| Sports |
by REGINALD
RENAGI
National security does matter
I READ Trevor Meauri’s article, ‘Does
National security really matter?’ (The National, April23) with
interest. I agree that we must take our national security
seriously.
The foremost policy area for any government today is to protect
our national interests. We do this by integrating all elements of
our national power and resources to ensure the survival of PNG at
all cost.
It is the duty of every citizen to ensure this, and all government
agencies are responsible for protecting our national interests.
For years, the government has taken our national security for
granted as it fails to identify specific threats to PNG.
Its early threat assessments were on the basis that it was
unrealistic considering the state of turmoil in the world. This
flawed strategic assessment was used as justification for the
relatively low priority given to defence and national security.
Moreover, security issues were notably characterised by poor
standards of debate in Parliament coupled with an inadequate
budget appropriation.
So it is of vital importance that there should be informed and
continuing criticism and debate concerning national security, both
in and outside Parliament.
Thus, it is essential that our defence requirements be clearly
defined and implemented. In future, our security environment will
undoubtedly erode as the rate of crime has not gone down despite
continued efforts to reduce crime.
New strategies must now be adopted. The government must show
concern as the role of our defence force in developing and
maintaining its security capability will no doubt go through a
significant change.
As a sovereign nation, it is time the government gets serious
about our security and does something about it than give mere
‘lip-service’.
In general, many people including the government, thinks national
security is about defence by linking it with military-related
threats. This is inaccurate, as security considerations goes
beyond the realm of defence.
Our policy framework must effectively comprise of the political,
economic, social and environmental defence against both internal
and external threats; having domestic as well as international
dimensions.
With complex and dynamic interplay between all elements at various
levels, it is important that our development policies and
programmes are formulated in a manner that are mutually
supportive, and give substance to the government’s role in future.
PNG’s national security should comprise of several sub-strategies.
The government must be committed to develop its capacity to
inspire confidence among its citizens that our territorial
integrity, sovereignty, national core values and interests are not
threatened by any hostile force or element, including other
divisive forces of subversion and anarchy.
National security is our absolute value with all other values as
well as resources being subservient to it.
A future national security White Paper should include our concerns
for education, health, environment, culture, societal values,
human needs and preservation of ethical, moral, religious aspects
among others.
Moreover, national security and development are complementary to
each other, so it is important to critically focus on the primary
objectives of national security and development.
Without a sound national security policy framework and synergistic
action by all relevant agencies, our government will fail to
achieve the kind of development it desires for its people.
Meauri further asks a very pertinent question: “What then should
be our immediate security focus?”
The biggest future security challenge for us is the range of
transnational security concerns that we must try to effectively
deal with using our own resources.
On the other hand, we must also realise that we share many
challenges internally and within the region, and so it is with
great comfort to know that PNG attracts a particular priority in
both Australia and New Zealand’s strategic thinking.
This priority comes from several factors. So let us not forget
that we are of prime geo-strategic importance, especially to the
former.
As apart from our historical links, Australia has substantial
economic investments here (as with other countries), and with a
potentially expanding economy besotted by serious internal
instability, national security poses great challenges that
Australia is prepared to assist us address it in any way, in
future.
This is perhaps our shared strategic vision and security
objective.
It is important that PNG does not reach the stage where its key
state functions of national security get seriously undermined.
When this happens, we could easily fall victim to the growing
threats of transnational crime where non-state actors could
subvert our government and country, and creating a wider national
security concerns within the region.
Thus, at both national and international level, our security
policies must be thoroughly integrated to take full account of the
interface with economic, social and political realities. This will
ensure we effectively leverage the strategic support of friendly
countries having shared interests to us.
If we fail to do this, then government’s efforts become mostly
ineffective, very costly and contradictory to future core
development goals.
Given our modest economic strength, we can only achieve a
reasonable degree of national security. This is possible through a
favourable international environment, economic and military
self-reliance, and a stable political system.
Additionally, we need to also ensure our policy framework contains
certain key components. They should comprehensively articulate
four essential areas – foreign policy, economic potential,
strategic intelligence and defence options.
The government must ensure that other vital areas of national
policies are in line with our defence policy. There have also been
recent changes to our strategic environment and the need for
greater self-reliance in defence must be fully appreciated.
The government must now fully assess PNG’s situation today and
translate these fundamental changes into a coherent national
security ‘White Paper’.
Notwithstanding, in view of the difficulties involved in
predicting either likely threats, or a range of possible
contingencies which PNG could face, consequently; most strategic
assessments since independence has so far been mainly of a
no-threat environment.
For valid reasons, PNG cannot plan for a ‘no-threat’ future. This
‘no-threat syndrome’ has for many years clouded politicians and
bureaucratic thinking to be so complacent resulting in our present
state of affairs.
Today, the government has no real excuse for not recognising the
basic elements of our national security situation with which it
has to deal with.
As a sovereign nation, we must always strive to promote our
national security.
Moreover, the media in recent times have queried whether we should
increase or reduce our defence force.
This depends very much on two key factors.
It all hinges around how we perceive our military within our
societal context and juxtapose this against the overall national
security spectrum today.
However, this is not an easy question to address without fully
analysing many complex factors involved.
When everything has been said and done, I feel it depends on the
basic and fundamental issue of ‘the defence of PNG and its
national interests’.
From years of direct observations, PNG’s political leadership has
been woefully ignorant in failing to treat defence and national
security as a high priority development tool.
Its lack of any sound strategic intelligence planning has impeded
the economic growth of PNG for years.
The bottom-line is – if we do not have good security, then our
country’s development will also suffer – period.
The government failed to do its own cost-benefit analysis of its
security requirements in 2000 when it was influenced by foreign
interests to cut its defence force strength by over 60%. It failed
to properly consult with the defence organisation, which was in a
much better position to advise the government.
It was total betrayal to our military personnel who have shown
years of loyalty and commitment and no one in government and
Parliament had the guts to speak out in defence of the PNGDF, or
even point out the fact that PNG was now in a vulnerable strategic
position.
The intelligence community also failed to advice the
‘powers-that-be in Waigani that this was another calculated move
to seriously weaken our national security capacity through
economic subversion. This action alone was indeed a national
disgrace.
For the record, no other country will ever tell us what we need to
know due to our government’s total ignorance about matters of
national interests and security.
It is not in their national interest, but it certainly is in ours
to do something about it.
As Meauri so aptly puts it, “this will give the government a sense
of direction and coordination in the way that allows it to fulfil
its constitutional obligation”.
Yes, our national security does matter, so it is now up to a new
prime minister and government to start doing this in 2007 and
beyond.
Note: The writer is a former PNGDF Chief
of Staff and head of the military planning branch within the
Defence Ministry. He is now a freelance writer, researcher and
part-time adviser to concerned like-minded citizens groups in
matters of preserving national interest and security.
 
|
