MONGABAY.COM
Mongabay.com seeks to raise interest in and appreciation of wild lands and wildlife, while examining the impact of emerging trends in climate, technology, economics, and finance on conservation and development (more)
WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
|
|
Dominican Republic
Index
The Torre del Homenaje, Santo Domingo
BY TRADITION, THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC'S armed forces had
been
active participants in the competition for national
political
power and often had functioned as a praetorian guard for
the
government holding power. The military continued to play
these
parts as the 1990s neared; however, it appeared that,
during the
1970s and the 1980s, successive governments had been able
to
reduce the military's former role in national political
life
(most evident in the early 1960s) as self-appointed final
arbiter
of public policy.
The armed forces' reduced stature was made evident in
the
late 1980s by their transformation into an interest
group--albeit
an important one--competing with other such groups for
power and
influence within the nation's increasingly pluralistic
political
system. It would be premature, however, to conclude that
the goal
of developing an institutionalized and apolitical military
establishment had been completely realized by 1989.
Individual
military officers continued to exert considerable
political
influence, and armed forces units continued to be employed
overtly during political campaigns. Nonetheless, the
military's
explicit support of civilian governments during the 1980s
suggested that the armed forces had accepted the principle
of
civilian control.
As of mid-1989, the nation faced no credible external
threat
and only a negligible insurgent threat. As a result, the
armed
forces were principally employed in working with the
National
Police to maintain domestic order, chiefly by helping to
control
demonstrations, riots, and other large-scale threats to
public
order. Most such disturbances during the mid-1980s and the
late
1980s received their impetus from domestic austerity
programs
inaugurated because of adverse international economic
conditions.
Public discontent over the concomitant deterioration of
living
conditions for ordinary citizens, as well as a decline in
the
level and the quality of public services, occasionally
manifested
itself in widespread, and sometimes violent, outbreaks
that
resulted in the intervention of the armed forces and
police. The
security forces were also called out on several occasions
to deal
with violence associated with political campaigning and
elections.
National economic constraints during the mid-1980s and
the
late 1980s were reflected in defense budgets, as spending
on
weapons replacement and modernization was virtually
eliminated.
The military leadership apparently acquiesced in this
policy,
despite its serious effects on readiness. This
acquiescence may
have occurred because the armed forces' pay and benefits
were
largely shielded from the cuts.
For administrative purposes, the armed forces were
under
thejurisdiction of the secretary of state for the armed
forces.
Operational command of the approximately 21,000-member
military
was exercised through the deputy secretaries of state for
the
army, the navy, and the air force. The army was the
largest and
the most influential of the three services, and it was
equipped
mainly as a light infantry force. The navy was a coastal
patrol
force that included a battalion of marines. The air force
flew
transport planes and helicopters, and it had a small
number of
Cessna A-37B Dragonfly counterinsurgency aircraft used
mainly for
patrol purposes.
The National Police was the principal agency charged
with
maintaining public order. In addition to its paramilitary
activities, it was organized to perform routine patrols
and other
crime prevention and control functions. Approximately half
the
members of the National Police were stationed in the
capital. The
rest were assigned to posts throughout the remainder of
the
country.
Criminal justice was the responsibility of the national
government. The national judiciary, headed by the Supreme
Court
of Justice, administered the country's criminal courts,
and the
attorney general oversaw the system of government
prosecutors.
All penal and procedural statutes were issued by the
central
government.
Data as of December 1989
|
|