Knocking on the barracks’ door: How role conceptions shape the military's reactions to political demands

IF 2.5 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS European Journal of International Security Pub Date : 2021-11-25 DOI:10.1017/eis.2021.30
C. Harig, Chiara Ruffa
{"title":"Knocking on the barracks’ door: How role conceptions shape the military's reactions to political demands","authors":"C. Harig, Chiara Ruffa","doi":"10.1017/eis.2021.30","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Academic research on civil-military relations often assumes that dangers for democracy and civilian control mainly emanate from the military's predisposition of ‘pushing’ its way into politics. Yet, civilian control frequently is a precondition for governments’ moves of ‘pulling’ the military into roles that may potentially be problematic. These can include the military's involvement in political disputes or internal public security missions. Notwithstanding its empirical relevance, little academic work has been devoted to understanding how ‘pulling’ works. In this article, we aim to provide a first, exploratory framework of ‘pulling’ that captures the dynamics of the military's reactions and indirect consequences for civil-military relations. We identify three analytically distinct phases in which pulling occurs. First, politicians initiate either operational or political pulling moves. Second, we situate the military's reaction on a spectrum that ranges from refusal to non-conditional compliance. This reaction is driven by the military's role conceptions about appropriate missions and their relation to politics. In a third phase, the military may slowly start shifting its role conceptions to adapt to its new roles. We illustrate our argument with case studies of two different instances of pulling: operational pulling in the case of France (2015–19) and operational – then-turned-political – pulling in the case of Brazil (2010–20).","PeriodicalId":44394,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Security","volume":"7 1","pages":"84 - 103"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of International Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/eis.2021.30","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Abstract Academic research on civil-military relations often assumes that dangers for democracy and civilian control mainly emanate from the military's predisposition of ‘pushing’ its way into politics. Yet, civilian control frequently is a precondition for governments’ moves of ‘pulling’ the military into roles that may potentially be problematic. These can include the military's involvement in political disputes or internal public security missions. Notwithstanding its empirical relevance, little academic work has been devoted to understanding how ‘pulling’ works. In this article, we aim to provide a first, exploratory framework of ‘pulling’ that captures the dynamics of the military's reactions and indirect consequences for civil-military relations. We identify three analytically distinct phases in which pulling occurs. First, politicians initiate either operational or political pulling moves. Second, we situate the military's reaction on a spectrum that ranges from refusal to non-conditional compliance. This reaction is driven by the military's role conceptions about appropriate missions and their relation to politics. In a third phase, the military may slowly start shifting its role conceptions to adapt to its new roles. We illustrate our argument with case studies of two different instances of pulling: operational pulling in the case of France (2015–19) and operational – then-turned-political – pulling in the case of Brazil (2010–20).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
敲军营的门:角色观念如何塑造军队对政治要求的反应
关于军民关系的学术研究通常认为,民主和文官控制的危险主要来自军方“强行”进入政治的倾向。然而,文官控制往往是政府将军队“拉”到可能存在问题的角色中去的先决条件。这些可能包括军队参与政治争端或国内公共安全任务。尽管与实证相关,但很少有学术工作致力于理解“拉动”是如何起作用的。在本文中,我们旨在提供第一个探索性的“拉动”框架,以捕捉军方反应的动态以及对军民关系的间接后果。我们在分析中确定了拉扯发生的三个不同阶段。首先,政客们要么采取行动,要么采取政治拉扯行动。其次,我们将军方的反应置于一个范围内,从拒绝到无条件遵守。这种反应是由军方关于适当任务的角色观念及其与政治的关系所驱动的。在第三阶段,军方可能会慢慢开始转变角色观念,以适应新的角色。我们通过对两种不同拉动案例的案例研究来说明我们的论点:法国(2015-19年)的操作性拉动和巴西(2010-20年)的操作性(随后转为政治性)拉动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.60%
发文量
30
期刊最新文献
Transcending the fog of war? US military ‘AI’, vision, and the emergent post-scopic regime Anything you can do [I can do better]: Exploring women’s agency and gendered protection in state militaries Timing bombs and the temporal dynamics of Iranian nuclear security Cyberbiosecurity in the new normal: Cyberbio risks, pre-emptive security, and the global governance of bioinformation The military-strategic rationality of hybrid warfare: Everyday total defence under strategic non-peace in the case of Sweden
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1