One of the most stupid suggestions in recent times has come from Home Ministry. Its deputy minister, Tan Chai Ho, said the government may deploy army reserve troops to help the country's undermanned police force fight a wave of violent street crime.
Thank goodness deputy police chief Musa Hassan has the commonsense to decline that, diplomatically averring that the level of crime does not warrant the deployment of reserve soldiers.
Today I read that DPM Najib has also agreed, stating that the Territorial Army has other duties to attend to, such as border surveillance and forming the border brigade.
He said: “It is quite sufficient to reactivate the Rukun Tetangga and integrate it with police patrolling and anti-drug activities.”
Soldiers are part of a war machines, trained to attack, destroy and kill. They aren’t equipped with knowledge of civil laws, thus are not suitable to be deployed for civil policing. How in the bloody hell has the Home Ministry come up with such a stupid dangerous idea?
When soldiers and civilian population come into contact, the possibility of antagonistic interaction cannot be ruled out. With one party designed for war and armed with deadly weapons, but without knowledge of civil laws and rights, that’s just asking for bloody big trouble.
That was why in the old days, the Police Field Force (PFF) was formed. The para-military force was nothing more than police in military uniform assigned to military duties, but equipped with understanding of the duties of a civil police force.
The idea then was for the army to engage with the communist insurgents in the jungle, far away from civilian population. But should the insurgents run from the army into a 'new village'. and hide among its civilian population, the army was not allowed to enter the hamlet for all the reasons mentioned earlier.
It would have been disastrous for the government if that happened (a few times it did), because the authority understandably feared the worst, of soldiers being heavy-handed and inadvertently treating civilians like the enemy.
That was/is what have been happening in Iraq. See how the Iraqis have been treated by the American soldiers!
In the 'new village' scenario I mentioned, the old Malaysian anti-insurgency strategy was for the soldiers in hot pursuit to cordon off the village, while the PFF (the police) moved in among the civilians in the village in order to deal with the insurgents hiding there. This was part of the old 'hearts & minds' strategy, something that's beyond the capacity of the American military to understand, let alone adopt.
Our old days’ leaders knew their stuff. Now, we have instead a heap of sh*tty nonsense from the current crop of so-called leaders.
We better pray this stupid idea is killed off (thank goodness it is now, by DPM - I wrote this posting last night; Najib spoke today) before some innocent civilian gets killed, courtesy of the Home Ministry.
Why are we endangering lives of our soldiers? For reputation? If the said minister are so gung-ho about sending troops, he should volunteer first with a keris in hand. Kepimpinan Melalui Teladan
ReplyDeleteStop playing with human lives!
'In the 'new village' scenario I mentioned, the old Malaysian anti-insurgency strategy was for the soldiers in hot pursuit to cordon off the village, while the PFF (the police) moved in among the civilians in the village in order to deal with the insurgents hiding there. This was part of the old 'hearts & minds' strategy, something that's beyond the capacity of the American military to understand, let alone adopt.'
ReplyDeleteKtemoc, the new village example cannot be compared to the situation in Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam because the MCP was not supported by external forces.
In the above examples the US are fighting insurgents which are very well supported by external powers.
Please stick to politics which seems to be your forte. You know nuts about millitary affairs.
Anon,
ReplyDelete(1)You don't know me yet you damned me as knowing "nuts about military affairs". Don't worry I don't take offence, but aren't you just reckless and presumptous?
(2) The Americans has a history of incompetence in the 'hearts & minds' programme since the Vietnam era. The Iraq situation merely confirms that incompetence.
Even when the Yanks attempted to borrow Thompson's 'new village' concept and applied it in Vietnam as the 'new hamlet' strategy, they botched it through inability/incompetence, corruption and a lack of empathy for the locals.
(3) What made you say that the CPM wasn't supported? Another reckless presumption!
(4) Your arguments about the US problems in those countries it invaded, namaely fighting against insurgents well-supported, didn't challenge nor discredit my arguments, that of the inability of the Americans to apply the 'hearts & minds' strategy.
Your arguments failed to address the topic, that of not permitting soldiers to come into contact with the local population. Instead you went on to another aspect about the insurgents being well supported.
You should read my postings in BolehTalk, particularly the 'Falluja' Alamo series.
Anyway, read this one http://bolehtalk.blogspot.com/2004/11/driving-sea-to-fishes.html titled 'Driving the Sea to the Fishes' [I hope as a military 'expert' you know what Sea and Fishes mean] and http://bolehtalk.blogspot.com/2004/11/eating-soup-with-knife.html titled 'Eating Soup with a Knife'
The American problems may be traced to their (a) arrogance, (b) disproportionate (simpleton-ish) love of brute power to solve any perceived problems and (c) most important of all, a total lack of empathy and care for the locals.
'You don't know me yet you damned me as knowing "nuts about military affairs".' You are right I do not know you . But you are too chicken shit to reveal your true identity eventhough you purport to be a blogmaster. You want to be Arab -Muslim hero but you are afraid someone might put a bomb under car. The 'hearts and minds' tactic worked in Malaya because Malaya was a former British colony.
ReplyDeleteThe 'new village' concept failed in Vietnam because the US could not use the same method of herding a population in to what was essentially concentration camps.
What foreign support did the CPM get Ktemoc? Artillery, heavy machineguns, rockets, mines, money (how much)
Don't talk shit. You really do know f**kall about millitary affairs.
So, whether my identity is KTemoc or otherwise, does that hide the fact that you DON’T KNOW me, which makes your presumptions reckless.
ReplyDeleteAnd what did you do when you were confronted with this fact of your impetuosity? You resorted to puerile invectives, not only a discourtesy but a sign of either your incapacity to conduct intelligent debate or your embarrassment of your faux pas.
You’re just like those American soldiers in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, spraying bullets left, right and centre, hoping to hit something, anything ;-) which may explain why you are an American apologist.
And if I am a Arab-Muslim hero as you alleged, what does that make you?
New hamlets failed because the Americans ‘could not use the same method of herding a population in to what was essentially concentration camps’? Insurgents need ‘Artillery, heavy machineguns …’?
From those statements of yours, I don’t see anything worthwhile to interact with you on counter-insurgency warfare, because then, I would be like a Directing Staff of a Command & Staff College interacting with a secondary school cadet.