Armed Forces: Should They Defend Chileans from Themselves?

El Mostrador, Thursday, November 11, 2021

Chile and Chileans deserve much more than a very regrettable death in Cañete and Navy personnel sent by the Government to impose order, who the Public Prosecutor now wants to imprison for acting according to the Executive’s instructions. If the Armed Forces are to assume the role of defending Chileans from themselves, then let us be correct and provide them not only with the appropriate human and material resources for the task but, more importantly, with the legal backing to impose public order and the rule of law.

The role of the Armed Forces frequently comes under discussion, whether due to their participation in Constitutional States of Exception or the efforts of some to remove them from the Constitution currently being drafted, aiming for unfettered access to power.

It is striking to observe the current Government’s attitude, as well as that of previous center-left governments, in resorting to them when deemed necessary. They have been used to support police at the northern border, combat forest fires, respond to natural disasters caused by earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and landslides, and more recently, to sustain the State of Catastrophe declared due to the pandemic and the Emergency States triggered by the social outbreak and, lately, by violence in the Southern Macrozone.

It is important to define what the Armed Forces do and, along with that, the tools and resources they need to perform the tasks assigned to them, whether in defense of sovereignty, territory, or national interest, wherever it may be located.

Given that they hold the monopoly on the use of force, what they do must be defined at the constitutional level, as well as how their leadership is chosen and to whom they report. But, equally or more importantly, it is essential to define their purpose, what they do, and how they do it.

Why is the above relevant? It is because two situations are occurring that must be addressed. On one hand, there are groups that want to remove them from the equation to have free access or a clear path to seizing power, where they believe that the armed institutions are the only obstacles in their way; on the other hand, there is the use of the Armed Forces in Constitutional States of Exception, such as the 18 months during the pandemic and, for the past few weeks, to support police in restoring order in provinces of the Biobío and La Araucanía regions, which are experiencing out-of-control violence.

If we believe that there is no other solution than to use the armed institutions in La Araucanía, then let us proceed. But first, we must ensure that they are trained and equipped, with the appropriate material resources, following a plan where the use of force is not the only element. Above all, it must be under an appropriate legal regime that recognizes the existing emergency and the use of armed institutions as a last resort, rather than the current situation, which limits their effectiveness and actions, with rules of engagement written by individuals who have never been in combat or caught in the midst of a shootout, or by a legal regime that refuses to acknowledge that when the use of armed institutions is required, the situation has long ceased to be normal.

It can be understood that the Government used them when the social outbreak occurred, an action that may be debatable, but which, given the circumstances at that moment, was legal and possible for them, and that, in light of the confusion and surprise caused by the attacks on Metro stations and the lack of intelligence, was the only thing they could do. After the war, we are all generals, and it is easy to criticize, but it is another matter when faced with the reality.

The most complex case is the use of the Armed Forces to support police in maintaining public order and the rule of law in La Araucanía. It is complex because it is not a new situation. It is a state of disruption and ungovernability that has existed for quite some time and that no Government has been able to resolve, despite the good intentions expressed by all when they assume leadership of the country.

It is complex because a group of Chileans does not recognize the authority of the State of Chile, engages in violent actions, commits offenses, and acts independently. I say Chileans because all of us who were born in Chile or adopted Chilean nationality are Chileans.

It is complex because governments and the sum of state powers have not been effective in resolving the problem and have had to resort to the last available resource, as indicated by our national motto – by reason or by force – which is represented in the use of the Armed Forces as a last option in the face of ineffectiveness or lack of expertise of those who have been in charge of the problem, or because the assigned police resources have been overwhelmed.

That said, if we believe that there is no other solution than to use the armed institutions, then let us proceed. But first, we must ensure that they are trained and equipped, with the appropriate material resources, following a plan where the use of force is not the only element. Above all, it must be under an appropriate legal regime that recognizes the existing emergency and the use of armed institutions as a last resort, rather than the current situation, which limits their effectiveness and actions, with rules of engagement written by individuals who have never been in combat or caught in the midst of a shootout, or by a legal regime that refuses to acknowledge that when the use of armed institutions is required, the situation has long ceased to be normal.

Chile and Chileans deserve much more than a very regrettable death in Cañete and Navy personnel sent by the Government to impose order, who the Public Prosecutor now wants to imprison for acting according to the Executive’s instructions.

If the Armed Forces are to assume the role of defending Chileans from themselves, then let us be correct and provide them not only with the appropriate human and material resources for the task but, more importantly, with the legal backing to impose public order and the rule of law; otherwise, we are being cynical and irresponsible by asking them to do the work that others do not want to do, akin to asking a cat to put its paws in the fire to pull out the chestnuts.

Richard Kouyoumdjian
Vice President AthenaLab