African Military Perspectives1

---

By Idriss Ngari
Minister of Defence Republic of Gabon

Published in African Security Review Volume 4 No 2 1995

INTRODUCTION

In dealing with a subject as broad as "African military perspectives", the primary consideration should be the multitude and complexity of African countries and their historical experiences. It is also true that African states and peoples present numerous common traits that could serve as a uniting force. Although derived from the perspective of Gabon’s experience, the following issues that will be addressed will nevertheless be familiar to the South African experience.

Firstly, the need for defence from an African perspective will be explained, including the developments that followed after the accession of different states to international sovereignty.

In the second place, more recent developments regarding the military will be presented, this being a period that has coincided with well publicised political unrest and democratisation.



The role that the military is playing in the present political environment will then be touched upon.



Finally, the contribution of the military in the promotion of trust and security between African states will be pointed out.

THE NEED FOR DEFENCE

The need for defence has manifested itself since the dawn of humanity. Mankind, whether it was organised in clans, tribes, villages or countries, always felt the need to ensure its collective security. This security role which devolved upon the army by a human collective was not only to ensure its own defence when a given territory was threatened, but also to increase vital living space. Parallel to this role, the army also became the spearhead of nation building and the safeguard of societies.

In antiquity, as much in the Greek Republic as in the Roman Empire, the armed forces played a major role both as an institution and as the principal instrument in conquests and in the protection of their respective countries’ interests. Likewise, as the history of humanity took its course during the centuries and on all continents, including Africa, republics, empires, kingdoms and dynasties were created and undone, enlarged and reduced, established and annihilated by the power of the sword. More recently, the powers of the West and subsequently the newly colonised countries relied mainly on military forces. The West did so in order to extend their zones of influence and colonised countries needed to liberate themselves from the colonial yoke. In Africa, the majority of countries achieved independence between 1950 and 1970. Irrespective of whether the colonial powers were forced to grant independence to these countries or whether independence was seized by means of an armed struggle, the young states found themselves faced with the obligation of having to ensure their own defence.

During this period the newly independent countries required defence forces out of necessity, out of principle and out of realism. At the time it was imperative to preserve cohesion within countries whose borders, as has long since been established, did not correspond with the natural and traditional contours of the various African nationalities. The defence force became the cement that was essential in uniting heterogeneous populations. It was also deemed functional in discouraging any secessionist attempts by a region within a particular country, or to deter any expansionist designs harboured by a neighbouring country. The necessity for a defence force once more focused on the age-old role of all defence forces to defend their countries against internal and external threats.

Furthermore and as a matter of principle, the newly independent states could not claim to be truly independent without a defence force. A so-called national defence force was considered a necessary attribute of independence, because, as guardian of the newly acquired international sovereignty, it constituted proof of the state’s authenticity.

On a realistic level, the newly independent states quite simply needed their defence forces in order to integrate top military cadres into the new administrative structures being formed, that were formerly occupied by citizens of the old colonial powers. The large numbers of lieutenants and captains who were members of government in almost every country at that time can still be recalled.

It must be emphasised that in most of these cases the political leaders of countries sincerely hoped that the devotion of officers to the service of the particular country might be an example to their fellow citizens. However, many internal and external crises have occurred, and numerous ambitions have been disappointed in the ten to fifteen years that followed the attainment of independence in African countries. Innumerable hopes have also been raised.

As to internal crises, the numerous coups d’état perpetrated by military men in a great many African states come to mind. If one were tempted to indulge in the exercise of finding historical justification for their deeds, for example by supposing that these military men believed themselves to be acting in the best interests of their people, this history, of which we are both the witnesses and actors almost thirty years later, will only condemn them. Their actions did not achieve a better life for the majority of the population.

As to external crises, the most obvious were the wars of liberation that several African countries south of the Sahara waged against the former colonial powers. The fratricidal wars between neighbouring countries, often inhabited by the same peoples also deserve mentioning. These wars constitute a particularly pernicious threat, as they have been and still are a sequel to colonialism. In many instances wars were fought over the borders that were drawn in the last century when the African continent was carved up at the Berlin conference.

As far as disappointed ambitions and missed historical opportunities are concerned the indiscretions of the military coups of the past three and a half decades have already been referred to. Whether the coups of the present day deserve censure or not, will have be reflected upon.

Finally, hopes have been raised within the general population who has always wanted to see the defence forces play a far greater part in contributing towards the development of their countries. These hopes originated when governments chose to assign the task of building many of the infrastructures to the defence force, in addition to regular armed service. In this altered role the defence forces were able, amongst others, to set up civic training programmes for young people. They have contributed to combating the devastating effects of droughts by constructing dams for the irrigation of land. They built schools and roads, and they took part in numerous mass medical programmes, notably vaccination campaigns. In short, the defence forces have always been seen primarily as instruments to assist communities that have been struck by natural disasters. This role taken on by defence forces falls within the field of civil service, something not really taken into account or acknowledged by many of the states.

In the years following the attainment of independence, troops constituting the armed forces came out of the previous colonial forces. Naturally, its members, especially the ordinary soldiers and non-commissioned officers, were Africans. It was also clear that, on the eve of independence, these soldiers were perceived as being members of an occupation force and even worse, of an army of repression. Overnight, these soldiers became part of a "national defence force" that implied instant conformity to the new governments. Obviously the people distrusted them, and for good reason. These same "brothers" participated the day before in extortion against their fellow citizens and, encouraged by the foreign cadres, abused their authority and generally scorned human rights. Under these circumstances, the people feared and distrusted the armed forces. Moreover, many political leaders, amongst them some of the foremost of the newly independent states, preferred the guaranteed short term peacefulness of a fearful and obedient people to the potential problems that a liberated and demanding society was likely to create.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

The relative peace and quiet amongst the powers of the day and the extended role of the defence force were to be called in question again a few years later when the wind of history and change, notably the wind of democracy, blew over the world and reached Africa.

It is well known that the instability in a country is generally and primarily motivated by the fact that elementary material and spiritual aspirations of the population have not been fulfilled. This is a truth which can be observed throughout the history of states, whatever the political regime. The ongoing world-wide economic crisis that is exacerbated in developing countries by restrictive historical factors, has already severely undermined economic activities in these countries for several years. A moral crisis was added to the bankruptcies of numerous companies that resulted in thousands of unemployed being spewed into the streets. This had been latent for several years and was basically due to the accumulation of all kinds of social frustrations. At the same time political voices speaking in a different language were being raised, questioning the efficiency of the ruling elite. In the face of social movements of a magnitude that was unprecedented in most countries, the reactions of some political leaders was to suppress these movements, in the same way as in the past. Others, following the direction of history, entered into negotiations with the emerging oppositions without delay.

For the African defence forces the swiftness, and sometimes even the brutality with which democracy was imposed on countries, constituted a new threat against national life - an internal threat that regularly manifested itself in riots. These were often caused by general incomprehension of the new political dispensation. Thus the defence forces, initially under the sway of the prevailing institutional system in a particular country, and simultaneously condemned to change in view of a new political context, realised that they had to come to terms with their own traditional code of conduct. In those countries where the armed forces had become accustomed to long periods of internal peace, it was remembered, sometimes with a sense of surprise, that they had a duty to arbitrate and ensure the continuity of the state. At the same time and fortunately in quite a number of countries, the defence force became aware of the fact that as a national force it could not interfere with local events without prejudicing its country’s chances of truly becoming master of its own destiny for a very long time. The defence forces therefore began to "adapt" to the new political situation. Without positioning themselves on the side of any one political party, they settled down to their task of preserving the peace through their responsible conduct and to reassuring the people of their neutrality in the political arena. In fact, since the end of the eighties and the beginning of the nineties, it has been a matter of "adapting" to the new democratic environment for the military. It has also been a period in which its primary calling within a constitutional state had to be rediscovered.

THE ROLE OF THE MILITARY

The role that the military should play in Africa and in the present political environment needs to be questioned. Ideally, and in addition to being responsible for the defence of national territories, the armed forces must also play an educational role, contribute towards development, serve as social cement by observing neutrality and be a force in the service of peace.

The educational and social role of the defence force is realised, amongst others during the time spent by young men and women doing military service. Some of the values that young people can acquire or strengthen whilst serving in the defence force can include the development of a sensitivity for community issues, respect for the public well-being and a commitment to excellence. Added to this are qualities such as punctuality, moral integrity, intellectual discipline, and the development of strength of character. Physical and mental toughness and endurance, a respect for values, such as authority, a sense of dignity, duty, honour and ethics are also instilled.

From a social point of view, military service enables the most disadvantaged to uplift themselves socially, to acquire an education and to develop and improve their skills. In its efforts to provide avenues for social advancement, the defence force must obviously be assisted by the relevant government departments and ministries, such as those for National Education, Labour, Agriculture, Culture and Sport, to mention but a few. It must be added that it is of the utmost importance that all these actions are co-ordinated by government in order to emphasise its particular interest in the social reintegration of former soldiers into the economic circuit and civil society. This will also serve to make the African soldier’s increased contribution to the development of his country more visible. Indeed, the developing countries need all the manpower available and moreover, it is also a fact that in certain countries the defence force is in charge of a large part of the national infrastructure, particularly in the more inaccessible areas of such a country.

The defence force must also establish itself as the unifying cement of the nation. It is already the crucible where patriotism is forged, where young people from all over the country mingle, irrespective of their nationalities or origins. The position of neutrality expected of a soldier, as well as his implied willingness to lay down his life for his country, confer upon him a particular dimension and an importance that are accepted and recognised by all political systems. But whatever noble or unpopular roles these different political systems wish the defence force to play, it often asserts itself as the foundation of the national edifice. This is true even under those circumstances where Africans have to question themselves as to the position of the defence force as a state body in an under-developed society.

CONCLUSION

There are more roles that the defence force can play in Africa, apart from an educational one and one in which it contributes to development. On a military level, in its role as a peace force, there is little doubt that defence forces in Africa have not always been used with discretion by politicians. By the same token, military leaders have sometimes been seen diverting their forces from their traditional and legal missions. Fortunately, these deviations can never cast doubt upon the inherent validity of the institution. The new African political landscape affords the military the opportunity to rediscover its national ideal. This places an obligation on African leaders to strengthen the role that defence forces can play in a democratic society. It must be a force in the service of peace and must strive towards guarding the continuity of the State. In a similar vein, dissuasion in Europe and America has the merit of not only preventing a nuclear war, but also of promoting peace and serving as a vital channel for international relations. In the era of democracy that is ultimately characterised by multiparty politics and transparency, the defence force must above all forge renewed bonds with the nation, as it is primarily meant to act in the service of the nation.

Finally, the military should seek appropriate means to promote and strengthen security between states. In the concerted pursuit of establishing trust between countries, it is surely the duty of the armed services to ensure that sub-Saharan Africa is not disarmed, a situation that could only serve to put the region at risk within the broader world community.

__________