Security and Defence Reform and the Roles of the State Institutions

After the end of the Cold War, among many other processes, there is a specific one going on all around Europe regarding security and defence arrangements. It is the process of reform of security and defence institutions. This process is common for the rich as well as the under-developed European countries, for the old NATO member countries, the former Warsaw pact countries and those that never belonged to any of these political-military organizations, for big and small nations alike.

Although there is a lot of discussion within most of our societies about security and defence reform as such, it is interesting to see that there are different political and professional ideas what “reform” is and what should it encompass. Furthermore, if we take a deeper look, it may be argued that there are at least two different approaches towards reform. One implying that reform is predominantly the final result and it is all that matters, and another arguing that reform is the process, so that only the quality of the process can secure the quality of the final result.

Those who argue that it is just the result that counts, tend to forget, or justify, all the mistakes, changes of direction and waste of time due to the execution of the misconceived plans and programs. And those who emphasize the importance of the process seem to find the shelter in the lengthy process itself for not getting to the objective. How are we going to deal with these tendencies will be one of the first signs of our commitment and clear vision as to what do we want to achieve in the end.