A national security policy vacuum creates significant instability by removing a clear strategic compass for a nation’s defense and foreign policy, leading to a range of potential negative consequences.
The absence of a defined national security strategy can create a power vacuum in a region, which often leads to other state and non-state actors (such as rival nations or terrorist groups) moving in to establish influence and pursue their own interests. This can increase regional tensions and the risk of conflict.
Without a clear doctrine, different government agencies and the military may be forced to “guess” the political leadership’s intentions and formulate their own uncoordinated plans, leading to inefficiencies, miscommunication, and a lack of a unified response to threats.
Vulnerability to Diverse Threats
Modern national security threats extend beyond traditional military concerns to include areas like cyberattacks, economic coercion, climate change impacts, and pandemics. A policy vacuum makes it difficult to prioritize and coordinate responses to these multifaceted and evolving challenges effectively.
Inconsistent or absent national security policy can strain relationships with long-standing allies, who may question a nation’s reliability and commitment to collective security.
A lack of focus on key domestic issues that affect national security, such as economic inequality or social cohesion, can lead to internal divisions, instability, and make the nation more vulnerable to external manipulation or influence.
A policy vacuum makes it difficult to ensure that resources, including budget and personnel, are allocated to the correct priorities, potentially leading to a weakened military or intelligence capability in critical areas.
Military Doctrine- How it works?
Military doctrine is the fundamental set of principles, codified best practices, and official advice that guide a nation’s armed forces in employing military power to achieve national security objectives, covering everything from strategy and tactics to force structure and ethics, and evolving with technology and policy. It’s a storehouse of experience that influences training, operations, and force readiness, providing a framework that enables adaptation while ensuring coherence and effectiveness in achieving goals.
Dictates how forces are structured, deployed, trained, and cooperate in campaigns, operations, battles, and engagements involving:
Types & Examples
- Joint Doctrine: Shared principles for multinational or multi-service operations.
- Offensive Doctrine: Aims to punish an adversary (e.g., using air superiority).
- Defensive Doctrine: Aims to deny an adversary (e.g., securing borders).
- Deterrent Doctrine: Aims to disarm or dissuade adversaries (e.g., nuclear deterrence).
National Security Policy (NSP) refers to a nation’s comprehensive plans, laws, and strategies to protect its sovereign territory (land, air and sea), people, institutions, and interests from threats, encompassing traditional defence, intelligence, cyber security, counter-terrorism, and emerging challenges like economic coercion and climate change. It involves high-level coordination among all forces and spy agencies, policy development across agencies, and aims to build resilience and secure a nation’s ability to make independent decisions.
Defence and security framework for a country to engage with several trusted allies and partners, ranging from formal alliances and intelligence-sharing agreements to trilateral and bilateral partnerships for enhanced cooperation. These frameworks focus on enhancing interoperability, intelligence sharing, capability development, and regional stability, offering a clear understanding of friend and foe to develop offensive and defensive military capabilities and cooperation between nations. Some examples of frameworks include the GSOMIA, VFA, and ACSA agreements with the USA; the AUKUS agreement; and the Five Eyes and USA-Japan-Australia alliances.
Systemic Corruption in the Bangladesh military
Corruption is a significant issue within the Bangladesh military, with recent high-profile investigations and international sanctions targeting top former officials for abuse of power, bribery, and illicit wealth accumulation. Transparency International has categorised the country’s defence sector as high-risk for corruption.
Former Army Chief Aziz Ahmed and Air Chief Marshal Hannan are two of the most prominent cases involving a mega Ponzi scheme. The U.S. Department of State publicly designated him and his immediate family members as ineligible for entry into the United States in May 2024 due to his involvement in “significant corruption”.
An investigative documentary by Al Jazeera Investigative Unit in 2021 detailed how Ahmed allegedly used his position to help his brothers evade criminal accountability and secure military contracts for personal benefit.
Bangladesh’s Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) formally launched an inquiry into the significant corruption involving more than 40 military officers.
Following a change in government in August 2024, the ACC launched probes into at least nine other high-ranking former military and security officials, including former air force chiefs, intelligence directors, and other generals.
These investigations involve a range of accusations, including embezzlement of public funds, manipulation of recruitment processes, money laundering, and accumulation of illegal assets.
Courts have ordered the freezing of assets and imposed overseas travel bans on many of the accused and their families to prevent them from fleeing the country or moving funds.
Systemic Issues
Reports indicate that the military has long engaged in extensive business interests, including banking, construction, and power plants, creating channels for the misappropriation of funds. A 2009 mutiny by the Bangladesh Rifles paramilitary force was partly fuelled by rank-and-file resentment over corruption among army officers.
The military has also faced scrutiny for controversial procurement practices, such as purchasing Israeli-made surveillance equipment despite Bangladesh not officially recognising Israel, a move that the UN denied was for peacekeeping missions, as claimed by the Bangladeshi military.
Since Bangladesh lacks a doctrine and a security framework, the Bangladesh military resorts to widespread corruption and politically motivated propaganda to conceal military acquisitions.
However, the recent domestic probes and international sanctions highlight serious, long-standing concerns about corruption within the military establishment.
In essence, a national security policy vacuum leaves a nation adrift, unable to proactively manage risks and likely to react haphazardly to crises as they emerge.
© 2026, GDC. © GDC and www.globaldefensecorp.com. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to www.globaldefensecorp.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
