|
|
|
| Sunday, 18 December 2005 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Operation 'Guard of Honour' Military protocols: a show of 'Lankan' strength "Customs and Traditions do not mean that the living are dead but that the dead are living" - Field Marshall Wavell By Lt. Gen. Susantha Seneviratne, RWP, RSP, Psc, Msc (def)-rtd
Customs and traditions are instrumental in making etiquettes and protocols in the military. They, also contribute towards maintaining a kind of decorum. Nurturing and observing these customs and traditions, according to etiquettes and protocols help ensure 'discipline' at individual and collective levels in the military. The military is the prime organisation, in which these etiquettes/protocols are fostered, cherished and observed to the highest order, in the world. Unlike the various customs and traditions of individual races and religions that constitute a cosmopolitan society in countries, the military possess a unique characteristic - the customs and traditions, which the military forces of individual countries uphold are, almost similar to one another. Therefore, it has become much easy for the military servicemen to associate their counterparts overseas, regardless of whether those countries are located in the western, eastern, northern or southern hemisphere. This, in other words can be interpreted that the military is a 'global family'; enriched with a set of remarkable customs and traditions. 'Review' But, in Sri Lanka, there is a slight 'infiltration' of practices, rites and rituals based on various races, religions and culture into the military; and thus the military perform certain events, which do not carry any 'military significance' as a part of military ceremonies at present. The 'guard of honour' is the most 'solemn' and the highest order of parade in the military, which is accorded to a person of 'high office'. In the sequence of this drill, the most 'gracious' movement is the 'review' conducted by the person, who is being accorded the military honour. Since the incident of the aborted 'rifle butt strike' by a naval rating on the late former PM of India while he was reviewing the parade accorded to him in the year of 1987, the military seems to have omitted this event from the sequence; probably anticipating/to avoid recurrence of possible, similar incidents of such disgraceful nature in the future. However, what cannot be understood is that the military, being the 'rightful' defence authority of this country why did they exclude such a 'significant' movement from the standard sequence of military ceremonial drill although it was an 'irreparable' act that was prejudicial to military discipline and decorum committed by an 'insane' sailor. Nevertheless, the said act is not a 'veto' or a kind of 'threat' against the military to refrain from performing such a drill. What is being implied from such abstinence is the question of 'loyalty' of those, who are on parade and the 'incomplete' performances by them as per the laid down 'standards' in military protocols. However, at passing-out parades, the review is conducted as per the laid down protocols because, for the presentation of awards by the chief guest, he needs to be in close proximity to recipients. There was a time after the said incident in 1987, where the person reviewing the parade had been accompanied by the parade commander, keeping a distance more than the stipulated, to avoid such incidents. But, of course even before the said incident in 1987, there had been one occasion where the review was not conducted at the guard of honour - the first inaugural session of the parliament following completion of its construction, which was attended by the then president the late J. R. Jayewardene. The service commanders were not present and there was no 'reporting', either; the president was accorded only the 'present arms'; and since then, the same sequence has been continuing to- date. But, there is no logical explanation as to why the 'review' has been skipped or omitted from the sequence events, after all it being an old 'traditional' protocol in the military, which is, also an essential part of the sequence of action. Further, 'wordings' of initial 'reporting' to VIP convey the 'link' to the next event - the 'review'. So, this being the cynosure, once again manifested at the swearing-in ceremony of the 5th executive president. The parade was restricted to 'reporting' and 'present arms'. Although 'gun salute' took place as scheduled it is not an integral/organic part of the parading troops. The ideal should have been the 'review' by the new president; accompanied by the parade commander, who would be followed by the service-chiefs as that of a standard guard of honour. 'Standards' The presence of the chief of defence staff (CDS) at ceremonies, such as 'swearing in', along with service commanders is a point to be clarified, is it appropriate, in accordance with the 'standards' of military protocols and 'military wisdom'. Because, this appointment is meant for 'operational' purpose and its purview does not encompass command, control, administration and management of forces as that of a service commander; it is not the same as or is similar to that of Joint Chief of Staff of the US military or to that of Supreme Commander of the military in Thailand, either. However, the CDS is the highest operational coordinating office at national level but, yet he is not a commander or one, who is in charge of any 'service organisation'. According to the constitution, the executive president is the commander in chief of the Armed Forces. If the CDS is to be present; as per protocols he must be made the 'commander in chief' and, thus the president must hold only the ministerial appointment of defence. Another event, although it seemed to be insignificant, particularly to those ordinary civilians but would have given much conspicuous to those, who have a general understanding of this procedure, was the president's non-attendance to the hoisting of 'national flag'; Instead, he was given a pigeon to release to the air, which does not have any bearing to state/military protocols. This seemed to be a sheer ignorance on the part of those organisers including 'parade staff' of the military. Because, it is the prime responsibility of the military to 'guide' the president from the time he is taken over by them till the time the entire sequence of military ceremony comes to an end. Needless to mention the coordination is required to be made with civilian staff for this purpose. However, 'releasing pigeons' has no significant impact on both state and military protocols, because it is not a custom or tradition, upon which the etiquettes and protocols have been founded. How many times, have these birds been released to air! Has it actually brought peace! Had this practice been adopted in the country before the present crisis came into existence; and is this practice going to continue, even after peace dawned in the country. It is, also interesting to note that there had been two occasions where those pigeons, thus released had died after being thrown to the air-one such instance had been the opening ceremony of UN peace keeping training centre at 'Kukuleganga' where the present PM was, in attendance. Yet, it seems that no lesson has been learnt out of that as that of the separatist 'conflict'. The birds, especially pigeons will, naturally die when they are kept, clinching for hours and are thrown to air, at once; for being unable to expand their wings. If this event is mandatory to be in the sequence, it is much prudent and is of high standard to use a small cage, which is beautifully designed. One must understand that protocols stand eternally - it mustn't change or even attempt to modify; (unless for some worthwhile and meaningful purpose) otherwise its 'originality' will have no value. Culture and Religion Today, the military has its own cultural troupes - performances by 'drummers' and 'dancers' have become a part of the military ceremony. At inaugural/opening ceremonies, the event where the VIP is to be accompanied by military officials, under military escorts - 'stick orderlies' have, now been replaced or mixed up with 'drummers and dancers' as that in civil-ceremony. What must be understood is that a state ceremony would, in any case have to depict national culture whereas the military must show its own culture, which is 'unique' to all military forces in the world. There are even instances where the military is resorting the various kinds of religious observances which are of no military significance or do not have any 'truth' behind them. 'Blessing' ceremonies are one of them, which instill the servicemen on superstitious beliefs, miracles, myths, etc than building confidence in themselves. This, once again is a manifest of poor understanding - invoking blessings for 'material'/ 'worldly' victories rather than using that time for 'spiritual' development; and then act by 'professionalism'. Also, the religious activities must be done in plainclothes; not in 'uniform' - especially carrying flowers in uniform, of course does not go, in conformity to military attire. Security It is, also understood that there is a growing risk against VIPs attending military ceremonies, which are open to the public. But, it does not mean that these ceremonies must be postponed/ cancelled; if it happens so; that world would come to know; who is best-capable-and, who should be supported with. This has a great psychological impact within and outside the land. Besides, it will inspire the adversary by increasing his morale, and thus more cadres will join him. If the military is unable to provide security with 'least public inconvenience' (the last principle of 'internal security' - IS) those responsible must quit giving opportunities for others to do. State ceremonies must go on, as per the protocols with no modifications/ changes for security reasons. Major ceremonies, such as 'independence parade' which is the highest military ceremony in any country, must be conducted (including vehicle mounted review by the president) as a symbol of strength of the state and the military. Obviously, there may be risks, but they must be faced by the leadership of all fields-because they are obliged to carry on with state affairs and the military must ensure that their adversary is not capable as that of them. However, these are some of the challenges, which the new president has to face and overcome; he has now got everything new as he said - the Cabinet; government; policy, etc but to make a new Sri Lanka he needs a new 'strategy'; which no president has, ever ventured on. |
|
| News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
| Produced by Lake House |
