Hi Jallow, to deal with your first question with refrence to the quotation,
am sure you are aware of the the catalogue of atrocities committed by the
armed forces in Africa. Do you happen to think that these are spontaneous
acts of violence. I think you would be very naive to accept that. To
understand the brutalities and violence commonly displayed by the armed
forces in Africa, you have to dwell on the history of the origins of these
forces. Most of the armed forces in Africa were the creation of the
colonialist and am sure you are aware of the fact the colonialists purpose
for creating armies was mainly to perpetuate their domination of the African
people, to achieve this required a very loyal and trustworthy army, hence
they instituted a pattern of education that was conciously designed to make
their recruits conform to their desires. Hence evolved in Africa and
institution that was a machine of suppression.

After indepence most of the governments maintained the statu-quo, people's
expectatiobns were dashed hence popular uprisings became the order of the
day. To control these uprisings the armed forces revert to the same role and
functions as a tool or mechanism of oppression. Tis in brief is the origin
of the Army in Africa and the blue print that was left by the colonialist
was adopted and even made more crude in some instances.

As for Gambia it has  a relatively young army and it was created against the
backdrop of Kukoi, obviously its purpose was not to defend against our
neighbours, since Senegal helped to creat it, hence it's purpose can only
serve one function and that is not a detterent against foreign invasion. Its
primary function therfore had to be to suppress any form of challenge to the
state. Hence from the onset it had a clear mandate, that was why the core of
the upper echeleon was mainly people Jawara had faith on. He could not have
afforded to put people in high positions if there loyalty was doubted. That
was why when you talked about the professionalism and the places you went to
study I began to put your mentality in perspective. You see, of course there
would be a few of you that would be highly trained and provided with
facilities to keep you happy. But the rank and file had little chance of
prospering, for them life in the army can be very oppressive and daunting,
unlike your ilk who enjoy the  trappings and are endowed with absolute
power. In fact it is common knowledge that officers in the African armis can
get away almost with everything they do as long as they stay loyal to their
masters. In such a world of sea professionalism is just a concept after all
the professionalism is only directed to the people. When there is conflict
with authority then the army is on a hype eager to shoot and kill. Where is
the professionalism if the army whose remit should  be to protect the people
becomes the arch enemy of the people.

If this is your concept of professionalism the we have a differing notion of
the concept. I feel that a genuine army have a legitimate intrest in the
affairs of nation hence they most be politically concious, this is different
from being partisan. In fact I hold the believe that there could be
legitimate intervention in certain instances where the ruling class has
converted into fascism, but this has to be done only to return power to the
people instead of usurping to hold onto it.

I hope you understand the notion or concept of people's army. A people's
army one that is loved and revered by the people and not one that is feared.
A people's army must involved in the community, take on some community
projects and justify their salaries instead of having to wait for command to
storm and brutalise the population. A genuine army  can never aim a gun at
their citizens and this type of army is yet to imerge in Africa. I hope the
form of education in army institutions reflect the democratic as well as
socvial needs of the people. For a soldier that is enlighthen can never shot
at his brothers and sisters. There cannot be any justificatiopn to shot an
kill unarmed cuvilians.


>From: Ebou Jallow <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
><[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Malik>>Re: call for restraint on abusive adjectives
>Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 11:42:49 -0800
>
>Mr. Kah,
>
>I thank you for being more forthcoming particularly on your
>impressive segue from a universal claim to a specific and incomplete
>analysis of African Armies.  I want you to clarify this please:
>"...in the army  in Arica particularly,deliberately exist a
>methodology of education designed to turn soldiers into subservient
>tools, whose allegiance is not to our constitutions  and the rule of
>law, but essentially to defend the neo-colonial exploitative  class
>whose intrest and that of the people quite regularly conflicts."
>
>I believe if this pegagogy of subservience is "deliberate" in African
>Armies then I would have been aware of it.  I know for a fact that
>the Gambian Army was trained by the British Army during Jawara's
>Government.  The Officer Corps were trained in the finest military
>institutions in this planet- Sandhurst, St. Cyr, Fort Benning
>Georgia, Royal Defence College in London, Staff Colleges in Nigeria,
>Pakistan, and the USA. I know upon my commission as an officer I
>swore an oath of allegiance to the Gambian constitution and to my
>Commander in Chief, then Jawara, against all enemies foreign and
>domestic.  This is almost similar to the oath of allegiance for the
>US Armed Forces which I also served and worked at the Strategy and
>Plans Division at the Pentagon.  So my friend what are you talking
>about?
>It is true that you don't see in the US the pattern of soldiers
>dappling into politics as in most African Armies.  The main reason is
>the long history of democratic praxis and a complex web of
>institutional arrangements that guarantees the subordination of the
>military to civil authority in the US. Unfortunately this is not the
>case in most young, fragile and vulnerable countries in Africa.
>Civil-military relations is a complex issue that the finest minds in
>the US are still struggling to understand well.  I believe it is
>beyond the scope of this forum for us to engage in that argument.
>Finally, I would warn you to be careful of putting Ex-Capt. Sankara
>on a pedestal.  Afterall he was a romantic revolutionary and not an
>exemplary model warrior.    His charisma loomed larger than any other
>attribute he has as a warrior or a politician.  No wonder he was the
>darling of the anti-establishment media.
>
>
>
>=====
>Ebou Jallow
>Georgetown University
>Washington, DC
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
>http://personals.yahoo.com
>
><<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>
>
>To view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
>at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
>To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>[log in to unmask]
>
><<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>

To view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]

<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>