Soldiers drawn into politics? The influence of tactics in civil–military relations
2013; Routledge; Volume: 24; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1080/09592318.2013.778035
ISSN1743-9558
AutoresChiara Ruffa, Christopher Dandeker, Pascal Vennesson,
Tópico(s)Military History and Strategy
ResumoAbstract The tactical level has become increasingly important in the conduct of contemporary complex military operations. Yet, the potential impact that this tactical level may have on domestic civil–military relations has been neglected. In this article, we focus on mechanisms by which low-level soldiers have acquired an increasing importance in tactical operations and we suggest that this may influence civil–military relations in the future. We argue that two phenomena deserve particular attention. These mechanisms are not new but they have had new effects by making it possible for soldiers to influence politics in sometimes unforeseen ways: the first is the strategic corporal and the second is the expansion of ancillary tasks. Our contribution lies at the interface between military sociology and security studies and seeks to show how the tactical level of warfare has become a fundamental context in which civil–military relations are enacted. Exploring these dynamics is fundamental to understanding under what conditions soldiers may interact with other actors in complex operations. Keywords: complex operationsstrategic corporalancillary taskscivil–military relations Notes 1. Complex operations have been defined in the introduction to this special issue. 2. http://www.isaf.nato.int/troop-numbers-and-contributions/index.php. 3. http://www.isaf.nato.int/troop-numbers-and-contributions/index.php 4. By tactical level, we refer to ‘the level at which activities, battles and engagement are planned and executed to accomplish military objectives assigned to tactical formations and units’, NATO definition of tactics AAP06, NATO Glossary of Terms (2009) p. 2-T-2, available at http://www.nato.int/docu/stanag/aap006/aap-6–2009.pdf. 5. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/13/world/asia/video-said-to-show-marines-urinating-on-taliban-corpses.html?_r = 1&pagewanted = all. 6. Mercer Mercer, Jonathan. 1996. Reputation and International Politics, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University. [Google Scholar], Reputation and International Politics. 7. Dandeker Dandeker, Christopher. 2006. “Surveillance and Military Transformation: Organizational Trends in Twenty First Century Armed Services”. In The New Politics of Surveillance and Visibility, Edited by: Haggerty, Kevin and Ericson, Richard V. 225–249. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. [Google Scholar], ‘Surveillance and Military Transformation’. 8. By political decision, we mean a decision that has consequences for or related to the government or the public affairs of a country and we see it as opposed to strategic, operational, or tactical levels. 9. Strachan Strachan, Hew. 2006. Making Strategy: Civil-Military Relations after Iraq. Survival: Global Politics and Strategy, 48(3): 59–82. [Taylor & Francis Online] , [Google Scholar], ‘Making Strategy’. 10. Finer Finer, Samuel. 1962. The Man on Horseback: The Role of the Military in Politics, London: Pall Mall Press. [Google Scholar], The Man on horseback; King King, Anthony. 2011. The Transformation of Europe's Armed Forces: The Rhine to Afghanistan, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar], Transformation of Europe's Armed Forces; Abrahamsson Abrahamsson, Bengt. 1972. Military Professionalization and Political Power, London: Sage. [Google Scholar], Military Professionalization and Political Power. 11. Abrahamsson, Military Professionalization and Political Power, 140. 12. Smith Mercer, Jonathan. 1996. Reputation and International Politics, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University. [Google Scholar], The Utility of Force. 13. Resteigne Resteigne, Delphine. 2010. Still Connected in Operations? The Milblog Culture. International Peacekeeping, 17(4): 59–76. [Taylor & Francis Online] , [Google Scholar], ‘Still Connected in Operations?’ 14. Burk Burk, James. 2002. Theories of Democratic Civil-Military Relations. Armed Forces and Society, 29(1): 7–29. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], ‘Democratic Civil-Military Relations’, 9. 15. Sowers Sowers, Thomas. Spring 2005. Beyond the Soldier and the State: Contemporary Operations and Variance in Principle-Agent Relationships. Armed Forces and Society, 31(3): 385–409. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], ‘Beyond the Soldier and the State’. 16. Smith, The Utility of Force. 17. Dandeker, ‘Surveillance and Military Transformation’, 239. 18. Ruffa Ruffa, Chiara. “Afghan War Lessons.” The Diplomat, Flashpoints: Diplomacy by Other Means. 7 March 2012. http://thediplomat.com/flashpoints-blog/2012/03/07/afghan-war-lessons/ [Google Scholar], ‘Afghan War Lessons’; Dandeker, ‘Surveillance and Military Transformation’. 19. Resteigne and Soeters Resteigne, Delphine and Soeters, Joseph. Jan 2009. Managing Military. Armed Forces and Society, 35(2): 307–332. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], ‘Managing Military’. 20. Porter Porter, Patrick. 2012. A Matter of Choice: Strategy and Discretion in the Shadow of World War Two. Journal of Strategic Studies, 35(3): 317–343. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], ‘A Matter of Choice’. 21. Dandeker, ‘Surveillance and Military Transformation’. 22. Dandeker, ‘Surveillance and Military Transformation’, 239–40. 23. Dandeker, ‘Surveillance and Military Transformation’, 240. 24. Ruffa Ruffa, Chiara. 2012. “What Kind of Military Leadership for what Kind of Operation?Assessing “Mission Command” in Peace Operations and Counterinsurgencies”. In Leadership in Challenging Situations, Edited by: Haas, H., Kernic, F. and Plaschke, Andrea. 183–194. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. [Google Scholar], ‘What Peacekeepers Think’. 25. For instance, Ruffa and Vennesson Ruffa, Chiara, and Vennesson Pascal. “Fighting and Helping? The Domestic Politics of NGO-military relations.” Mimeo, Uppsala University Archive, 2012 [Google Scholar], ‘Fighting and Helping?’ 26. Krulak Krulak, Charles C. May 1999. The Strategic Corporal: Leadership in the Three Block War. Marine Corps Gazette, 83(5): 18–22. [Google Scholar], ‘The Strategic Corporal’, 18. 27. Abrahamsson, Military Professionalization and Political Power, 146. 28. Abrahamsson, Military Professionalization and Political Power, 146 29. Ignazi Ignazi, Piero, Giacomello, Giampiero and Coticchia, Fabrizio. 2012. Italian Military Operations Abroad: Just Don't Call It War, London: Palgrave MacMillan. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar] et al., ‘Italian Military Operations Abroad’; Ruffa Ruffa, Chiara. “Imagining War and Keeping Peace? Military Cultures and Peace Operation Effectiveness.” PhD thesis, European University Institute, 2010. [Google Scholar], Imagining War. 30. King, ‘Transformation of European Armed Forces’, 275. 31. See ‘Slimming the Ranks’, Bagehot, The Economist, 19–25 January 2013. 32. This is an old debate from the post-Cold War onwards in the literature, especially when peacekeeping seemed to be the new core business. Boene Boene, Bernard. Jun 1990. How Unique Should the Military Be? A Review of Representative Literature and Outline of a Synthetic Formulation. European Journal of Sociology, 31(1): 3–59. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], ‘How Unique Should the Military Be?’ 33. For a good overview, see Feaver Feaver, Peter D. 1999. Civil-Military Relations. Annual Review of Political Science, 2: 211–241. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], ‘Civil-Military Relations’. 34. Angstrom, ‘The changing norms of civil and military and civil-military relations theory’, and Haldén, ‘Fundamental but not eternal: The public-private distinction, from normative projects to cognitive grid in Western political thought’. 35. Rosén Rosén, Frederik. 2010. Moving Beyond the Security-Development Nexus: Third Generation Civil-Military Relations. PRISM, 2(1) Paper [Google Scholar], ‘Moving Beyond’. 36. Lyall and Wilson Lyall, Jason and Wilson, Isaiah. Winter 2009. Rage Against the Machines: Explaining Outcomes in Counterinsurgency Wars. International Organization, 63(1): 67–106. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], ‘Rage Against the Machine’. 37. King, ‘Transformation of European Armed Forces’. 38. Dandeker Dandeker, Christopher. forthcoming 2013. The End of Western Military Intervention? What “success” means in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. [Google Scholar] in ‘The End of Western Military Intervention? What “success” means in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya’.
Referência(s)