U.S. Civil-military Relations


Book Description




American Civil-Military Relations


Book Description

politics, and national security policy.--John R. Ballard "On Point"




The Soldier and the State


Book Description

In a classic work, Samuel P. Huntington challenges most of the old assumptions and ideas on the role of the military in society. Stressing the value of the military outlook for American national policy, Huntington has performed the distinctive task of developing a general theory of civil–military relations and subjecting it to rigorous historical analysis. Part One presents the general theory of the "military profession," the "military mind," and civilian control. Huntington analyzes the rise of the military profession in western Europe in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, and compares the civil–military relations of Germany and Japan between 1870 and 1945. Part Two describes the two environmental constants of American civil–military relations, our liberal values and our conservative constitution, and then analyzes the evolution of American civil–military relations from 1789 down to 1940, focusing upon the emergence of the American military profession and the impact upon it of intellectual and political currents. Huntington describes the revolution in American civil–military relations which took place during World War II when the military emerged from their shell, assumed the leadership of the war, and adopted the attitudes of a liberal society. Part Three continues with an analysis of the problems of American civil–military relations in the era of World War II and the Korean War: the political roles of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the difference in civil–military relations between the Truman and Eisenhower administrations, the role of Congress, and the organization and functioning of the Department of Defense. Huntington concludes that Americans should reassess their liberal values on the basis of a new understanding of the conservative realism of the professional military men.




The Revolution in Military Affairs


Book Description

The current Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) is taking place against the background of a larger historical watershed involving the end of the Cold War and the advent of what Alvin and Heidi Toffler have termed "the Information Age." In this essay, Dr. Earl Tilford argues that RMAs are driven by more than breakthrough technologies, and that while the technological component is important, a true revolution in the way military institutions organize, equip and train for war, and in the way war is itself conducted, depends on the confluence of political, social, and technological factors. After an overview of the dynamics of the RMA, Dr. Tilford makes the case that interservice rivalry and a reintroduction of the managerial ethos, this time under the guise of total quality management (TQM), may be the consequences of this revolution. In the final analysis, warfare is quintessentially a human endeavor. Technology and technologically sophisticated weapons are only means to an end. The U.S. Army, along with the other services, is embracing the RMA as it downsizes and restructures itself into Force XXI. Warfare, even on the digitized battlefield, is likely to remain unpredictable, bloody, and horrific. Military professionals cannot afford to be anything other than well prepared for whatever challenges lie ahead, be it war with an Information Age peer competitor, a force of guerrillas out of the Agrarian Age, or a band of terrorists using the latest in high-tech weaponry. While Dr. Tilford is optimistic about the prospects for Force XXI, what follows is not an unqualified endorsement of the RMA or of the Army's transition to an Information Age force. By examining issues and problems that were attendant to previous RMAs, Dr. Tilford raises questions that ought to be asked by the Army as it moves toward Force XXI. Warfare is, the author reminds us, the most complex of human undertakings and the victors, even in the Information Age, will be those who, as in the past, are masters of the art-as well as the science-of war.




Civil-military Relations; Changing Concepts in the Seventies


Book Description

Forholdet mellem stater og deres væbnede styrker belyst gennem en række eksempler fra såvel demokratiske stater som ikke-demokratiske stater samt militære regimer i landene i Afrika syd for Sahara.




Warriors and Politicians


Book Description

With historical case studies ranging from the Revolutionary War to the war in Iraq, this new book shows how and why the US military is caught between two civilian masters – the President and Congress – in responding to the challenges of warfighting, rearmament, and transformation. Charles Stevenson skilfully shows how, although the United States has never faced the danger of a military coup, the relations between civilian leaders and the military have not always been easy. Presidents have contended with military leaders who were reluctant to carry out their orders. Generals and Admirals have appealed to Congress for sympathy and support. Congressional leaders have tried to impose their own visions and strategies on the US armed forces. This triangular struggle has recurred time and again, in wartime and in efforts to reshape the military for future wars. Illustrating this dual system of civilian military control in a series of case studies, this new volume starts from the way the Continental Congress ran the Revolutionary War by committee and concludes with the George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld efforts to transform the US military into a modern terrorist-fighting force. This detailed coverage shows how warriors and politicians interacted at key points in US history. This book will be of great interest to all students of the US Military, government of the United States and of strategic and military studies in general.




"So Much for the Revolution"


Book Description

On April 11, 1862, General Ormsby M. Mitchel and his Third Division, Army of Ohio, invaded North Alabama, becoming the first Union division to occupy an inland Deep South region during the Civil War. During the 1862 occupation, General Mitchel's superior, General Don Carlos Buell, expected Mitchel to follow a conciliatory civil-military policy toward secessionist civilians. Instead, Mitchel challenged his superior's ability to sustain a conciliatory civil-military policy in the region. Mitchel's abandonment of conciliation was not borne in isolation; defiant secessionists, the region's black population, and civil and military leaders in Washington contributed to the evolution of punitive civil-military policies toward Confederate civilians. Analysis of the 1862 occupation challenges Civil War historians' assertions that the Union's 'hard war' civil-military approach toward Confederate civilians did not start until 1863. With each successive occupation, Union soldiers' authority and desire to punish secessionists grew. Conversely, blacks' self-determination during these occupations provided them with privileges and rights hitherto denied by white Southerners. The Union's application of punitive civil-military policies in North Alabama had, by early 1865, inflicted an incalculable amount of damage on white civilians' morale and their commitment to the Confederacy. When the Rebels gave up their fight for independence, the Union had the power to impose the terms of surrender and define the political, social, economic, and racial consequences of the conflict. However, President Lincoln's assassination, the rapid demobilization of the Union Army, and Johnson's reconstruction policies gave white North Alabamians the opportunity to reconcile with the North on their terms. In particular, Johnson's lenient policies came full circle with Buell's conciliatory approach.