Constitution and Armed Forces: not looking in the rearview mirror

Mr. Director, 
The constituents face the task of proposing the National Defense and Armed Forces that we require for the twenty-first century.
I admit that proposals on civil control, transparency or changes in the structure of the Armed Forces caused me concern, since then, the debate seems to be inspired by the past rather than the challenges of the future.
Recent publications give me optimism as they invite in-depth debate on this topic.
Coinciding with those who postulate that Congress should have a greater impact on these matters, I value that they reinforce the need for parliamentarians to have the proper technical advice and it would be good to go into detail on how to achieve it since – being relevant to have civilians specialized in Defense – our reality shows the scarce attention that the political world gives them.
Not a minor detail. The operational capacity of the Armed Forces is achieved in the long term, which it considers among others: training processes, the acquisition of material, instruction and training to achieve the condition that allows it to fulfill the functions that society imposes on them.
This implies the adoption of measures that go beyond the parliamentary and presidential period, encouraging consensus among the different political sectors.
Welcome the debate, I am sure that it will contribute to the Constituents proposing a Defense that is assumed by our entire society and this is achieved when we leave out ideologies, doomed to the challenges of the XXI century with a sense of country.
The military wears on their uniform a patch over their heart with the name of the institution to which they belong next to a word, from Chile.
Will it be too much to ask that the Constituents take up this challenge with the same enthusiasm and commitment as our soldiers?
Eduardo Aldunate Herman

Original source in Spanish