
