The 35th President of the United States, John F. Kennedy, who made military reform a presidential campaign promise, appointed Robert S. McNamara, a former general manager of Ford Motor Company, as defense secretary.
Secretary McNamara introduced so-called systems analysis to the military, attempting to revolutionize the way weapons are acquired.
Previously, each county had decided how to spend its share of the budget, but McNamara allocated the budget to each county by comparing the relative value of competing businesses performing similar missions.
McNamara's reforms are evaluated to have improved the combat power of the US military by sublimating the military backlash into a dynamic interaction between the civilian and military.
McNamara's system analysis reforms were entrusted to the Assistant Secretary of State's office of private experts.
McNamara's assistant secretary's office is, in our terms, the DAPA.
Then, is the DAPA, an agency specializing in acquiring weapons, working closely with the military and playing the same role as McNamara's assistant secretary's office?
If the McNamara method is Korean-styled, the DAPA should put projects with similar missions on the table and discuss what to remove and what to save.
After a clash between the officials of the Bangsa Agency and the soldiers belonging to the Bangsa Agency, the budget is drawn up, and the National Assembly deliberates with a hawk eye.
This is a natural and reasonable procedure.
However, looking at the situation revealed through the budgeting and deliberation process for the 2022 defense capability improvement budget, the DAPA did not do that.
There were many items that did not even meet the basics of budgeting, so the National Assembly Defense Committee was humiliated by the largest budget cut in history.
Although the Bangsa Agency has succeeded in civicization since its opening in 2006, it seems to have failed to effectively implement the military unrest.
The military should seriously raise a problem with the DAPA, which caused a setback in power increase, but it is not a matter to routinely pass on the reality that seems like someone else's business.
Dialogue, communication, and interaction between the military and the DAPA, and between the civilian and military within the DAPA, are lacking.
What is the communication between civil servants and civil servants between 75 civil servants and 25 soldiers?
The DAPA has a total of 1,600 employees.
Ten years after the opening of the agency in 2006, the ratio between civil servants and military personnel was 50:50.
In response to the demand for civilisation, the speed of civil servants has been gradually increased, and now there are 1,200 civil servants versus 400 military personnel.
It is a 75:25 ratio that exceeds the 70:30 that was set as the standard for civilization.
Based on the 75/25 structure, a solid class system was formed in the Bangsa Agency.
It is a structure in which the majority of civil servants control the few soldiers.
In recent years, there are almost no military positions in high-ranking positions such as the head of the department, the deputy chief, and the head of each division.
A field-level officer of the DAPA said, "There are many difficulties in making the DAPA aware of the urgency of the military unrest."
Another military-level officer pointed out, "If the logic and standards of the military and the logic and standards of the civilians collide, it would be good to discuss and draw conclusions within the framework of civilian superiority, but there is no such opportunity at the DAPA."
It seems that the civil-military dialogue within the Bangsa Agency is difficult to operate as the soldiers of the Bangsa Agency are living side by side.
It is pointed out that the current address of the 75/25 DAPA is to focus on maintaining or expanding authority while avoiding audits by the Board of Audit and Inspection, rather than trying to buy good weapons cheaply.
An example of this is the action of the head of the Bangsa Agency, who tried to change the situation with the self-congratulatory statement of "120% satisfaction" even after signing an unprecedented unfavorable contract that received 30% of Indonesia's KF-21 development contribution in kind.
Air Force and Army, burial in power disruption... Only the navy is my voice
The development, introduction, and improvement of weapons that have been distorted due to the DAPA's poor budget work are diverse, including the Patriot Pack 3, F-35A, large attack helicopter, large transport aircraft, light carrier, early warning aircraft, mobile long-range radar, and K1E1 tank. Minesea helicopters and amphibious assault helicopters are in a similar situation. Next year is at this point, but not many people expect that the next year will be better.
It's time for each military commander to move. We need to summon the soldiers out of the DAPA to listen to what happened and find out the cause and countermeasures. Unfortunately, none of the military did that. One of the staff of Gyeryongdae, where each military headquarters is located, called the soldiers working for the DAPA to find out the truth and to convey the will of the military to the DAPA, but it is also heard that the chief of staff of the relevant army refused. It is equivalent to the negligence of the Chief of Staff.
The chief of staff may directly criticize the DAPA, paying attention to the superiors.
On the 25th, only Buseok-jong, chief of the Navy's Chief of Staff, emphasized on the Navy's Facebook page that it is regretful about the budget cuts for light carriers and the justification of the promotion of light carriers.
President Boo Seok-jong criticized the anti-light carrier argument piece by piece, saying, "It is a key joint force to protect people's lives and property and protect national interests in a situation of increasing uncertainty in the international security environment."
The military must absolutely obey the policy that has been decided, but in principle, it is a principle to express opinions fiercely in the policy-making process.
It is the military's right and duty to actively express opinions until the budget is finalized.
This is not a reaction, but an advisory function of civilian control.
Decision making through dynamic interaction between civilians and military is the flower of civilian control.
The unconditional obedience of the military erodes the military's professionalism.
I'm used to the look of the military who kept his mouth shut for too long, so it's almost unfamiliar to President Buseok-jong's natural voice.