LETTERS -
| 2013-08-09National Security At Risk
ALLOW me a space in your poor man’s friend newspaper to inform and educate my fellow Namibians as well as our security agents of the beloved land. It’s a pity that whoever advises the head of the state on security issues lacks a comprehensive understanding of what security entails and the thin line between that and the promotion of personal interests.
It was worrying to read a newspaper article in which the Minister of Defence was quoted as saying that he had no problem with his senior officials [including military generals] doing business with the Namibia Defence Force. But the danger here is the term ‘business’ – understanding how the business work is the most important issue; business is undertaken as a “barter system”.
An official will be tempted to compromise or sell out this country outright to get favours; buying fake weapons to get kickbacks because of business or buying poor quality security equipment to get maximise profit or create companies in which they have shares and get the ministry’s food tenders.
My suggestion to the minister is to relook at this issue again and to see it as a problem having generals who are businessmen; that this is a way of allowing your enemy to weaken your security agents in a form of trading with generals (senior officials).
Those generals must be given a chance to choose whether they want to be security agents or businessmen, period! No negotiations.
When the generals act as the NDF’s middlemen, the danger is real when the same officials who are tasked by the head of the state to secure his well-being are creating ways of milking his government and thus weaken his administration. Who will screen the quality of materials supplied through the [government-owned] 26 August company when the officials/generals are the middlemen?
Finally, I wish to reiterate that security means the presence of peace but peace alone does not ensure security. In today’s world, the enemies have changed their form of attacking.
Back in the day, they came with guns blazing, but in modern days they share with you a cup of tea, calling you ‘honourable’ and all the flattering words that you want to hear as a previously disadvantaged person so that you can feel honoured and bold to do business with them. They tell you the strategies that will enable their mission as your option and obstruct you from understanding the strategies that will strengthen your security.
The heads of security agents must stop doing business at work. If they are truly business people, they must step down and concentrate on what they do best and if they are tasked to secure this country they must do so 24/7. It’s a worrying factor that almost every corruption deal exposed in this country is never far from security agents.
Perhaps it’s time for our national security leaders to declare their interest in public and should they fail to do so they must be fired.
Jacky
By email
It was worrying to read a newspaper article in which the Minister of Defence was quoted as saying that he had no problem with his senior officials [including military generals] doing business with the Namibia Defence Force. But the danger here is the term ‘business’ – understanding how the business work is the most important issue; business is undertaken as a “barter system”.
An official will be tempted to compromise or sell out this country outright to get favours; buying fake weapons to get kickbacks because of business or buying poor quality security equipment to get maximise profit or create companies in which they have shares and get the ministry’s food tenders.
My suggestion to the minister is to relook at this issue again and to see it as a problem having generals who are businessmen; that this is a way of allowing your enemy to weaken your security agents in a form of trading with generals (senior officials).
Those generals must be given a chance to choose whether they want to be security agents or businessmen, period! No negotiations.
When the generals act as the NDF’s middlemen, the danger is real when the same officials who are tasked by the head of the state to secure his well-being are creating ways of milking his government and thus weaken his administration. Who will screen the quality of materials supplied through the [government-owned] 26 August company when the officials/generals are the middlemen?
Finally, I wish to reiterate that security means the presence of peace but peace alone does not ensure security. In today’s world, the enemies have changed their form of attacking.
Back in the day, they came with guns blazing, but in modern days they share with you a cup of tea, calling you ‘honourable’ and all the flattering words that you want to hear as a previously disadvantaged person so that you can feel honoured and bold to do business with them. They tell you the strategies that will enable their mission as your option and obstruct you from understanding the strategies that will strengthen your security.
The heads of security agents must stop doing business at work. If they are truly business people, they must step down and concentrate on what they do best and if they are tasked to secure this country they must do so 24/7. It’s a worrying factor that almost every corruption deal exposed in this country is never far from security agents.
Perhaps it’s time for our national security leaders to declare their interest in public and should they fail to do so they must be fired.
Jacky
By email
