Ina CMR

   CIVIL MILITARY RELATION

By. Juanda Sy, M.Si (Han)

Civil - Military relations, is a political term that has been developed into a science. Previous knowledge and theory of civil military relations developed countries and the liberal-democratic state that is relatively advanced and politics pattern, civil military relations implemantation interpreted as a form of civil supremacy. The views and thoughts about the civil and military relations, not just developing in Indonesia, but globally discussed by experts of political and military link with the process of democratization and the impact caused by the process. In some colleges universities, civil military relations into a branch / department that contained a separate college in central of civil military relations.

In countries which apply the rule of Democracy, civil military relations is the implementation of civilian supremacy. Huntington in his article cited by R & D bulletin Kemhan also peeling of the civilian Supremacy or civilian control objective, states that civilian supremacy interpreted as an attempt to minimize military intervention in political activities, in the sense that the military recognizes the authority of another civilians in formulating and overseeing implementation of policies on defense. Reducing the military intervention of practical politics to improve military professionalism while providing the military the right to autonomy over their own organization. Military devotion to the state is a consequence of the task according to his profession as a country that based on military professionalism in its main task. In countries that awareness of the responsibilities of the profession is so attached, the military completely under civilian control, with the understanding that the military domination of civilian politics, contrary to the democratic system of government.

Each country in which civil-military relations had been going well, usually politicians control the military through a system of accountability, and control of politicians by the public through the same way. Despite the division of responsibilities and a government already well-established, but the real control is still not implemented effectively. The main key civilian leadership over the military is a mechanism of accountability, with accountability mechanisms that have been going well and effectively, then the control will be good and effective as well. Civilian leadership over the military should not be interpreted simply become a shield against possible coup, but as an attempt to manage a government that gives legitimacy and corridors of all concerned actors in society. Although the government sets limits on decisions and actions of military officials, but control over the responsibility in carrying out the fundamental duty is a concept that gives real control over decisions and actions of politicians and military leaders.

 Thinking of looking at the relationship of civil - military, reviewing some problems that can be used as an assessment that is: First, in civil-military relations that happens is' Praetorian problems, such as Samuel Huntington (1991: 231) "the need to curb the ability of military politics ". Having succeeded in limiting the political power of the military, the government of liberal democracies and new democracies have concentrated on the need to oversee and manage civil-military relations. Second, the Government argues that liberal democracy because the army is an armed organization that discipline, then it can be a potential that threaten freedom. Conversely, because the indiscipline military, also a potential that can cause harm in society. In such circumstances, it is necessary to guarantee for the military as a disciplined armed organization, shall perform its functions to maintain state sovereignty and prevent military intervention in politics in a manner that is not discipline, adventure, which is a threat to a democratic government or to citizens. Third, M. Howard, (1957), thinking about how to protect the military so as not to fall into the dual role of the army between the submission of the armed forces under the political and governmental control over the submission. Namely to prevent the military from becoming an instrument of power for the sake of perpetuating the political power of civil, which led to the military out of its main task as a tool of the State. Fourth of relationship problems between military experts with the Ministry of Defence.  Samuel Huntington, (1991:20) About "how the Secretary of Defense can control the military if he has no credible knowledge and experience to perform the duties and authority" control functions will be weakened if the decision of the Minister is the brainchild of military generals. To overcome this minister could have taken a staff of experts (whizz kids) outside the military environment. The problem that arises is, how the military would comply with the policy minister while the minister's decision did not involve military opinion. The problems are interrelated and can not help to improve civil-military relations. Consideration of the more profitable is if you want to achieve is a common interest, then the military remained involved in drafting policies that deal directly with military autonomy. These considerations provide an opportunity to civilian control over military better still give to the military leadership roles in his involvement in the policies to be applied, because basically the head of the army was primarily to understand how the organization.

In recent decades, Indonesia experienced a pattern of civil military relations with the military domination during the New Order which turned out not to develop democracy in a positive nature.   However, this view has not been received by all military leaders.  The attitude of the military leaders who reject this view, it would sharpen the negative perception of the civil parties against the military that led to the assumption that the military presence would only be a threat to democratic governance.

 Military as part of the Indonesian community or section of citizens is the instrument of the state and therefore the attitude of the military must carry out government policy as a political leader's decision. As the mandate of popular sovereignty, granting autonomy to the military from civilian political leaders, there are some circles of the opinion that these conditions will provide opportunities to the military to be responsible and avoid being subject to the civilian leadership. The military argued that if the military subject to civilian leaders, then what happens is the politicization of the military, where military rulers exploited by political / as a tool of power, which would interfere with its status as a country that protects state sovereignty. Therefore, the military would prefer that the relationship is equality (equal relationship), nothing is mastered and controlled, there was no ordinate and subordinate.
         Civil-military relations pattern in Indonesia still raises insecurity and unhealthy rivalry between the civilian and the military. Civil-military relations in turn requires the harmonization of the equality of "proportional" as agreed upon by civilian supremacy, which the military must be professional in their field and participate in civil defense manage to jointly build a model of civil-military relations are harmonious in Indonesia for the common good and build a new Indonesia in democratic government and recognized by the international community.

The Defence Ministery views published in the Bulletin of Research and Development (2007), stated that efforts to build a new format of civil-military relations in a democratic society requires a more fundamental basic, an important criterion that must be met is the establishment of democratic governance through a legitimacy based on legislation, public accountability in the provision of military autonomy in personnel policy, determining the level of power, problems of education and military doctrine.

Sayidiman Suryohadiprojo (2007) on civil military relations in Indonesia warned that Indonesia did not adopt a purely civilian Supremacy adopted for the western world, because of the supremacy of one faction against another faction is not in line with Pancasila and the opportunity to be a reason for conflict. Nevertheless, the military organization as the instrument of the state, is obliged to carry out decisions issued by the Government. Sayidiman further argued that without having to adopt the term civilian supremacy, the military will adapt to the nature of democracy, with a conscious adherence to the Government, whoever is sitting in a government that, during the reign was legitimized by the election results valid. However, in accordance with his true identity, the military as a national army, which upholds the political state, is obliged and has the right, as a right held by other professions to deliver its founding to the Government even though it may differ from the views of the establishment of the Government. The military must always be guided by the political state based on Pancasila and 1945 Constitution and Sapta Marga. During the government in carrying out its duties remain guided by the Pancasila and 1945 Constitution, the military will be obedient to the government, as a professional military organization, submissive attitude of the military as the capacity to implement and manage basic tasks with fixed forward the interests of the people, together with other social forces promote the establishment of democracy in Indonesia.

 Samuel P. Huntington in his work The Soldier and the State: the Theory of Civil - Military Relations, concerning civilian control objective, which quoted Djuyadi Yusa (2010) believed in the notion of objective civilian control, military power will be minimized, but not eliminated the same once, as one way to increase professionalism among the military. For these purposes, the condition of civil - military relations in Indonesia after New Order government aimed to create a pattern balance and control in civil - military relations. Platform to think Huntington is then also used as an excuse to reduce the military strength of practical politics and the only place the military under its main functions and duties as an defence instrument of the state.

Although the military had consciously put myself as an instrument of national defense and civil government has the right to exclude the area of ​​defense policies, to organize civil military relations are harmonious and democratic, the government should formulate a systematic program in accordance with existing problems, as a form of civic understanding on defense issues and military issues. Civilian politicians, in order to be recognized and trusted in matters of defense, should be able to increase the expertise, in order to understand the ins and outs of national defense and military organizations, so that the formulation of defense policies legitimized by the military.

The involvement of civil government in formulating and managing the field of defense, should continue to give autonomy to the military in organizing and managing the organization, to achieve the professionalism and ability to perform basic tasks. In the spirit of democracy by considering the harmonious relationship of civil - military, civilian interference in preparing the agenda and policies in the field of defense, should not intervene too much into the military organization. Instead, the military also did not look for opportunities and a chance to intervene in government affairs and consciously adhere to government policies and respect the democratic process.

Military civilian relations that are expected of civil military relations that are built with the spirit of equality, solidarity, co-exist as the driving passion to maintain and improve the competitiveness of Indonesia in the era of globalization. In searching for and formulating new Civil-Military relations are harmonious takes a willingness and enthusiasm of all the components of the nation in the mental attitude of mutual respect and respect and work together to achieve a democratic Indonesia.

The involvement of civil authority in the defense sector should be supported by a number of expertise, because expertise from civilian largely determine the quality policy that will be generated in the defense sector, which is very different from the formulation of policies in other sectors. Expertise in the defense sector can also determine the quality of civil relationships - harmonious military. Therefore, the civil authorities need to understand the ins and outs of the world for defense and military policies are not formulated to get the opposition or rejection from the military. It is important for the government or politics to maintain consistency in the enforcement of civil military reform, one of which is to prevent civilian politicians actively involve the military in a variety of practical political activity. The attitude of civilian politicians involving the military in the world of practical politics to bring the military to the desire to gain power they once felt when the New Order.

 Although the military currently is in a democratic climate, it turns out the problems of the past into consideration some politicians, so that the military presence in Indonesia is currently limited by the system and regulations that are deliberately structured to limit the role, operations, budget, weapon system and military professionalism, as a result of civil mindset that is embedded as a form of "revenge of the past" on a group of actors and institutions that feel marginalized and feel the pressure at the previous time. This attitude shows the indications that lead to a goal of distancing the military with the people, by considering that the proximity of the Indonesian armed forces with the people, will greatly affect the political role of the Military, which is inevitable in the era of democracy. This situation causes the military was still disturbed by the doubts in the community environment activities.

In view of the above, the arrangement of civil-military relations, democratic should be managed with: (1)  engage in the management of civil defense policies in the field, (2) civil-military relations are harmonious built within the framework of democracy with the spirit of mutual trust and willingness to work together to build Indonesia, (3) All components of both civilian and military nation side by side and the mutual respect of each profession, (4)  Prevent an atmosphere of mutual suspicion between the civilian and military, and eliminating feel better or superior attitude of devotion to country and nation.

Although civil military relations tend to apply at the policy level, but in its implementation, is very influential to the lower level of military activity. Various regulations that limit the role and military operations, the allocation of limited budgets, causing the interaction of military units in the area with the community to be limited, military professionalism is lowered due to very limited logistical and training infrastructure that has not been supported, including one of which is to support activities for territorial command is very minimal, which is not possible to be able to sustain the financing of activities that become their responsibility.

  Update on  Desember 18th 2014