The Botswana Defence Force Act Of Botswana

1063 Words3 Pages

The rapid development of the BDF from a single rifle company to the current force did not have corresponding formulation of defense policies and strategies to define its roles, force levels, and ways of sustainment. Policy makers neither kept abreast of the BDF’s growth nor changing world events. Consequently, they failed to promulgate requisite defense legislation and policies beyond creating a founding act. The BDF was formed out of and around the logical imperative of the time. It came out of a police branch; hence, it lacked a military history or strategic leadership experience. Thus, it adopted a culture of expediency and tactical solutions at the expense of long term strategic planning.
The Botswana Defence Force Act of 1977, as observed by R. Dale, does very little to define the construction and role of the military. Apart from force employment privileges of the President and the Commander, the BDF Act provides little guidance on the regulation of force size, equipment, and organization. Under the section for the establishment and maintenance of the defense force, the act merely states “There shall be established and maintained in Botswana a force to be known as, "The Botswana Defence Force", which shall consist of the Regular Force of the Defence Force; and the Defence Force Reserve”. It suggests the broad employment of the BDF as “defence of Botswana and with such other duties as may from time to time be determined by the President.” Apart from referring to a Navy (in a landlocked Botswana), Air Force and Army in explanation of “disciplined forces,” the constitution is silent on the construct of the military. This ambiguity and lack of strategic guidance led University of Botswana academic Dr Molomo to observe, “The r...

... middle of paper ...

...s; an integrated civilian/military effort converts national resources into military capabilities with due regard to political, military, and economic dimensions. Botswana is not yet there in this top down approach to building military capabilities; the MDJS does not have a robust defense management structure to inform policy, plan force development, and execute defense acquisition. Deficient of this type legislative and bureaucratic guidance, the BDF’s vision becomes an unrealistic internal exercise; another part of a futile bottom up, stove-piped approach to the country’s security challenges, lacking coordination and synergy with other national sources of power. Because of this practice, the BDF’s inventory has become a perfunctory capability to address every security challenge of a landlocked country surrounded by war tested, dominant, and more populous neighbors.

Open Document