By: Viktoriya Malikova, Associate Editor
http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/lebanons-protesters-arrested-civilian-rallies-tried-military-courts-995284779
http://www.dawn.com/news/1307715
https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/01/26/lebanon-civilians-tried-military-courts
In his book, Huntington emphasizes importance of objective civilian control of the military, claiming that military is professional in management of violence, but not in the management of the state. So, the military may have a right to make certain decisions concerning army or, at least argue, that those decisions are indeed necessary and would be useful for society. But in any case it should not interfere in the politics. This balance, however, is difficult to achieve as the demands and suggestions of military often intersect with the other policies of the state. It was also highlighted by Posen in his discussion of the military doctrine, that grand strategy is about survival of the state and it covers military, social and economic aspects. However, drawing borders among these aspects can be very difficult. For example, during distribution of the budget it may be challenging to find a balanced way of distributing budgets among social care, investments into economics and satisfaction of military needs as each sector would consider itself to be the most important and will demand a bigger share.
Thus, the civilian control is not easy as it demands finding balance for many factors. However, one example of why the civilian control is so necessary and important can be Lebanon case, where the military courts were given a right to try the civilians who are suspected in terrorism or other type of threat to the state (participation in protests, for example). Military courts, trying military people is fitting into Huntington theory of objective control. However, when the military officers start to determine sentence of civilians, it is a clear example of violation of the civilian control. This is a case of military interfering into the politics and of a sharp increase in political power of the military.
The example of Lebanon shows that this expansion of military power leads to multiple abuses of human rights, such as use of torture during the interrogations. The law allows even children being sent to the military court. It results in vagueness and blurring the line between the cases that are under the management of the civilian courts and the cases under the management of the military. So, potentially, any suspect may be sent to the military court. Moreover, these trials are conducted behind the closed door, so there is not even a hint at transparency in this situation. Due to all this, the idea of military courts trying civilians rose high international condemnation, in particular of the Human Rights Watch organization.
This initiative at the beginning was put into practice for the period of two years and this period has expired in the January this year. The main political parties now debate with the government and argue in favor for taking away the right to try civilians from the military courts.
This case is an example of how the military control can be dangerous. The protection of state sometimes needs drastic measures. This solution of Lebanon’s government two years ago to allow military court try civilians was aimed at providing more security. At that time there was a serious threat of terrorism as it was right after the terrorist attack in 2015. However, the experience shows that decrease of the civilian control undermines protection of human rights and leads to abuse of power by military.
____________
References:
Huntington, S. (1957). The soldier and the state (1st ed.). Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Posen, Barry R. 1986. Chapter I In The Sources of Military Doctrine: France, Britain, and Germany Between the World Wars. Cornell University Press.
http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/lebanons-protesters-arrested-civilian-rallies-tried-military-courts-995284779
http://www.dawn.com/news/1307715
https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/01/26/lebanon-civilians-tried-military-courts
In his book, Huntington emphasizes importance of objective civilian control of the military, claiming that military is professional in management of violence, but not in the management of the state. So, the military may have a right to make certain decisions concerning army or, at least argue, that those decisions are indeed necessary and would be useful for society. But in any case it should not interfere in the politics. This balance, however, is difficult to achieve as the demands and suggestions of military often intersect with the other policies of the state. It was also highlighted by Posen in his discussion of the military doctrine, that grand strategy is about survival of the state and it covers military, social and economic aspects. However, drawing borders among these aspects can be very difficult. For example, during distribution of the budget it may be challenging to find a balanced way of distributing budgets among social care, investments into economics and satisfaction of military needs as each sector would consider itself to be the most important and will demand a bigger share.
Thus, the civilian control is not easy as it demands finding balance for many factors. However, one example of why the civilian control is so necessary and important can be Lebanon case, where the military courts were given a right to try the civilians who are suspected in terrorism or other type of threat to the state (participation in protests, for example). Military courts, trying military people is fitting into Huntington theory of objective control. However, when the military officers start to determine sentence of civilians, it is a clear example of violation of the civilian control. This is a case of military interfering into the politics and of a sharp increase in political power of the military.
The example of Lebanon shows that this expansion of military power leads to multiple abuses of human rights, such as use of torture during the interrogations. The law allows even children being sent to the military court. It results in vagueness and blurring the line between the cases that are under the management of the civilian courts and the cases under the management of the military. So, potentially, any suspect may be sent to the military court. Moreover, these trials are conducted behind the closed door, so there is not even a hint at transparency in this situation. Due to all this, the idea of military courts trying civilians rose high international condemnation, in particular of the Human Rights Watch organization.
This initiative at the beginning was put into practice for the period of two years and this period has expired in the January this year. The main political parties now debate with the government and argue in favor for taking away the right to try civilians from the military courts.
This case is an example of how the military control can be dangerous. The protection of state sometimes needs drastic measures. This solution of Lebanon’s government two years ago to allow military court try civilians was aimed at providing more security. At that time there was a serious threat of terrorism as it was right after the terrorist attack in 2015. However, the experience shows that decrease of the civilian control undermines protection of human rights and leads to abuse of power by military.
____________
References:
Huntington, S. (1957). The soldier and the state (1st ed.). Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Posen, Barry R. 1986. Chapter I In The Sources of Military Doctrine: France, Britain, and Germany Between the World Wars. Cornell University Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment