Download Free Politicization Party Politics And Military Missions Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Politicization Party Politics And Military Missions and write the review.

According to a widely shared notion, foreign affairs are exempted from democratic politics, i.e. party-political divisions are overcome-and should be overcome-for the sake of a common national interest. This book shows that this is not the case. Examining votes in the US Congress and several European parliaments, the book demonstrates that contestation over foreign affairs is barely different from contestation over domestic politics. Analyses of a new collection of deployment votes, of party manifestos, and of expert survey data show that political parties differ systematically over foreign policy and military interventions in particular. The left/right divide is the best guide to the pattern of party-political contestation: support is weakest at the far left of the spectrum and increases as one moves along the left/right axis to green, social democratic, liberal and conservative parties; amongst parties of the far right, support is again weaker than amongst parties of the centre. An analysis of parliamentary debates in Canada, Germany, and the United Kingdom about the interventions in Afghanistan and against Daesh in Iraq and Syria shows that political parties also differ systematically in how they frame the use of force abroad. For example, parties on the right tend to frame their country's participation in the US-led missions in terms of national security and national interests whereas parties on the left tend to engage in 'spiral model thinking', i.e. they critically reflect on the unintended consequences of the use of force in fuelling the conflicts with the Taliban and Daesh.
Scholars of Latin American politics have been challenged to account for the varied outcomes of the transitions from authoritarian to democratic government that have occurred in many countries south of the border during the past two decades. What explains why some transitions were relatively smooth, with the military firmly in control of the process, while others witnessed substantial concessions by the military to civilian leaders, or even total military collapse? Rather than focus on causes external to the military, such as the previous legacy of democratic rule, severe economic crisis, or social protest, as other scholars have done, Craig Arceneaux draws attention to the important variables internal to the military, such as its unity or ability to coordinate strategy. Using this &"historical-institutionalist&" approach, he compares five different transitions in Brazil and three countries of the Southern Cone&—Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay&—to show what similarities and differences existed and how the differences may be attributed to variations in the internal institutional structure and operation of the military.
"Using a range of survey tools to glean insights into changing norms within the US military, this book provides a particularly valuable window into the political beliefs and behavior of active-duty (primarily US Army) officers. With its presentation of contemporary data, discussion of new dynamics created by social media, large number of questions for future research, and pragmatic policy recommendations, this book offers significant findings to be pulled that will improve the dialogue within professional military education and in senior military leader's writings to their colleagues and guidance to the forces and is an important resource for policymakers, practitioners, and scholars"--
American Civil-Military Relations offers the first comprehensive assessment of the subject since the publication of Samuel P. Huntington’s The Soldier and the State. Using this seminal work as a point of departure, experts in the fields of political science, history, and sociology ask what has been learned and what more needs to be investigated in the relationship between civilian and military sectors in the 21st century. Leading scholars—such as Richard Betts, Risa Brooks, James Burk, Michael Desch, Peter Feaver, Richard Kohn, Williamson Murray, and David Segal—discuss key issues, including: • changes in officer education since the end of the Cold War • shifting conceptions of military expertise in response to evolving operational and strategic requirements • increased military involvement in high-level politics • the domestic and international contexts of U.S. civil-military relations. The first section of the book provides contrasting perspectives of American civil-military relations within the last five decades. The next section addresses Huntington’s conception of societal and functional imperatives and their influence on the civil-military relationship. Following sections examine relationships between military and civilian leaders and describe the norms and practices that should guide those interactions. What is clear from the essays in this volume is that the line between civil and military expertise and responsibility is not that sharply drawn, and perhaps given the increasing complexity of international security issues, it should not be. When forming national security policy, the editors conclude, civilian and military leaders need to maintain a respectful and engaged dialogue. Essential reading for those interested in civil-military relations, U.S. politics, and national security policy.
Under which conditions do democracies participate in war, and when do they abstain? Providing a unique theoretical framework, Mello identifies pathways of war involvement and abstention across thirty democracies, investigating the wars in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq.
In this book leading scientists share their experiences and observations of developing and testing hypotheses, offering insights on the dangers of manipulating science for political gain. It describes how politicization--whether by misapplication, overextension, or outright manipulation of the scientific record to advance particular policy agendas--imposes expenditures of money, missed opportunities, and burdens on the economy.
This book examines military operations other than war (MOOTW) of the Indonesian military in the post-Suharto period and argues that the twin development of democratic consolidation, marked by ‘stable’ civil–military relations from 2004 to 2014 under Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s presidency, and internationalization of the military have not yet entirely de-politicized the armed forces. This book shows how peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, and counter-terror missions have been reinvented by the Indonesian military (Tentara Nasional Indonesia, TNI) to adhere to its politico-institutional interests rather than to divert military attention from politics. In contrast with conventional arguments about the rationale of MOOTW in promoting military professionalism, this book provides the first critical analysis of the development of these missions and correlates them with TNI’s concerted effort to preserve territorial command structure – a military network that parallels the civilian bureaucracy down to the village level. The book argues that the military in Indonesia remains domestically political amidst high intensity of international activism. A detailed investigation of civil–military relations in Indonesia, this book will be of interest to scholars in the fields of Southeast Asian studies and Asian politics, and more generally to those interested in civil–military relations, military politics, and MOOTW.
During the last decade, 'Hybrid Warfare' has become a novel yet controversial term in academic, political and professional military lexicons, intended to suggest some sort of mix between different military and non-military means and methods of confrontation. Enthusiastic discussion of the notion has been undermined by conceptual vagueness and political manipulation, particularly since the onset of the Ukrainian Crisis in early 2014, as ideas about Hybrid Warfare engulf Russia and the West, especially in the media. Western defense and political specialists analyzing Russian responses to the crisis have been quick to confirm that Hybrid Warfare is the Kremlin's main strategy in the twenty-first century. But many respected Russian strategists and political observers contend that it is the West that has been waging Hybrid War, Gibridnaya Voyna, since the end of the Cold War. In this highly topical book, Ofer Fridman offers a clear delineation of the conceptual debates about Hybrid Warfare. What leads Russian experts to say that the West is conducting a Gibridnaya Voyna against Russia, and what do they mean by it? Why do Western observers claim that the Kremlin engages in Hybrid Warfare? And, beyond terminology, is this something genuinely new?