http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_editorial/475364.html
[Editorial] On Defense Reform Plan 307: Keep an open mind on pending legislation and gather ideas again.
Posted on : Apr.28,2011 13:16 KST
Controversy is raging over "Defense Reform Plan 307," which is set to change the upper command structure of the armed forces. The Navy and Air Force are objecting particularly strongly, expressing concerns about problems with the concentration of military authority and the diminishing of their own forces. One cannot help but worry that the government may end up harming military solidarity with its reckless pursuit of reorganization of the military system.
The gist of Plan 307 involves strengthening integrated military organization elements of the existing three-force system in order to transform the military into an operation-centered combat organization. To accomplish this, it would give both military command and military administration authority to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and have him preside over operations and personnel affairs for all of the forces through the individual Chiefs of Staff.
The integrated system and three-force system each have their own merits and demerits. However, the biggest problem with Plan 307 is that the legislation has been rushed. The Ministry of National Defense raced to give a presidential report without conducting any proper hearing. After some segments of the armed forces raised objections, an official from Cheong Wa Dae, the presidential office in South Korea, threatened to "regard this as insubordination and strip them of their uniforms." This is a situation where the unrealistic elements should be filtered out after having been reviewed openly within and around the armed forces, yet things have essentially been handled in the opposite way from the beginning.
Another problem is the repeated use of stopgap measures to quiet objections. In a deviation from the original plan, the Ministry of National Defense announced that it would create two or three Deputy Chief of Staff positions and hand operational command to the First Deputy Chief of Staff, who would hold the rank of general. This gives an indication of their intent to give merely nominal authority to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a position that circulates among the Army, Navy, and Air Force, and have real authority exercised by the First Deputy Chief of Staff, a position appointed by the Army. This is worse than outright creating a distorted organization in which the higher-ranked party is a figurehead and the lower-ranked party holds the real power.
After Air Force observers commented that it was ridiculous for the Air Force Chief of Staff, a general, to be under the wartime command of the U.S. 7th Air Force Commander, a lieutenant general, the response was to create the new position of the lieutenant general-level Deputy Chief of Staff and have this officer subject to the command of U.S. forces. Here we see a strained Procrustean attempt to cut the person down to the size of the bed. With the increase in deputy chiefs in the Joint Chiefs of Staff and different forces, the leadership has swollen further. One has to ask whatever happened to the plan of simplifying the upper command system and getting rid of the dead weight.
On the heels of a Cabinet vote on Plan 307, the Ministry of National Defense announced plans a few days ago to finish the legislative process at the June extraordinary session of the National Assembly. In so doing, it plans to complete the military system reorganizations before the end of the current administration. However, it is difficult to see the reorganization succeeding without sympathies within the armed forces, and there have also been concerns voiced by the National Assembly National Defense Committee. This is not a case where stubbornness will win the day. We hope the government will start over by gathering opinions on military system reorganization with an open mind.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment