essay on military rule

It exists along a continuum of more, or less, civilian control, from the extreme of countries ruled by military establishments, or that experience periodic coups d’etat and frequent direct or indirect military intervention in politics, to those that do not even possess standing military forces. The best way to understand civilian control, to measure its existence and evaluate its effectiveness, is to weigh the relative influence the military and civilians have in the decisions of state concerning war, internal security, external defense, and military affairs.

Sometimes, where civilian control is weak or nonexistent, military influence laps over into other areas of public policy and social life. Even in mature democracies that have long practiced civilian control, the balance between military and civilian varies with time and place, with the personalities involved, with the personal or political ambitions of senior military officers and leading politicians, and with the circumstances that give the military prestige and weight in public opinion. Even in those democracies with rich traditions of unbroken civilian dominance, war and security can (and have) become so important in national life and so central to the definition of the state, that the military, particularly during or after a crisis or war, can use its expertise or public standing to limit civilian influence in military affairs. In the wake of World War II, senior American generals and admirals possessed great influence in government. Nearly every American war has produced a heroic commander who emerges to run for president or consider doing so, Colin Powell being only the most recent example.

• The Truman-MacArthur crisis in 1951 originated in trying to limit a conflict early in the era of atomic weapons, in a part of the world the American political and military leadership deemed secondary in the Cold War struggle against communism. The crisis exploded when a legendary general whose reputation overshadowed the president’s, a general who was not willing to settle for stalemate after suffering a shocking defeat at the end of a fabled career, would not cease public disagreement with American policy and strategy.

Foundations of Civilian Control

T H E    F I R S T    R E Q U I R E M E N T  for civilian control in democracy is democratic governance itself, that is, the rule of law, a stable method for succession, workable practices for electing officials,

and a government and governing process accepted as legitimate by elites and by the population as a whole (perhaps spelled out in a written constitution).Civilian control can support or sustain democracy, but civilian control is only one aspect of democratic rule; civilian control is necessary for democracy but not sufficient. Without a stable and legitimate governmental system and process, the military may be induced to intervene or interfere in order to protect society from chaos, internal challenge, or external attack–even though intervention may itself perpetuate instability and destroy the legitimacy of the government. The tradition of legitimacy in government acts on the one hand to deter military interference in politics and on the other to counteract intervention should it threaten or occur. In countries with English legal traditions, but also in others like Switzerland or the Scandinavian states, the rule of law puts the military by definition under civilian authority and keeps it there.

• through force, by other armed forces in society (such as militia or police or an armed population); and,
• by the knowledge that illegal acts will not be tolerated, and will lead to personal dishonor, disgrace, retirement, relief, fine, arrest, trial, conviction, prison–whatever punishment is legal, appropriate, and can be made to stick. The more likely that violations of civilian control will not be forgiven and will be met by effective resistance, the less likely they are to occur. Historically a most effective counterweight has been a reliance on citizen-soldiers as opposed to full-time professionals. The ” standing army” has often been difficult to manage. But knowledge that revolt would lead to crisis and be opposed by an armed population, or that citizen forces might not heed the orders, has been an effective deterrent. Size matters. Standing forces should be as small as security permits: so that the population consents to provide the resources, so that the military will be oriented exclusively to external defense, and to reduce civil- military friction.

Because of their expertise and role as the nation’s guardian, military leaders in democracies can possess great public credibility, and can use it to limit or undermine civilian control, particularly during and after successful wars. The difficulty is to define their proper role and to confine their activity within proper boundaries even when those boundaries are fuzzy and indistinct. The scholar of civil-military relations in Israel, Yehuda Ben Meir, believes that the military should advise civilians, represent the needs of the military inside the government, but not advocate military interests or perspectives publicly in such a way as to undermine or circumscribe civilian authority.

Helpful to this ethos is an officer corps that is, in every respect possible, representative of the diversity or homogeneity of the larger society. Some countries have enjoyed civilian control with officers drawn only from particular races, religions, classes, or ethnic backgrounds. But it seems far wiser to build an officer corps that equates itself with the national population and whose officers identify their first loyalty to the country rather than the profession of arms. Drawing them from one segment risks them identifying as guardians above, and independent of, society–separate and superior. If they see their own values at variance with those of the population and their loyalties to their group of origin and to the military as primary, they may delude themselves into thinking that their purpose is to preserve or reform society’s values and norms, rather than safeguard the nation’s physical security.

Nor should the military participate in any fashion in politics, not as members of parties, in elected office, or even in appointive office as members of a political administration at the local or national level. If officers belong to a political party, run for office, represent a particular group or constituency, publicly express their views (and vote), attack or defend the executive leadership–in short, behave like politicians–they cannot be trusted to be neutral servants of the state and guardians of society. Even personal identification with a political program or party can compromise an officer in the performance of his or her duty.

In theory, nothing physical in most societies prevents armies from interfering in politics or even attempting to overturn their government. But where civilian control has succeeded over a long period, military professionals have internalized civilian control to an extraordinary degree. In those countries, the people and civilian leaders expect, because of law or tradition, military subordination to civil authority. The organs of public opinion, in the press and among elites, accept the principle and in times of stress in civil-military relations declare it as an axiom of government. Some countervailing power to the military force may exist, but the military understands that any step toward insubordination would immediately provoke a crisis that by consensus they would lose, with the possibility of legal sanctions to them personally.Yet ultimately, on a day-to-day basis, it is the military officers’ own discipline and restraint that maintains civilian control. Whether or not they would face dismissal or prison, they choose to submit, to define their duty as advice to civilian bosses rather than advocacy, and to carry out all lawful orders effectively and without complaint. But because civilians frequently lack knowledge and understanding of military affairs, and the apportioning of military and civilian responsibility depends so often on circumstances, the relationship even in the most stable governments has, historically, been messy, uncertain, and filled with friction. And thus, historically, the degree of civilian control , that is, the relative weight of the civilian and the military , has been dependent on the people and the issues.

T H E    T H R E A T S    T O    C I V I L I A N   control have been unspecified but assumed in this essay. It bears repeating that any breakdown or erosion of constitutional process caused or used by the military or that permits the military to become independent represents a threat to democratic rule.

Unitary control of the military, or control by one person or branch or institution of government that unbalances power, can permit the military to become the tool of tyranny and, quite possibly, the successor tyrant. A military establishment larger than needed, tasked with missions beyond national defense, strains the trust between soldiers and society that must underlie stable civilian control. Political or bureaucratic conditions periodically offer armed forces limited opportunities to disobey, circumvent, ignore, or defy civilian authority. And of course last, and most dangerous, a military leadership willing to intervene improperly in politics and governance always threatens military subordination.

• Externally, a security crisis so grave as to imperil the existence of a nation invites military intervention under the illusion of efficiency, as occurred in Germany in World War I.

D E M O C R A C Y is a disorderly form of government, often inefficient, always frustrating. Maintaining liberty and security, governing in such a manner as to achieve desirable political outcomes and at the same time military effectiveness, is among the most difficult dilemmas of human governance.

As the new millennium approaches, newly emerging democracies with long-established armed forces accustomed to a large degree of autonomy face the challenge of gaining enough influence and control to say with confidence that they have civilian control over their military. Military establishments which are unused to having their judgment or authority questioned by anyone, much less the cacophony of groups and individuals (many of whom most flagrantly do not subscribe to the values and behaviors traditional to military groups) typical of democratic governance, will experience an equally uncomfortable challenge.

How will that transition come about, or be managed, without the kind of internal conflict, or even violence, which so threatens democratic process? On the answer to this problem, undoubtedly worked out slowly and painfully, will rest much of the future of democracy in human society.

Dick Kohn is professor of history and chairman of the Curriculum in Peace, War, and Defense at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, as well as executive secretary, Triangle Institute for Security Studies . Further, he is a member of the Editorial Advisory Board of American Diplomacy.

♟️ Why we must understand civilian participation in military rule

Researchers of authoritarian politics and civil-military relations have long examined military rule. However, our understanding of civilian participation in military regimes remains limited and requires greater analytical attention, argues Salah Ben Hammou . Amid last year’s coup resurgence, researchers must begin to appreciate the subtle but salient differences among military dictatorships

When soldiers seize political power, our minds tend to conjure up assumptions about military rule. We might imagine officers in fatigues dictating legislation and the outlawing of political participation. In our vision, civilian leaders – civil society members and party leaders – might well be notably absent. But is this really what 'military rule' looks like?

When someone speaks of military rule, we might imagine officers in fatigues dictating legislation. But is that really what 'military rule' looks like?

Hager Ali recently called for greater analytical precision in the study of authoritarian regimes. The study of military regimes – particularly those with a significant civilian presence – is one area of research in need of such nuance. This is especially important in light of the 2021 military coups which toppled governments in Sudan , Mali , Guinea , and Myanmar . But rather than simply lumping all militarised governments together, researchers must do more to appreciate the subtle, but salient, differences.

Delineating (military) dictatorships

It's tempting to assume that all military governments share the same traits and behaviours. But this is not true. Moving beyond the archetype of ‘military rule’, we find great variation among militarised regimes. Researchers acknowledge a few of these distinctions. Most scholarship, for example, distinguishes between cases in which militaries govern through a collegial entity and those where a military officer ‘personalises’ political power.

Examples of the latter include Chile’s General Augusto Pinochet and Uganda’s Idi Amin . The former includes Brazil’s ruling junta 1964–1985 and the Derg in Ethiopia . Studies ( here , here , here , and here ) reveal these differences matter for a country’s foreign policy, political instability, and prospects of democratisation. Yet, despite receiving the most attention from researchers, the difference between collegial and personalist military rule is far from the only relevant distinction.

Scholars have done little to evaluate one key distinction across military regimes: civilian participation

Scholars have done little to evaluate one key distinction across military regimes: civilian participation. Some typologies, such as the Autocratic Breakdown dataset , classify certain governments as having a dominant military and political party. Yet we still lack a nuanced understanding of these types of arrangements. It is unclear, for example, how much relative power each institution wields, or how we might compare such systems to each other.

Further, collegial military rule and military-personalist systems can experience significant involvement by civilian political parties even if they don’t meet the criteria of a ‘dominant’ institution. For example, Sudan’s Colonel Jaafar Nimeiri (in power 1969–1985) is often categorised as a personalist military dictator. Yet Nimeiri's regime initially crafted legislation and policy hand-in-hand with the Communist Party . Likewise, Turkey’s collegial military government (1980–1983) worked alongside a constellation of civilian allies who had previously demanded the armed forces’ intervention.

Bringing civilian participation into the mix

Rather than treating civilian participation as negligible, researchers can use the varieties of this feature to uncover more general trends in military rule.

Soldiers and civilians come to govern together through a variety of avenues. As a result, each avenue comes with its own implications for a country’s civil-military relations. For example, military dictators can form their own civilian political parties. Through these, they can channel mass mobilisation, reduce their reliance on the armed forces, and discredit civilian opposition. Nimeiri’s Sudanese Socialist Union is one such example. The SUU was created in the aftermath of Nimeiri's dispute with his former civilian allies in the Communist Party . In this context, civilians lack significant autonomy from their military allies and merely serve at officers’ behest.

However, civilian parties can also have a great deal of agency. They can build a strong following within the armed forces and use their military partisans to seize power on their behalf. The Ba’ath party’s ascension via a military coup in 1968 Iraq is one such example. Though it began as a military regime, the Ba'athist government saw its officers increasingly lose influence to their civilian allies. And this, of course, paved the way for a civilian – Saddam Hussein – to consolidate political power.

Blurring the lines between 'civilian' and 'military'

In some cases, the outcome is the opposite: officers successfully subjugate their civilian partners. In Sudan, Hassan al-Turabi’s civilian National Islamic Front (NIF) initially dominated Omar al-Bashir’s military dictatorship throughout the 1990s. Indeed, Turabi is often referred to as the power behind the throne . However, al-Bashir and his associates gained full primacy in the regime. By the end of the decade, they had sacked Turabi and his associates. And this type of arrangement is still distinct from cases that emerge from armed anti-colonial resistance, blurring the lines between what it means to be a 'civilian' and a 'soldier'. Algeria's military regime is one such example.

Incorporating different dynamics into our analysis sheds a new light on military regimes, and helps us design our efforts to limit military intervention

These examples are by no means exhaustive of all the potential civil-military arrangements possible under military regimes. However, incorporating the different dynamics sheds light on processes researchers have previously ignored. Instead of erroneously assuming militaries and civilians operate in distinct spaces, we can work towards a nuanced typology that includes the varieties of relationships between civilians and soldiers, their origins, their changing features, and more.

Why civilian participation matters beyond research

Unpacking civilian participation in military regimes extends beyond theoretical concerns.

First, if officers have civilian allies – either willing participants for post-coup governments or instigators of coups themselves – efforts to limit military intervention in politics will be futile . Second, the international community’s recurring demand for a 'civilian' government after a coup overlooks the too-common strategy of handing power to an affiliated civilian party. Observers have raised similar concerns with the international community’s call for a civilian-led government in Sudan, pointing to the recent putschists’ move to form a government composed of civilian allies .

Ultimately, finding the language to describe situations in which civilians don fatigues and govern alongside officers clarifies what military rule can really look like. It also reminds us that civilians, too, have agency.

♟️ No.2 in The Loop's Autocracies with Adjectives series examining the nuanced differences between autocratic regimes around the world

Salah's research focuses on civil-military relations, democratisation, and authoritarian politics in the Middle East and North Africa.

His work has been published in peer-reviewed journals including International Studies Review and Journal of Global Security Studies as well as in popular outlets such as The Washington Post , the Cairo Review , and Political Violence at a Glance .

Personal website

He tweets @poliscisbh

Share Article

Republish article, republish this article.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License .

by Salah Ben Hammou, The Loop May 11, 2022

Republish This Story

Stay in the loop with our biweekly digest

* Provide your email address to subscribe, e.g. [email protected]

* I agree to receive your newsletters and accept the data privacy notice

Your email address is only used to send you The Loop Digest newsletter.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Recently Published

Auction politics: when and why parties are likely to over-promise, political legacies and their ‘side-effects’ for political parties, how real is the threat of the populist far right in the european parliament elections.

Argumentative Essay On Democracy Is Better Than Military Rule

The debate between democracy and military rule has long been a topic of contention in discussions about governance. In this essay, we will explore the advantages of democracy over military rule, focusing on representation, human rights, the rule of law, economic development, and peaceful transitions of power. Democracy, with its emphasis on citizen participation and protection of individual rights, has proven to be a better path to progress and prosperity for nations worldwide.

Table of Contents

Reasons Why Democracy Is Better Than Military Rule Essay

Representation and participation.

One of the fundamental pillars of democracy is representation and participation. In democratic societies, citizens have the opportunity to elect their leaders, granting them a voice in shaping policies that impact their lives. Elected representatives, who are accountable to the people, advocate for the interests of their constituents and secure various perspectives, are considered in decision-making processes. In contrast, military rule often leaves citizens without a voice, as a select group makes decisions of military leaders without the consent of the governed.

Protection (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); of Human Rights

Democracies are characterized by a commitment to protecting individual rights and freedoms. Constitutional frameworks and independent judiciary systems in democratic nations ensure that basic human rights, such as freedom of speech, assembly, and expression, are upheld. These rights are essential for fostering an environment of open dialogue, debate, and progress. In contrast, military rule may impose restrictions on civil liberties, leading to censorship and oppression, stifling societal growth and development.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is a cornerstone of democratic governance. In a democracy, laws apply to all citizens equally, regardless of their social or political standing. This principle ensures that those in power are held accountable for their actions, promoting transparency and fairness. In military rule, the rule of law may be undermined, leading to arbitrary decision-making and a lack of checks and balances, which can result in abuse of power.

Economic Development

Empirical evidence suggests that democracies tend to experience higher levels of economic development compared to countries under military rule. The stability and predictability of democratic systems create a favorable environment for investment, innovation, and entrepreneurship. Additionally, democratic governments prioritize policies that foster economic growth, social welfare, and education, leading to better economic outcomes and improved living standards for citizens.

Peaceful Transitions of Power

One of the significant advantages of democracy is its ability to facilitate peaceful transitions of power through regular elections. In democratic nations, leaders are elected for a fixed term, and power is peacefully transferred to the winning candidate after each election cycle. This ensures political stability and reduces the risk of violent conflicts that can arise from power struggles in military regimes.

Challenges and Counterarguments

While democracy offers numerous benefits, it is essential to acknowledge its challenges and consider counterarguments. Democracies can face issues such as political polarization, bureaucratic inefficiencies, and the influence of money in politics. Furthermore, some argue that military rule can bring stability and decisive action in times of crisis. However, it is crucial to recognize that military rule often comes at the cost of human rights and undermines the principles of democratic governance.

In conclusion, democracy has proven to be a superior form of governance when compared to military rule. It ensures representation and citizen participation, protects human rights, upholds the rule of law, fosters economic development, and facilitates peaceful transitions of power. While it may face challenges, democracy remains the best path to progress and prosperity for nations worldwide. Embracing democracy’s core principles of inclusion, transparency, and accountability will continue to lead societies toward a brighter and more equitable future.

Hello! Welcome to my Blog StudyParagraphs.co. My name is Angelina. I am a college professor. I love reading writing for kids students. This blog is full with valuable knowledge for all class students. Thank you for reading my articles.

Related Posts:

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Explore our publications and services.

University of michigan press.

Publishes award-winning books that advance humanities and social science fields, as well as English language teaching and regional resources.

Michigan Publishing Services

Assists the U-M community of faculty, staff, and students in achieving their publishing ambitions.

Deep Blue Repositories

Share and access research data, articles, chapters, dissertations and more produced by the U-M community.

A community-based, open source publishing platform that helps publishers present the full richness of their authors' research outputs in a durable, discoverable, accessible and flexible form. Developed by Michigan Publishing and University of Michigan Library.

• shopping_cart Cart

Browse Our Books

• See All Books
• Distributed Clients

Feature Selections

• New Releases
• Forthcoming
• Bestsellers
• Great Lakes

English Language Teaching

• Companion Websites
• Subject Index
• Resources for Teachers and Students

By Skill Area

• Academic Skills/EAP
• Teacher Training

For Authors

Prospective authors.

• Why Publish with Michigan?
• Open Access
• Our Publishing Program
• Submission Guidelines

Author's Guide

• Introduction
• Final Manuscript Preparation
• Production Process
• Marketing and Sales
• Guidelines for Indexing

For Instructors

• Exam Copies
• Desk Copies

For Librarians and Booksellers

• Our Ebook Collection
• Ordering Information for Booksellers
• Review Copies

Background and Contacts

• About the Press
• Customer Service
• Staff Directory

News and Information

• Conferences and Events

Policies and Requests

• Rights and Permissions
• Accessibility

Between Military Rule and Democracy

Regime consolidation in greece, turkey, and beyond.

Examines military interventions in Greece, Turkey, Thailand, and Egypt, and the military’s role in authoritarian and democratic regimes

Look Inside

• Table of Contents

Description

Why do the armed forces sometimes intervene in politics via short-lived coups d’état, at other times establish or support authoritarian regimes, or in some cases come under the democratic control of civilians? To find answers, Yaprak Gürsoy examines four episodes of authoritarianism, six periods of democracy, and ten short-lived coups in Greece and Turkey, and then applies her resultant theory to four more recent military interventions in Thailand and Egypt.

Based on more than 150 interviews with Greek and Turkish elites, Gürsoy offers a detailed analysis of both countries from the interwar period to recent regime crises. She argues that officers, politicians, and businesspeople prefer democracy, authoritarianism, or short-lived coups depending on the degree of threat they perceive to their interests from each other and the lower classes. The power of elites relative to the opposition, determined in part by the coalitions they establish with each other, affects the success of military interventions and the consolidation of regimes.

With historical and theoretical depth, Between Military Rule and Democracy will interest students of regime change and civil-military relations in Greece, Turkey, Thailand, and Egypt, as well as in countries facing similar challenges to democratization.

Yaprak Gürsoy  is Lecturer of Politics and International Relations at Aston University.  

“ Between Military Rule and Democracy is a pioneering study in the sense that there exists no comparative-historical study of the same level of historical depth and theoretical sophistication which tries to uncover the complex trajectories of democratization and authoritarian reversals in the Southeastern periphery of Europe.” —Ziya Öniş, Koç University  

“ Between Military Rule and Democracy goes beyond many of the other treatments of militaries in politics by making a well-supported argument concerning factors that influence the actions of militaries in various situations . . . It thus makes an interesting contribution to the literature on democratization and authoritarianism as well as providing very well-documented case studies of the actions of militaries in two countries where they have played an important role over time.” —Sharon Wolchik, George Washington University  

News, Reviews, Interviews

Watch: Yaprak Gursoy book launch with the South East European Studies group at Oxford Link | 5/24/2017 Watch: Interview with Yaprak Gursoy with the South East European Studies group at Oxford Link | 4/19/2017

Download the Entire Issue

Book Reviews

Joint doctrine, joint force quarterly 77 (2nd quarter, april 2015), the military's role in rule of law development.

By Patrick J. Reinert and John F. Hussey Joint Force Quarterly 77

America’s commitment to the rule of law is fundamental to our efforts to build an international order that is capable of confronting the emerging challenges of the 21 st century.

—President Barack Obama 1

As Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan transitions to the Resolute Support Mission, many believe that military engagements abroad involving the United States will decrease and that the Nation will become a disengaged actor on the world stage. Given the complexity and volatility of relationships among nations, however, as well as the continual rise of hostile transnational groups, it appears the United States will remain substantially engaged on the international stage for the foreseeable future. As part of its future engagement strategy, the United States must consider and plan for conducting operations in states at risk of failure, in failed states where the central government is so weakened that the people have virtually returned to the natural state described by Thomas Hobbes in the Leviathan , in states emerging from long periods of conflict such as Afghanistan, and in states in peaceful postconflict rebuilding periods. 2

The world remains a volatile, uncertain, and dangerous place with states, transnational organizations, and nonstate actors all working in their own self-interests—which may or may not be aligned with the national interest of the United States. There is little choice for the United States but to maintain an active role to counter, impede, and dissuade hostile states, nonstate actors, and transnational criminal organizations. The United States, working in concert with other nations, international organizations, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), must work to mitigate threats through the use of all elements of national power and focus on rule of law development as a means to provide international stability.

President Obama talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin about situation in Ukraine, March 1, 2014 (White House/Pete Souza)

If combat operations are required to wrest control of a nation or a large geographic area from a hostile force or if a nation becomes a failed state requiring international intervention, each participating nation must plan for and be prepared to implement programs to provide security and stability. Using as much of the indigenous criminal justice system as soon as possible should protect the people from harm and help them begin developing a sense of “nation” to form the nucleus of the nation that will rise from the ashes of the conflict. Rule of law development requires a whole-of-government approach in which synchronization and coordination among the military, Embassy teams, international organizations, and NGOs are critical. In an operation with a kinetic component, or where the security situation may be unstable, the military must take the lead in developing the security umbrella using the criminal justice system for counterinsurgency and providing general security for the people. Other rule of law programs, focusing on more generalized development efforts, have a longer time horizon and can more effectively flourish after the security situation is more stable.

David Kilcullen, former counterinsurgency advisor to General David Petraeus in Iraq, stated the United States is likely to remain engaged in major stabilization or counterinsurgency operations such as Iraq or Afghanistan. 3 In a world of uncertainty and instability, Kilcullen predicted the United States will engage in smaller operations, such as those in Bosnia or Kosovo, every 5 to 10 years for the foreseeable future. 4 These conflicts will likely occur in conflict-ridden littoral areas and in underdeveloped regions of the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, and Asia. 5 Operational planners must anticipate that coalition military forces and international organizations will confront failed, broken, or simply nonexistent justice systems that lack sufficient capability or capacity to conduct law enforcement operations, effectively resolve civil or criminal disputes, or appropriately conduct detention operations to support Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) or criminal detentions in accordance with international humanitarian standards. 6

What Is Rule of Law?

The rule of law has been described in varying terms, but a comprehensive definition, such as the one used by the United Nations, is useful in this context. The United Nations defines rule of law as:

a principle of governance in which all persons, institutions and entities, public and private, including the State itself, are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently adjudicated, and which are consistent with international human rights norms and standards. It requires, as well, measures to ensure adherence to the principles of supremacy of law, equality before the law, accountability to the law, fairness in the application of the law, separation of powers, participation in decision-making, legal certainty, avoidance of arbitrariness and procedural and legal transparency. 7

Many nations use secular constitutions, statutes, and mechanisms (law enforcement, courts, and institutions to correct individual criminal behavior) to implement rule of law. Other nations use differing implementation methods. In the Middle East, for example, the structure of the legal system is derived from a combination of systems, including religion and tribal practice, to form formal and informal legal mechanisms. In Latin America, citizens believe that they do not have a voice or the ability to obtain justice from a system permeated by corruption, judicial failures, repressive police tactics, and the legal marginalization of the majority of the population. 8 Citizens in Central Asia, most notably the Caucusus states, assume that they are governed by institutions that are inept, corrupt, and rife with nepotism. 9 In some parts of the world, rule of law appears under the guise of a strong authoritarian ruler exercising great influence over the “independence” of the judiciary. Often rulers with a strong “law and order mentality” impede social change that may threaten their holds on power. In states with a strong Islamic influence, personal issues, such as divorce and marriage, are resolved in sharia courts. The judges in criminal courts may be educated to approach criminal matters differently than judges trained in sharia law. 10

For those who have deployed to or are familiar with war-torn areas or failed states, it is clear that military force alone will not be able to establish or implement rule of law. Legal systems and institutions take years to develop based on a variety of factors, including host nation culture, religion, and tolerated levels of corruption, and whether coalition members bring with them an ethnocentric bias that could complicate the establishment of rule of law. In at-risk, failed, emerging, and postconflict states, the military can set the conditions for rule of law development and stability by focusing on the state’s criminal justice system.

Rule of Law in Afghanistan

After the Taliban government fell in Afghanistan, extremist organizations and insurgents continued to wage asymmetric warfare. The United Nations Security Council through the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) established the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) to oversee security in the country. Under ISAF, a new sovereign national structure developed in Afghanistan in 2004. This new government faced significant challenges in establishing rule of law in a country that had been a battleground for years and was still a kinetic environment.

In much of Afghanistan, the legal system struggled to provide stability for the nation due to overly bureaucratic institutions focusing on central control; a traditional preference for local, informal dispute resolution; and a security environment challenging justice actors to maintain a regular presence in some areas, resulting in a virtually nonexistent formal criminal justice system. This allowed the Taliban to fill the void with shadow courts using a rough variant of sharia law. Continued instability and the lack of significant economic growth have caused Afghanistan to struggle with sustaining required infrastructure and trained personnel to maintain rule of law institutions in the short term.

As noted in a recent RAND study, military planners and policymakers repeatedly treated detention operations as an afterthought. Detention operations have had strategic consequences for the United States internationally since 2001. 11 Planning and resourcing detention operations and rule of law development in the earliest phases of the campaign create additional challenges in conducting counterinsurgency operations. Although the international community was quick to offer solutions to address Afghan institutional shortcomings, real reform of the justice system required an Afghan system to ensure protection of civil liberties, equal treatment, and stability. To conduct effective counterinsurgency operations, Afghans needed a trusted criminal justice system void of corruption and abuse of power. In 2009, the U.S. Embassy in Kabul and ISAF commander recognized the need for coordination of military and civilian rule of law efforts.

Afghan National Army soldiers stand in formation outside Bagram Air Field as part of ceremony giving Afghan government control of local prison (U.S. Army/Andrew Claire Baker)

A Response to the Dilemma

In addition to a struggling judicial system, Afghanistan had a prison system that focused on the provincial rather than national level, resulting in detainees being removed from the battlefield and taken to a court in the same war-torn province. This process placed the provincial legal system at higher risk of attack and illegal influence. The LOAC detention system used by the coalition was not part of the civilian system, and Afghanistan preferred using criminal procedure rather than administrative detention. Major General Douglas Stone, former Task Force 134 commander in Iraq, came to Afghanistan to review the Afghan prison system. His report was critical of coalition detention operations and found that approximately two-thirds of the detainees were not hardened radicals. Some were not involved with the insurgency, and others worked for the insurgency out of economic necessity. 12 General Stone felt detention centers and prisons should be rehabilitative in nature, which required separating insurgents from common criminals. This seminal report led to change.

On July 9, 2009, ISAF Commander General Stanley McChrystal requested approval to establish Joint Task Force (JTF) 435 to centralize detention operations, interrogation, and rule of law functions in Afghanistan while reducing strategic vulnerabilities posed by detention operations. On September 18, 2009, the Secretary of Defense established JTF 435 to assume command, control, oversight, and responsibility for all U.S. detainee operations in Afghanistan. JTF 435 assumed responsibility from Combined Joint Task Force 82 for the detainees held at the Detention Facility in Parwan (DFIP), oversight of detainee review processes, programs for the peaceful reintegration of detainees into Afghan society, and coordination with other agencies and partners for the promotion of the rule of law and biometrics in Afghanistan. JTF 435 achieved initial operations capability on January 7, 2010.

JTF 435 coordinated with a variety of military and civilian organizations, including Afghan organizations. In addition to the Kabul headquarters element, the JTF had seven subordinate elements:

• Military Police brigade maintaining humane custody, care, and control of detainees, limiting insurgent activity within the facility, and facilitating family visitation
• Theater Intelligence Group (TIG) to collect actionable intelligence
• Biometrics Task Force to confirm identities, track offenders, and build a biometric database
• Afghan Detentions and Corrections Advisory Team (later called the Security Forces Assistance Team) to coordinate with Afghan detention authorities and share best practices
• strategic communications and outreach cell to advance rule of law
• reintegration cell to facilitate deradicalization and reentry programs for Afghan prisoners
• Legal Operations Directorate to conduct periodic Detainee Review Boards and facilitate transfer of detainees to the Afghan criminal courts. 13

With the addition of Afghan and interagency partners, JTF 435 became Combined Joint Interagency Task Force (CJIATF) 435 on September 1, 2010. The command also assumed new missions and responsibilities to support rule of law efforts as it partnered with the U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan for Rule of Law and Law Enforcement. To effectively execute rule of law missions, CJIATF 435 created the Rule of Law Field Force–Afghanistan (ROLFF-A) to execute projects to increase rule of law capacity in Afghanistan. 14 The concept required the Embassy and ROLFF-A to concur on programs to build short-term, mid-term, and long-term Afghan governance and justice systems. ROLFF-A then coordinated with battlespace owners to build capacity of local legal systems to allow them to operate effectively across the legal spectrum. ROLFF-A, in conjunction with U.S. law enforcement agencies, provided subject matter experts on evidence-processing to assist Afghan prosecutors and investigators.

On June 9, 2011, the defense ministers from the 48 nations of ISAF created the NATO Rule of Law Field Support Mission (NROLFSM) as a command directly subordinate to the ISAF commander. The commander of ROLFF-A was also the NROLFSM commander. NROLFSM provided essential field capabilities for Afghan and international civilian providers to build Afghan criminal justice capacity, increase access to dispute resolution services, fight corruption, and promote the legitimacy of the Afghan government by providing security, coordination, movement support, engineering support, and contract oversight.

Under the ROLFF-A/NROLFSM mandate, U.S. Rule of Law Field Support Officers, predominantly lawyers and law enforcement officials, mentored justice sector officials. 15 Neither ROLFF-A nor NROLFSM were to participate in U.S. LOAC detention operations. 16 To be successful in a geographically dispersed rule of law mission, a unit such as ROLFF-A/NROLFSM needs to be well resourced and able to operate for an extended period of time. For future military forays into rule of law, a more focused effort is warranted.

In today’s complex battlefield, military leaders have come to realize that achieving national goals to transition from combat to stability operations and ultimately transfer to host nation civil authority requires rule of law planning and shaping efforts well before combat operations. To facilitate the eventual transition to the host nation, rule of law planning must include incorporation of significant aspects of the host nation’s legal system. The military rule of law plan must create the security umbrella and focus on criminal justice basics, specifically detentions, investigations, and adjudications. The military’s use of these universal components of a criminal justice system must be as close as possible to the host nation’s legal system to enable effective transition to host nation sovereignty. Military rule of law planning must focus on the basic security institutions to create a permissive environment for the interagency community, NGOs, and coalition partners to operate.

One of the primary goals of CJIATF 435 was to assist its Afghan partners in establishing a detention operations regimen, a detainee interview process to enable them to continue to gather information for prosecution and network targeting, and a court to adjudicate charges of criminal activity by members of the insurgency. The commander’s vision was “to build Afghanistan’s resistance and resiliency against insurgent and terror-related threats through use of evidence-based operations, forensic evidence, and enhanced cooperation across the Afghan Justice Sector.” 17 In an effort to build the Afghan legal system and transition this facet of the operation to the Afghans, CJIATF 435 focused its mission on training the Afghan partners in detentions, interview techniques to perfect criminal cases, and court operations to resolve criminal cases related to the insurgency.

Investigations

California National Guard Special Forces Soldier trains with Nigerian soldier in Nigeria to assist local military to counter Boko Haram (DOD/Jason Sweeney)

To dismantle any criminal network, investigators must gather information to understand the network, methods of operation, identity of participants, and their roles. One of the important methods to gain insight into a criminal network is the interview of a suspect. In conducting operations against a networked adversary such as an insurgent group, an interview can result in information to conduct future operations to disrupt or dismantle the network on the battlefield while simultaneously obtaining evidence to use against the individual in the host nation court system. In Iraq, the model used to conduct detainee interviews was the Joint Intelligence and Debriefing Center. 18 In Afghanistan, the Theater Intelligence Group and its Afghan partner, the National Directorate of Security, Department 40 (NDS-40), filled this role.

The TIG was created on January 6, 2010 and was assigned to CJIATF 435 to conduct interviews and debriefings to fill tactical, operational, and strategic intelligence requirements. Eventually, the TIG had more than 300 Servicemembers, civilians, contractors, and linguists assigned and forged working relationships with more than 20 interagency partners and organizations. 19 The TIG conducted more than 35,000 interviews and debriefings and produced over 6,800 reports supporting all echelons of intelligence consumers. 20 In 2013, the TIG began partnered operations with law enforcement investigators from NDS-40, which investigates individuals suspected of committing crimes in support of the insurgency. In this partnership, NDS-40 investigators were able to hone their skills at using forensic evidence, map tracking, and other interview techniques taught by the U.S. mentors in the TIG.

Court Operations

The evidence gathered through this joint effort enabled the Afghan legal system to remove insurgents from the battlefield. CJIATF 435 worked with the U.S. Department of State, international partners, and Afghan officials to develop the Justice Center in Parwan (JCIP) in 2010. 21 The concept was for Afghans to have an effective, centralized criminal court to resolve national security–related cases applying Afghan law. The JCIP was to be a long-term facility led by Afghan judges, prosecutors, and defense counsel and was collocated with the Afghan National Detention Facility in Parwan (ANDF-P) within the National Security Justice Center (NSJC). 22 At the JCIP, every detainee had a dedicated defense counsel, and justice advisors from other countries assisted counsel in honing their advocacy skills and effectively presenting cases before the court.

From May 2010 through September 2014, the JCIP provided due process to over 3,000 detainees through an Afghan criminal court operated by Afghan judges applying Afghan law. The JCIP successfully conducted over 7,000 primary and appellate trials of insurgents removed from the battlefield. 23 The legal advisors reviewed and reported the results of the majority of JCIP trials to help improve the process and capture lessons learned. The court maintained an overall conviction rate of over 75 percent and a conviction rate of 98 percent if there was DNA or a fingerprint match to an improvised explosive device. 24 The court’s application of Afghan criminal law, specifically the Internal/External Security Crimes Act, effectively protected the coalition and the Afghan people. The JCIP provided a sustainable foundation for Afghanistan to effectively implement Afghan law to criminalize the insurgency and build the people’s confidence in the national government and legal system. The effective prosecution at JCIP creates a beacon of hope for the rest of the criminal justice system in the eyes of the Afghan people. Furthermore, an effective National Security Justice Center also counters the narrative that Afghanistan is the source of regional instability.

KC-10 Extender refuels F-22 Raptor over undisclosed location before targeted airstrikes in Syria to protect U.S. personnel from Islamic State in Iraq and Levant (DOD/Russ Scalf)

As with Iraq and Guantanamo Bay, detention operations in Afghanistan had a variety of challenges. The original detention facility in Afghanistan, the Bagram Collection Point, later called the Bagram Theater Internment Facility, was challenged by a variety of issues, including the facility design. In 2009, the Detention Facility in Parwan was constructed with a view to transition detention operations to Afghan authority. 25 By the end of 2010, 561 Afghan guards had been trained to work at DFIP. Also, CJIATF 435 trained and mentored Afghan leaders to prepare them to assume responsibility for legal processing, case management, and administrative/logistical operations of the detention facility. CJIATF 435 facilitated the creation of the Afghan Military Police Brigade, a 5,294-man unit specially trained to conduct detention operations in accordance with international humanitarian standards. 26

CJIATF 435 transferred DFIP and the Afghan detainees to the control of the Afghan government on March 9, 2012, and the facility was renamed the Afghan National Detention Facility in Parwan. 27 The Afghan Military Police Brigade, subsequently designated the Detention Operations Command, remained part of the Afghan National Army and maintains control over the ANDF-P. The ANDF-P, JCIP, and support bases collectively constitute the NSJC. CJIATF 435 continues its partnership with the Afghan National Army, NDS-40, the court, prosecutors, and defense counsel to support the justice sector in combating the insurgency and creating a more stable Afghanistan.

Governing Ungoverned Territory

In the near term, the challenge for the United States is remaining globally engaged with limited resources. After nearly 13 years of continuous conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States and its coalition partners are war-weary. The duration of the conflicts, coupled with economic issues at home, makes domestic issues a focal point for politicians eager to avoid military engagements. To support global stability and prevent ungoverned territory from becoming a safe haven for extremist groups, the United States and its allies must carefully select the means to achieve the strategic goal of preventing nations from becoming failed states while avoiding long-term military engagements. This entails providing assistance to nations that are confronting destabilizing nonstate actors and transnational criminal organizations.

To achieve this objective, the United States and like-minded allies must concentrate on rule of law–focused engagement through routine military and interagency activities in an effort to dissuade or deter potential adversaries while solidifying relationships with friends and allies. These engagements will influence and strengthen the leadership of a nation and its populace. This engagement strategy requires a coordinated effort among the Defense Department, State Department, and other governmental agencies to formulate a holistic plan to help a nation or region avoid slipping into disunion and to enhance the ability of the nation to govern its territory. In many instances, this will require individuals on the ground to help build the legal institutions necessary for stability. The military is well suited to provide training in a less permissive environment to build security, stability, and a host nation’s forces to enhance rule of law and reduce the risk of instability. Reinforcing or reforming a nation’s security, prosecutorial, and judicial institutions helps create the fabric of a safe society functioning under the rule of law, while creating a more permissive environment for nonuniformed personnel to establish more long-term development programs.

While it may be more efficient to conduct training in detention operations, investigations, and legal operations in an academic environment in the United States, this method should be limited to key leaders identified during training occurring in the host nation. The bulk of training events must occur in the host nation. This allows trainers to gain a better understanding of the host nation’s legal system and culture while identifying key current and future leaders for additional training outside the host nation. Training like that conducted by the Defense Institute of International Legal Studies is an excellent example of rule of law development training conducted in the host nation. 28

All training must be tailored, focused, and incorporate the local legal system. Attempting to impose a new Western system or to make drastic changes to the existing legal framework will meet with resistance and undermine training efforts, which should focus on compliance with international humanitarian standards. This focus improves the professionalism of the force and mitigates the risk posed by an abusive authority figure to the rule of law. Abusive, predatory, or corrupt public officials undermine the legitimacy of the government in the eyes of the people. Police forces must enforce the law fairly and equally without regard for status, tribal/ethnic affiliation, or personal gain. In a nation emerging from conflict or striving to maintain legitimacy, the training must initially focus on the three necessary components for a functioning rule of law system: investigation, adjudication, and detention.

Investigations training must focus on basic investigative skills and human rights training to ensure international humanitarian standards are met. In some nations, the police will be responsible for the interview of alleged criminals/insurgents. Trainers must ensure any interview techniques comport with international humanitarian law. Any indigenous interview methods in the host nation that could result in a coerced statement must be specifically discouraged and the negative ramifications of such illegal activity discussed during the training.

The area of detentions is critical to establishing or preserving the rule of law. As noted by the classic Russian writer Fyodor Dostoevsky, “Humane treatment may raise up one in whom the divine image has long been obscured. It is with the ‘unfortunate,’ above all, that humane conduct is necessary.” 29 Without enlightened detention policy and rehabilitative programs, a detention center or prison can easily become a breeding ground for insurgents or other criminals. A poorly trained, corrupt, or abusive guard force will result in detainee abuse, causing the detainee to leave the facility a worse criminal than he entered. Detention and prison officials must understand their role is simply ensuring the safe and humane care of detainees in their custody. If a detainee or prisoner is humanely treated and given constructive rehabilitative training opportunities, the detention center can help create positive change in his behavior.

A free, impartial, and independent legal system, which ensures equal protection under the law and provides due process, is critical to the stability of a nation. The host nation may have a tradition of informal dispute resolution, such as allowing a village elder to resolve disputes, or a more formal legal structure. Informal methods are best suited for resolving individual, civil disputes, such as a land boundary dispute between neighbors. The formal mechanisms are best suited for resolution of criminal matters where the state is taking action to ensure the people are protected from criminal elements. To maximize the ability of the host nation to maintain security, initial training and development efforts should focus on the formal legal mechanisms, specifically the courts and counsel. The three rule of law building blocks of investigation, adjudication, and detention form the security foundation for the nation.

A failed, emerging, or postconflict nation is challenged to provide basic services such as garbage collection and water distribution; performing even basic government services is dependent upon first establishing security. Effective legal institutions are critical to establish and maintain rule of law by creating an environment for the rest of society to flourish. It is in the interest of the United States and the community of nations to ensure the stability of nations, minimize the number of failed states, and help emerging states become stable members of the international community. Using military rule of law development and training teams focused on investigation, formal adjudication, and detention should promote stability, reduce the risk of a failed state, and create the umbrella of security needed for other societal development. This military doctrinal focus should result in a narrow rule of law mission for the military to conduct in a kinetic environment, a clear line of demarcation from civilian development programs, and enhanced synchronization of rule of law development efforts. JFQ

• National Security Strategy (Washington, DC: The White House, May 2010), 37, available at <www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/national_security_strategy.pdf>.
• Ross Harrison, Hobbes, Locke, and Confusion’s Masterpiece: An Examination of Seventeenth Century Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 70.
• David J. Kilcullen, “The City as a System: Future Conflict and Urban Resilience,” The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs 36, no. 2 (Summer 2012), 20, available at <www.fletcherforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Kilcullen.pdf>.
• John F. Hussey with Larry W. Dotson, “Seizing the Initiative by Establishing the Rule of Law During Combat Operations,” Military Review , January–February 2013, 30, available at <http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/repository/MilitaryReview_201302280001-MD.xml>.
• United Nations Security Council, The Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post-Conflict Societies: Report of the Secretary-General (S/2004/616), August 23, 2004, available at <www.unrol.org/files/2004%20report.pdf>.
• Hugo Frühling, “A Memorandum on the Rule of Law and Criminal Violence in Latin America,” 3, available at <www.princeton.edu/~piirs/projects/Democracy&Development/papers/Panel%20IV%20Fruhling.pdf>.
• Brent T. White, “Putting Aside the Rule of Law Myth: Corruption and the Case for Juries in Emerging Democracies,” Selected Works of Brent T. White , available at <http://works.bepress.com/brent_white/1/>.
• Lionel Beehner, “Religious Conversion and Sharia Law,” Backgrounder , Council on Foreign Relations, June 8, 2007, available at <www.cfr.org/malaysia/religious-conversion-sharia-law/p13552>>.
• Cheryl Benard et al., The Battle Behind the Wire: U.S. Prisoner and Detainee Operations from World War II to Iraq (Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2011), available at <www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG934.html>.
• The Report of the Constitution Project’s Task Force on Detainee Treatment (Washington, DC: The Constitution Project, 2013), 76, available at <http://detaineetaskforce.org/pdf/Full-Report.pdf>.
• John H. Modinger and Joseph T. Bartlett, “A History of Detainee Operations in Afghanistan: How Combined Joint Interagency Task Force 435 Came to Be and What It Has Done,” July 1, 2012, unpublished paper in authors’ possession, 27–28.
• See Rule of Law Field Force–Afghanistan, “Rule of Law Support Mission History and After Action Review,” approved by Brigadier General Patrick J. Reinert, on file at The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School, Center for Army Lessons Learned, and the Army Center for Military History.
• Rule of Law Field Force–Afghanistan, Rule of Law Field Support Officer Deskbook (Brussels: NATO Rule of Law Field Support Mission, 2012), 21.
• Memorandum for the Under Secretary of Defense (Policy), Pentagon, Washington, DC, from General David Petraeus, December 10, 2010.
• Commander, Combined Joint Interagency Task Force (CJIATF) 435 Vision Statement.
• Thomas R. Mockaitis, The Iraq War: A Documentary and Reference Guide (Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2012), 222.
• Modinger and Bartlett, 43–44.
• Report on Progress Toward Security and Stability in Afghanistan (Washington, DC: Department of Defense, April 2012), 75, available at <www.defense.gov/pubs/pdfs/Report_Final_SecDef_04_27_12.pdf>.
• Modinger and Bartlett, 38.
• CJIATF 435 records as of September 2014; also see S. Res. 355, 113 th Cong., 2 nd sess., available at <www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-resolution/355/text>. The Justice Center in Parwan has a conviction rate of roughly 80 percent. See David Pendall and Cal Sieg, “Biometric-Enabled Intelligence in Regional Command–East,” Joint Force Quarterly 72 (1 st Quarter, January 2014), available at <http://ndupress.ndu.edu/Media/News/NewsArticleView/tabid/7849/Article/8327/jfq-72-biometric-enabled-intelligence-in-regional-command-east.aspx>; and Progress Toward Security and Stability in Afghanistan (Washington, DC: Department of Defense, April 2014), available at <www.defense.gov/pubs/April_1230_Report_Final.pdf>.
• Modinger and Bartlett, 14.
• Remaking Bagram: The Creation of an Afghan Internment Regime and the Divide Over U.S. Detention Power , Regional Policy Initiative (Washington, DC: Open Society Foundations, September 6, 2012), 7, available at <www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/BagramReportEnglish.pdf>.
• See Defense Institute of International Legal Studies, available at <https://www.diils.org/organization/defense-institute-international-legal-studies>.
• Fyodor Dostoevsky, The House of the Dead or Prison Life in Siberia (Boston: E.P. Dutton & Company, 1914), 130.

• A-Z Publications

Annual Review of Political Science

Volume 17, 2014, review article, military rule.

• Barbara Geddes 1 , Erica Frantz 2 , and Joseph G. Wright 3
• View Affiliations Hide Affiliations Affiliations: 1 Department of Political Science, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90095-1472; email: [email protected] 2 Department of Political Science, Bridgewater State University, Bridgewater, Massachusetts 02325; email: [email protected] 3 Department of Political Science, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802; email: [email protected]
• Vol. 17:147-162 (Volume publication date May 2014) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-032211-213418
• First published as a Review in Advance on January 27, 2014
• © Annual Reviews

Military rule as a form of autocratic governance can mean either rule by a military strongman unconstrained by other officers or rule by a group of high-ranking officers who can limit the dictator's discretion. We label the latter form a military regime. Both military strongmen and military regimes are more likely to commit human rights abuses and become embroiled in civil wars than are civilian dictatorships. The behavior of strongmen diverges from that of more constrained military rulers in other areas, however. Military strongmen start more international wars than either military regimes or civilian dictators, perhaps because they have more reason to fear postouster exile, prison, or assassination. Fear of the future may also motivate their resistance to transition. Military strongmen are more often ousted by insurgency, popular uprising, or invasion than are military regimes or civilian dictators. Their tenures rarely end in democratization, whereas the opposite is true of military regimes.

Article metrics loading...

Full text loading...

Literature Cited

• Acemoglu D , Robinson J . 2006 . The Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Univ. Press
• Arriagada G . 1988 . Pinochet: The Politics of Power transl. N Morris Boston: Allen & Unwin. From Spanish
• Banks AS , Wilson KA . 2012 . Cross-National Time-Series Data Archive Jerusalem: Databanks Intl.
• Barany Z . 2011 . The role of the military. J. Dem. 22 : 4 24– 35 [Google Scholar]
• Bebler A . 1973 . Military Rule in Africa: Dahomey, Ghana, Sierra Leone, and Mali New York: Praeger
• Biglaiser G . 2002 . Guardians of the Nation? Economists, Generals, and Economic Reform in Latin America Notre Dame, IN: Univ. Notre Dame Press
• Binnendijk AL , Marovic I . 2006 . Power and persuasion: nonviolent strategies to influence state security forces in Serbia 2000 and Ukraine 2004. Communist Post-Communist Stud. 39 : 411– 29 [Google Scholar]
• Boix C . 2003 . Democracy and Redistribution Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Univ. Press
• Britain V . 1985 . Introduction to Sankara & Burkina Faso. Rev. Afr. Polit. Econ. 32 : 39– 47 [Google Scholar]
• Brownlee J . 2009 . Portents of pluralism: how hybrid regimes affect democratic transitions. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 53 : 3 515– 32 [Google Scholar]
• Buchanan PG . 1987 . The varied faces of domination: state terror, economic policy, and social rupture during the Argentine “Proceso,” 1976–81. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 31 : 2 336– 82 [Google Scholar]
• Burggraaff WJ . 1972 . The Venezuelan Armed Forces in Politics, 1935–1959 Columbia: Univ. Missouri Press
• Burroughs RD . 1987 . The Yemen Arab Republic: The Politics of Development, 1962–1986 Boulder and London: Westview and Croom Helm
• Cheibub JA , Gandhi J , Vreeland JR . 2010 . Democracy and dictatorship data set https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/cheibub/www/DDpage.html
• Chiozza G , Goemans H . 2011 . Leaders and International Conflict New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
• Clapham C , Philip G . 1985 . The political dilemmas of military regimes. The Political Dilemmas of Military Regimes C Clapham, G Philip 1– 26 London: Croom Helm [Google Scholar]
• Corbett CD . 1972 . Military institutional development and sociopolitical change: the Bolivian case. J. Interam. Stud. World Aff. 14 : 4 399– 435 [Google Scholar]
• Davenport C . 1995 . Assessing the military's influence on political repression. J. Polit. Mil. Soc. 23 : Summer 119– 44 [Google Scholar]
• Davenport C . 2007a . State repression and political order. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 10 : 1– 23 [Google Scholar]
• Davenport C . 2007b . State repression and tyrannical peace. J. Peace Res. 44 : 4 485– 504 [Google Scholar]
• Debs A . 2010 . Living by the sword and dying by the sword? Leadership transitions in and out of dictatorships Presented at Annu. Meet. Midwest Polit. Sci. Assoc., Chicago, IL
• Debs A , Goemans H . 2010 . Regime type, the fate of leaders and war. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 104 : 3 430– 46 [Google Scholar]
• Decalo S . 1976 . Coups and Army Rule in Africa: Studies in Military Style New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
• Englebert P . 1998 . Burkina Faso: Unsteady Statehood in West Africa Boulder, CO: Westview
• Escribà-Folch A . 2013 . Accountable for what? Regime types, performance, and the fate of outgoing dictators, 1946–2004. Democratization 20 : 1 160– 85 [Google Scholar]
• Feit E . 1973 . The Armed Bureaucrats: Military-Administrative Regimes and Political Development Boston: Houton Mifflin
• Finer SE . 1976 . The Man on Horseback: The Role of the Military in Politics Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin, 2nd ed..
• Fjelde H . 2010 . Generals, dictators, and kings. Confl. Manag. Peace Sci. 27 : 3 195– 218 [Google Scholar]
• Frantz E , Ezrow N . 2011 . The Politics of Dictatorship: Institutions and Outcomes in Authoritarian Regimes Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner
• Gandhi J . 2008 . Political Institutions under Dictatorship Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Univ. Press
• Geddes B . 1999 . What do we know about democratization after twenty years?. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 2 : 115– 44 [Google Scholar]
• Geddes B . 2003 . Paradigms and Sand Castles: Theory Building and Research Design in Comparative Politics Ann Arbor: Univ. Mich. Press
• Geddes B . 2006 . Stages of development in authoritarian regimes. World Order after Leninism V Tismaneanu, MM Howard, R Sil, pp. 149–70. Seattle: Univ. Washington Press [Google Scholar]
• Geddes B . 2011 . How the military shapes “democratic” institutions in dictatorships Presented at How Autocracies Work: Beyond the Electoral Paradigm, Univ. Mich.
• Geddes B , Wright JG , Frantz E . 2013 . Authoritarian regimes data set. http://dictators.la.psu.edu
• Geddes B , Wright JG , Frantz E . 2014 . Autocratic breakdown and regime transitions: a new data set. Perspect. Polit. 12 In press
• Goemans H . 2000 . Fighting for survival: the fate of leaders and the duration of war. J. Confl. Resolut. 44 : 5 555– 79 [Google Scholar]
• Hadenius A , Teorell J . 2007 . Pathways from authoritarianism. J. Democracy 18 : 1 143– 57 [Google Scholar]
• Hyde S , Marinov N . 2012 . Which elections can be lost?. Polit. Analysis 20 : 2 191– 210 [Google Scholar]
• Janowitz M . 1977 . Military Institutions and Coercion in the Developing Nations Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
• Johnson JL . 1962 . The Latin-American military as a politically competing group in transitional society. The Role of the Military in Underdeveloped Countries JL Johnson 91– 129 Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Lai B , Slater D . 2006 . Institutions of the offensive: domestic sources of dispute initiation in authoritarian regimes, 1950–1992. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 50 : 1 113– 26 [Google Scholar]
• Luckham R . 1971 . The Nigerian Military: A Sociological Analysis of Authority and Revolt 1960–67 Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Univ. Press
• Nordlinger E . 1977 . Soldiers in Politics: Military Coups and Governments Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
• O'Donnell G . 1973 . Modernization and Bureaucratic Authoritarianism Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Inst. Intl. Stud.
• Ofosu G . 2013 . Explaining variation in the fairness of transitional election across authoritarian regime types Unpublished manuscript, Dep. Polit. Sci., Univ. Calif. Los Angeles
• Peceny M , Beer CC . 2003 . Peaceful parties and puzzling personalists. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 97 : 2 339– 42 [Google Scholar]
• Peceny M , Beer CC , Sanchez-Terry S . 2002 . Dictatorial peace?. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 96 : 1 15– 26 [Google Scholar]
• Peceny M , Butler CK . 2004 . The conflict behavior of authoritarian regimes. Int. Polit. 41 : 4 565– 81 [Google Scholar]
• Poe SC , Tate CN . 1994 . Repression of human rights to personal integrity in the 1980s: a global analysis. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 88 : 4 853– 72 [Google Scholar]
• Poe SC , Tate CN , Keith LC . 1999 . Repression of the human right to personal integrity revisited: a global cross-national study covering the years 1976–1993. Int. Stud. Q. 43 : 2 291– 313 [Google Scholar]
• Policzer P . 2009 . The Rise and Fall of Repression in Chile Notre Dame, IN: Univ. Notre Dame Press
• Potash RA . 1996 . The Army and Politics in Argentina, 1962–1973: From Frondizi's Fall to the Peronist Restoration Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press
• Remmer K . 1989 . Military Rule in Latin America New York: Unwin Hymen
• Smith B . 2005 . Life of the party: the origins of regime breakdown and persistence under single-party rule. World Polit. 57 : 3 421– 51 [Google Scholar]
• Stepan A . 1971 . The Military in Politics: Changing Patterns in Brazil Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
• Svolik MW . 2013 . Contracting on violence: the moral hazard in authoritarian repression and military intervention in politics. J. Confl. Resolut. 57 765– 94
• Wagner ML . 1989 . Chapter 1—Historical setting. A Country Study: Bolivia RA Hudson, DM Hanratty Washington, DC: Fed. Res. Div., Libr. Congr http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/botoc.html [Google Scholar]
• Wahman M , Teorell J , Hadenius A . 2013 . Authoritarian regime types revisited: updated data in comparative perspective. Comp. Polit. 19 : 1 19– 34 [Google Scholar]
• Weeks JL . 2012 . Strongmen and straw men: authoritarian regimes and the initiation of international conflict. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 106 : 2 326– 47 [Google Scholar]
• Wilson MC . 2013 . A discreet critique of discrete regime type data. Comp. Polit. Stud. doi: 10.1177/0010414013488546

Data & Media loading...

• Article Type: Review Article

Most Read This Month

Most cited most cited rss feed, framing theory, discursive institutionalism: the explanatory power of ideas and discourse, historical institutionalism in comparative politics, the origins and consequences of affective polarization in the united states, political trust and trustworthiness, public attitudes toward immigration, what have we learned about the causes of corruption from ten years of cross-national empirical research, what do we know about democratization after twenty years, economic determinants of electoral outcomes, public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: a review of the empirical literature.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

America’s Military Is Not Prepared for War — or Peace

By Roger Wicker

Mr. Wicker, a Republican, is the ranking member of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee.

“To be prepared for war,” George Washington said, “is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.” President Ronald Reagan agreed with his forebear’s words, and peace through strength became a theme of his administration. In the past four decades, the American arsenal helped secure that peace, but political neglect has led to its atrophy as other nations’ war machines have kicked into high gear. Most Americans do not realize the specter of great power conflict has risen again.

It is far past time to rebuild America’s military. We can avoid war by preparing for it.

When America’s senior military leaders testify before my colleagues and me on the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee behind closed doors, they have said that we face some of the most dangerous global threat environments since World War II. Then, they darken that already unsettling picture by explaining that our armed forces are at risk of being underequipped and outgunned. We struggle to build and maintain ships, our fighter jet fleet is dangerously small, and our military infrastructure is outdated. Meanwhile, America’s adversaries are growing their militaries and getting more aggressive.

In China, the country’s leader, Xi Jinping, has orchestrated a historic military modernization intended to exploit the U.S. military’s weaknesses. He has overtaken the U.S. Navy in fleet size, built one of the world’s largest missile stockpiles and made big advances in space. President Vladimir Putin of Russia has thrown Europe into war and mobilized his society for long-term conflict. Iran and its proxy groups have escalated their shadow war against Israel and increased attacks on U.S. ships and soldiers. And North Korea has disregarded efforts toward arms control negotiations and moved toward wartime readiness.

Worse yet, these governments are materially helping one another, cooperating in new ways to prevent an American-led 21st century. Iran has provided Russia with battlefield drones, and China is sending technical and logistical help to aid Mr. Putin’s war. They are also helping one another prepare for future fights by increasing weapons transfers and to evade sanctions. Their unprecedented coordination makes new global conflict increasingly possible.

That theoretical future could come faster than most Americans think. We may find ourselves in a state of extreme vulnerability in a matter of a few years, according to a growing consensus of experts. Our military readiness could be at its lowest point in decades just as China’s military in particular hits its stride. The U.S. Indo-Pacific commander released what I believe to be the largest list of unfunded items ever for services and combatant commands for next year’s budget, amounting to $11 billion. It requested funding for a raft of infrastructure, missile defense and targeting programs that would prove vital in a Pacific fight. China, on the other hand, has no such problems, as it accumulates the world’s leading hypersonic arsenal with a mix of other lethal cruise and attack missiles.

Our military leaders are being forced to make impossible choices. The Navy is struggling to adequately fund new ships, routine maintenance and munition procurement; it is unable to effectively address all three. We recently signed a deal to sell submarines to Australia, but we’ve failed to sufficiently fund our own submarine industrial base, leaving an aging fleet unprepared to respond to threats. Two of the three most important nuclear modernization programs are underfunded and are at risk of delays. The military faces a backlog of at least $180 billion for basic maintenance, from barracks to training ranges. This projects weakness to our adversaries as we send service members abroad with diminished ability to respond to crises.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

Importance of Military Essays ⚔

Essays on the military are critical because they help us comprehend the military’s history, tactics, and effects on society. They give us a place to conduct in-depth study and analysis, enabling us to examine and assess many facets of the military career.

We may learn a great deal about the complexity of combat, the advancement of military strategies and equipment, and the military’s influence on international politics and security by reading and writing on military topics. These pieces encourage critical thinking, spark intellectual debate, and improve military knowledge and study in addition to instructing and informing readers.

When writing a military essay, you may explore compare and contrast essay topics such as the similarities and differences between military strategies or the contrasting perspectives on the impact of warfare in different historical periods. For example, you can compare the military tactics used in World War I and World War II or contrast the views on the effectiveness of air power in modern warfare.

Types of Military Essays 🎖

Military essays come in various formats with various functions and writing styles. Here are four specific categories:

☑ Expository essays

 These papers seek to offer a concise and impartial exposition of a military subject or idea. They investigate the issue logically and methodically while providing factual information. Expository essays can be written on various subjects, including the history of a particular fight, the composition and organization of a military unit, and the operation of military technology.

☑ Argumentative Essays

In a military setting, an argumentative essay will express a particular point of view or argument and back it up with facts. Critical thinking and persuasive writing skills are needed to make a strong argument in these essays. Argumentative military essays could examine the moral ramifications of military action, debate the merits of a specific defense plan, or assess the efficacy of a military strategy.

☑ Comparative essay

Comparative essays analyze and contrast various elements of military systems, tactics, or historical events. They draw attention to contrasts, similarities, and patterns to comprehend the topic better. A comparative essay, for instance, can examine the parallels and differences between ancient and current combat or contrast the military strategies of various countries.

☑ Analytical essays

They dive into the specifics of a military subject, dissecting it into its component elements and critically analyzing them. To comprehend the subject, these essays require thorough investigation, data interpretation, and theoretical frameworks. Analyzing the origins and effects of a particular fight, evaluating the influence of military technologies on conflict, or reviewing the efficacy of a military doctrine are a few examples of analytical military studies.

If you’re looking to incorporate a capstone project into your military essay, consider exploring various capstone project ideas related to the military. These can range from analyzing the effectiveness of military training programs to developing strategies for improving military logistics or examining the ethical implications of autonomous weapon systems.

Format and Structure of a Military Essay 🪖

Here is a broad outline for a military essay, though precise requirements may change based on the assignment or institution:

☑️ Introduction

Start your paragraph with a compelling opening sentence or hook to capture the reader’s interest.

Describe the subject’s history and how it relates to the military.

Declare the essay’s thesis or significant point in clear terms.

Each paragraph should concentrate on a distinct subtopic or argument supporting the thesis.

Start each paragraph with a topic phrase that states the paragraph’s central theme.

Include examples, analysis, and supporting data to support the core point.

Use transitional words or phrases to transition between paragraphs and concepts seamlessly.

☑️ Discussion and Analysis

Discuss the implications of the evidence offered in the body paragraphs after it has been analyzed.

Think critically and offer perceptive criticism on the subject.

Consider opposing viewpoints or arguments, then reasonably and logically respond to them.

Summarise the key ideas covered in the essay, focusing on their importance.

Indicate how the essay’s main argument or thesis has been reinforced by restating it.

☑️ Citations & References

Include a separate section or bibliography for references, if necessary.

Use an appropriate citation format (such as APA, MLA, or Chicago) to give credit where credit is due.

Make that the reference list and in-text citations are formatted correctly and consistently.

Writing Tips for Military Essays

Research: Investigate your issue in-depth using reliable sources, including academic journals, books, government publications, and reliable websites. Obtain a range of viewpoints to create a comprehensive grasp of the subject.

Creating a Strong Thesis: Create a thesis statement that summarizes your essay’s essential points and is clear and concise. Throughout the essay, specific, contested arguments should support your thesis statement.

Creating an outline or structure for your essay guarantees the concepts are presented logically. Your essay should be broken up into an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. Each paragraph should contain a primary topic or point supporting your thesis.

Using Proper Language: Use a clear, concise, and formal tone when writing. Use proper and suitable military jargon and concepts. Aim to avoid jargon or excessively technical language that could mislead readers unfamiliar with military lingo.

Accurately citing your sources will ensure they receive due credit. Use the APA, MLA, or Chicago citation styles as specified by your instructor or institution. Use in-text citations for direct quotations, paraphrases, and other material that is not well known.

Military essay examples

“The Impact of Military Technology on Modern Warfare” examines how the character of warfare has changed due to developments in military technology, including drones, cyberwarfare, and artificial intelligence, and what this means for military strategy and ethics.

“Leadership Lessons from Historical Military Figures”: Examine the traits and tactics of historic military titans like Sun Tzu, Alexander the Great, and General George Patton, and discuss how they apply to modern military leadership.

Examine the historical development, present difficulties, and prospects for women serving in the armed forces in “The Role of Women in the Military.” Discuss how gender integration has affected military culture and effectiveness.

“The Use of Propaganda in Military Conflicts”: Examine how various countries and their armed forces have used propaganda to sway public opinion, inspire soldiers, and affect the results of military operations.

“Ethical Dilemmas in Modern Warfare”: Examine the moral dilemmas that military personnel face in today’s conflicts, such as the use of drones, the killing of civilians, and torture. Analyze various ethical systems and consider possible answers to these problems.

To incorporate the concept of a capstone project in your military essay, it’s crucial to understand the four essential elements that make up a successful capstone project. These elements include identifying a problem or challenge, conducting in-depth research, developing a comprehensive solution or approach, and presenting your findings through a well-structured and persuasive essay, for example, in “I want to be soldier” Essay .

For a concise and focused military essay, you may employ a 5-paragraph essay format . This format includes an introduction, three body paragraphs discussing key points or arguments, and a conclusion. It allows you to present your ideas clearly and organized, making it easier for readers to follow your thoughts.

Remember to pick a subject that interests you personally and fits the assignment’s or course’s requirements. To make your military essay exciting and instructive, do extensive research, create a fascinating topic, and employ concise, well-structured arguments backed by proof.

⏭ ORDER CUSTOM MILITARY ESSAY ⏮

As a result, military essays are critical in helping us learn more about the military, its history, tactics, and effects on society. They give people a place to conduct research, analyze information, and engage in critical thought, which promotes intellectual development and adds to the body of knowledge in military studies. Whether it’s an argumentative essay on the ethics of war or an expository essay on military technology, these pieces provide insightful analysis.

By diving into the complexities of military themes, we acquire a greater understanding of the sacrifices and difficulties military people face and the broader ramifications of their actions. Military essays provide a way to explore, analyze, and connect with the many facets of the military profession, making them an essential instrument in education, research, and intellectual conversation.

Writing a military essay can be a tricky task. Hence, you should seek professional help. There are various advantages to ordering your essay from WritingMetier . Our staff of expert writers, who specialize in military subjects, guarantees thoroughly researched and excellent articles.

You will receive personalized and unique content punctually provided and treated with strict confidentiality. We are the best option for your essay or military research paper demands because of our commitment to academic brilliance, user-friendly method, and focus on customer happiness.

Free topic suggestions

Laura Orta is an avid author on Writing Metier's blog. Before embarking on her writing career, she practiced media law in one of the local media. Aside from writing, she works as a private tutor to help students with their academic needs. Laura and her husband share their home near the ocean in northern Portugal with two extraordinary boys and a lifetime collection of books.

Similar posts

Military essay topics.

Discover an Array of Engaging Military Essay Topics that will Ignite Your Curiosity

What is a Military Essay? A military essay is a form of academic writing that examines different aspects of the military, including its history, strategy, operations, and societal influence. It allows students to delve into complex military topics and showcase their research and analytical skills.

How to write an Essay on Army Values?

Army values, deeply entrenched in military ethos, serve as guiding beacons not just for soldiers but for society at large. These principles of loyalty, respect, and selfless service are more than mere words; they are the very foundation upon which harmonious societies can be built.

How to Write a World War 2 Research Paper + Topics

Explore different topics and get tips on showcasing the global impact of this monumental World War 2.

Military Ethics Paper Topics🎖️

Explore the intricate ethical dimensions within the military while selecting an engaging paper topic. Analyze the foundational principles guiding ethical decision-making and examine current dilemmas that challenge military professionals.

Military Topics for Research Paper

Military Topics for Research Paper - article offers students a guided exploration into the undercurrents of these pivotal regions, inviting fresh perspectives and deep understanding. Key global regions with this guide.

We rely on cookies to give you the best experince on our website. By browsing, you agree to it. Read more

Is Military Rule Better Than The Civilian Rule Or Vice-Versa?

This article examines whether military rule is better than the civilian rule and vice-versa. It provides the advantages of each system of government and gives room for readers to build on any of the points highlighted.

Democratic Government

Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Democracy allows people to participate equally—either directly or through elected representatives—in the laws’ proposal, development, and creation. i.e., A democratic government is ruled by civilians, usually elected by the people. Democracy is ruled by the constitution and reign of civil laws, which are reasonably justifiable in a democratic society with civilians exercising all legislative, executive, and judicial powers.

A democratic government contrasts two forms of government where power is either held by one, as in a monarchy, or where power is held by a small number of individuals, as in an oligarchy or aristocracy. Nevertheless, these oppositions, inherited from Greek philosophy, are now ambiguous because contemporary governments have mixed democratic, oligarchic, and monarchic elements. Several variants of democracy exist, but two primary forms concern how the whole body of citizens executes its will: direct democracy and representative democracy.

Read: Is democracy the best form of government?

Military Government

A military government is ruled by the armed forces, who do not come to power through election, but by force of arms. A military regime is a process, procedure, or system with expertise, adapted and rooted in war and combat. It is a system rooted in martial law and forces. It is also a system that demands obedience always and, in its purest essence, makes no room for debate and opposition.

Some of the features of military rule include Suspension of the constitution, absence of an election, use of decrees and edicts, lack of respect for fundamental human rights, no checks and balances, centralized form of government, no periodic election, etc.

Read: Causes and remedies to indiscipline in schools

Which is better?

Below are the advantages of civilian rule and military rule. Look at the advantages of the two and compare them to be sure which is better. Each of them has its cons and that must be considered too. This will help you give the essential points to defend the side you want to take.

Civilian Rule

• There are ways to resolve different views and conflicts peacefully.
• It is a government by the people and for the people
• Respect for human dignity.
• The freedom to act, speak, and think freely (as long as it does not stop others from doing the same).
• Equality before the law.
• Safe and secure community.
• It is a system of government that is efficient, transparent, responsive, and accountable to citizens.
• Ability to hold elected representatives accountable.
• Opposition and criticism are tolerated.

Military Rule

• The military has protocol and structure.
• Protection of life and property is ensured in a military regime.
• Decision-making is faster in military regimes than in civilian.
• It instills discipline and brings about order and corporate living among people in society.
• Control of corruption
• It is cost-effective. Since the election is not conducted, billions spent on this process are avoided.
• There is respect for authority
• Criminal activities are minimal. Martial law can quickly illuminate all criminals.
• Military naturally commands respect and fear which is enough to make everyone do what is right while the nation develops with people marginalizing one another.

Related posts:

• Nigerian Military School JS1 Application Form 2024/2025
• Nigerian Military School (NMS) Admission List 2023/2024
• Nigerian Military School (NMS) Zaria School Fees 2023/2024
• Why you should not overprotect your child as a parent
• How to gain admission into Obafemi Awolowo University

Bolarinwa Olajire

Leave a reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

We use cookies to enhance our website for you. Proceed if you agree to this policy or learn more about it.

• Essay Database >
• Essays Examples >
• Essay Topics

Essays on Military Rule

12 samples on this topic

Our essay writing service presents to you an open-access selection of free Military Rule essay samples. We'd like to underline that the showcased papers were crafted by skilled writers with relevant academic backgrounds and cover most various Military Rule essay topics. Remarkably, any Military Rule paper you'd find here could serve as a great source of inspiration, actionable insights, and content structuring practices.

It might so happen that you're too pressed for time and cannot allow yourself to spend another minute browsing Military Rule essays and other samples. In such a case, our service can offer a time-saving and very practical alternative solution: an entirely unique Military Rule essay example written specifically for you according to the provided instructions. Get in touch today to learn more about practical assistance opportunities provided by our buy an essay service in Military Rule writing!

Inspiring Essay About Globalization And Politics In Nigeria

1) Introduction

General overview of the Federal Republic of Nigeria with regard to its political history and the concept of its geopolitics.

Max Webber’s concepts on the state and how they apply in Nigeria How John Stuart Mill’s Concepts on nationality are reflected in Nigeria 2) Geopolitical characteristics of Nigeria

The main geopolitical zones and their historical origin

Republicans Are Bad For The People Essays Example

[Author Name]

Coca Colas Global Business Marketing Strategy Research Paper Examples

INTRODUCTION

Democracy In Egypt Essay Example

Example of evolution of financial institutions: case study of burma research paper.

Financial institutions the world over have evolved depending on the economic policies of the government of the day as well as other economic imperatives. This has been accompanied by ideological and philosophical differences in banking policy. In this paper, I shall seek to examine the evolution of these financial institutions in Burma in three epochal periods namely- the colonial era, parliamentary democracy era and the era of military rule.

Colonial era

Biography On Early Life

Biography: Aung San Suu Kyi

Shock Therapy, Shock Doctrines And Free Market Structural Adjustment Programs In Research Paper Examples

Example of the united states and the brazilian military dictatorship, 1964-85 essay, example of research paper on panama, should the senate have convicted andrew johnson research paper example.

275 words = 1 page double-spaced

Password recovery email has been sent to [email protected]

Use your new password to log in

You are not register!

By clicking Register, you agree to our Terms of Service and that you have read our Privacy Policy .

Now you can download documents directly to your device!

Check your email! An email with your password has already been sent to you! Now you can download documents directly to your device.

or Use the QR code to Save this Paper to Your Phone

The sample is NOT original!

Short on a deadline?

Don't waste time. Get help with 11% off using code - GETWOWED

No, thanks! I'm fine with missing my deadline

• Senior Fellows
• Research Fellows

Submission Guidelines

• Media Inquiries
• Commentary & Analysis

Upcoming Events

• Past Events
• October 2021 War Studies Conference
• November 2020 War Studies Conference
• November 2018 War Studies Conference
• March 2018 War Studies Conference
• November 2016 War Studies Conference
• Class of 1974 MWI Podcast
• Urban Warfare Project Podcast
• Social Science of War
• Urban Warfare Project
• Project 6633
• Shield Notes
• Rethinking Civ-Mil
• Book Reviews

Select Page

• Essay Contest Call for Submissions: Solving the Military Recruiting Crisis

MWI Staff | 07.19.23

Update: We’re thrilled to announce that the US Army’s Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) has joined the Modern War Institute in organizing this essay contest and evaluating submissions. In addition to the top essays being published by the Modern War Institute, authors of the best submissions will have an opportunity to discuss their ideas with TRADOC senior leaders. TRADOC will also review all essays to evaluate their contributions to resolving the military recruiting crisis.

Essay requirements and the submission deadline remain the same, and authors who have already submitted their entries should not resubmit.

“Credible defense begins with our ability to steadily attract and retain the men and women who would assume the initial burden of a fast breaking war.” More than forty years ago, Vice Admiral Robert B. Pirie, Jr. eloquently described why recruiting was a national security issue.

This year, the Army will again fail to meet recruiting goals after falling fifteen thousand short last year. Likewise, the Navy anticipates falling six thousand sailors short of its target. The Air Force has issues too , with Secretary Frank Kendall acknowledging in March that his service would fall 10 percent short this year. Except for the two smallest services—the Marine Corps and Space Force—the United States’ armed forces continue to face recruiting woes.

With this serious issue as a backdrop, the Modern War Institute and the US Army’s Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) are launching an essay contest that seeks to explore the problem and identify solutions that could help the services address it.

Essay Prompt

Essays must answer the following prompt: What novel approaches can the United States military employ to solve the recruiting crisis?

This topic is broad. Essays might address new incentives, lessons from other countries or uniformed services, the impact of telework, messaging and marketing, how to resolve tensions created by years of recruiting shortfalls, ideas from labor economics or other academic fields, historical perspectives on recruiting challenges and solutions, or other ideas related to recruiting. Essays can take any form, to include speculative fiction. However, because of length limits, we strongly encourage authors to clearly articulate one idea or concept in their responses to the prompt.

Your ideas will inform internal conversations and workshops in support of the Modern War Institute’s human resources research theme. Based on the ideas presented in their essays, authors may be invited to contribute to future MWI publications or events on this topic.

Eligibility

• Essays will be accepted from any person in any field, and submissions from non-US participants are welcomed.
• Up to two people may coauthor an essay entry.
• Participants may submit only one entry to the competition.
• Essays must be original, unpublished, and not subject to publication elsewhere.
• Essays will not exceed 1,500 words.
• Use the standard submission guidelines for the Modern War Institute.
• Email your entry to [email protected] with “ Recruiting Essay Competition ” in the subject line. Once submitted, no edits, corrections, or changes are allowed.
• Submission deadline: essays will be accepted until 11:59 PM EDT on September 3, 2023.

Selection Process

Submissions will be reviewed and evaluated by a team from the Modern War Institute and TRADOC. Submissions will be assessed based on how well and creatively they address the topic of the contest and provoke further thought and conversation, as well as their suitability for publication by the Modern War Institute (e.g., style, sources, accessibility, etc.). Evaluation criteria include:

• Does the essay clearly define a problem and present a solution?
• Does the essay show thoughtful analysis?
• Does the essay inject new provocative thinking or address areas where there needs to be more discussion?
• Does the essay demonstrate a unique approach or improve current initiatives?
• Does the essay take lessons from history and apply them to today’s challenges?
• Is the essay logically organized, well written, and persuasive?

Winning Submissions

The top three essays will be announced publicly and will be published by the Modern War Institute. Depending on the evaluation of the Modern War Institute editorial team, revisions may be required before publication.

Additionally, the authors of the top submissions with senior leaders from TRADOC and the US Army’s Recruiting Command. Furthermore, TRADOC will review all essays to support the Army’s recruiting efforts.

Image credit: Spc. Kelsea Cook, Indiana National Guard

Although I am not much of an essay writer, perhaps the thesis, etc.. that I provide below will allow someone — who is a decent essay writer — to develop and provide a good essay for this competition. Here goes:

First, the essay prompt/question: "What novel approaches can the United States military employ to solve the recruiting crisis?"

Next, the proposed answer to this such essay prompt/question:

In order for the United States military to solve its current recruiting problems, the United States military must become able — in some way, shape or form — to better assure potential military recruits — and their families and friends — that they (these potential military recruits) will now (a) be less likely to be used to prosecute unnecessary, improper, ill-advised and/or ill-conceived and executed engagements and wars and, thus, will now (b) be less likely to find themselves in a position to be badly injured and/or killed in such unnecessary, improper, ill-advised, etc., engagements and wars.

(Herein to note that this such thesis and approach takes direct aim at the our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan of late and, thus, potentially gets directly to the/a true "root cause" of our current recruiting problems?)

It is not so much the fact that potential military recruits — and their families and friends — are unlikely to join/want their children and friends to join because they understand that these children and/or friends might get seriously injured and/or kill while engaged in our military profession.

Rather it is the fact that these such potential military recruits — and their families and friends — are unlikely to join/want their children and friends to join because they see the trend (think Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.) wherein these such injuries and deaths were/are incurred in what now is considered to be unnecessary, improper, ill-advised and/or ill-conceived and executed engagements and wars.

(Herein, it will be important to address the "common nature" of these such unnecessary, improper, Ill-advised, etc., engagements and wars — this being — that they were ultimately undertaken to achieve "revolutionary" political, economic, social and value "change" in the states and societies of the world — that is — states and societies in the world who are most different from ultra-modern "us.")

Bottom Line Thought — Based on the Above:

Today's recruiting problems, thus I believe, can be traced to the fact that our potential military recruits — and their families and friends — :

a. Do not agree with the "transformative" political objective of the United States post-the Old Cold War and/or:

b. Do not agree with the manner (war; military engagement) in which the U.S. has chosen to pursue this such — "transformative" — post-Cold War political objective.

B.C I believe after reading this long-winded comment. That you have a problem with Americas terrible policy and foreign policy decisions. You of course would be correct. For the same reasons they can't figure out foreign policy, our leaders can't figure out Retention and Recruitment problems. In both cases the American people are becoming aware that little of the decisions being made are done to benefit the country as a whole. Instead, they are to line the pockets of certain individuals and companies. For example, the Ukraine conflict, Billions of taxpayer dollars for no strategic goal or benefit. This coming off the back side of 20 years of Iraq and Afghanistan which obviously served little purpose at this point. Where is Kurdistan? Was Dick Chaney ever charged? There are many more such examples. But to your original point, I would believe that contest submissions would need to limit the material to only what the military itself could do to correct the recruitment shortfalls.

Don't worry. I wrote a very direct but elligent version of thus. You're welcome. Shoot me an email if you want it, [email protected]

Bring back the 6 month active duty with 4 years active reserve and free college education.

So, when it is time to combat, they will retreat with the excuse that I got in to get the college, not to go to war. My father (RIP) lived this cluster, and it was ridiculous seen young men and women played the Army. My son and I did active duty, did the required services, and every time that we hear the national anthem "of the land of the brave", we meant it. We never embrace college free benefits to defend our nation. and money

If you would like access to at least 250 papers on this topic get with the Sergeants Major Academy. Class 73 wrote a lot on this topic between white paper, capstone papers, and possibly a focus papers.

Leave a reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

The articles and other content which appear on the Modern War Institute website are unofficial expressions of opinion. The views expressed are those of the authors, and do not reflect the official position of the United States Military Academy, Department of the Army, or Department of Defense.

The Modern War Institute does not screen articles to fit a particular editorial agenda, nor endorse or advocate material that is published. Rather, the Modern War Institute provides a forum for professionals to share opinions and cultivate ideas. Comments will be moderated before posting to ensure logical, professional, and courteous application to article content.

Most Popular Posts

• The Five Reasons Wars Happen
• Understanding the Counterdrone Fight: Insights from Combat in Iraq and Syria
• The Illusion of Conventional War: Europe Is Learning the Wrong Lessons from the Conflict in Ukraine

Announcements

• Call for Applications: MWI’s 2024–25 Research Fellows Program
• Join Us Friday, April 26 for a Livestream of the 2024 Hagel Lecture, Featuring Secretary Chuck Hagel and Secretary Jeh Johnson
• Announcing the Modern War Institute’s 2023–24 Senior and Research Fellows

Privacy Overview

Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.

Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.

DEBATE TOPIC: 10 Reasons Why Civilian Rule is Better than Military Rule ( Support and oppose the motion)

Write an argumentative essay on civilian rule is better than military rule.

Explore the debate on whether civilian rule is better than military rule . This article provides insights into the advantages of civilian governance, backed by expert opinions and historical examples.

Civilian rule and military rule are two contrasting forms of governance that have shaped the course of history and politics. The debate surrounding the effectiveness and suitability of these forms of rule has been ongoing for decades. In this article, we delve into the reasons why civilian rule is considered superior to military rule.

By examining key aspects, historical instances, and expert opinions, we aim to shed light on the strengths of civilian governance and why it is a preferred choice for societies striving for stability, development, and freedom.

FREE DOWNLOAD NOW

Debate on civilian rule is better than military rule

10 reasons why civilian rule is better than military rule

Civilian rule is a fundamental aspect of democratic governance, and it has several advantages over military rule. Here are 10 reasons why civilian rule is better than military rule:

• Accountability : Civilian rule ensures that elected officials are accountable to the people, as they are chosen through free and fair elections. This accountability mechanism is absent in military rule, where the military leadership is not directly accountable to the public
• Civilian control of the military : Civilian rule allows for the establishment of a clear chain of command, with civilians in control of the military. This ensures that the military is subordinate to the larger purposes of the nation, rather than the other way around
• Protection of human rights : Civilian rule is more likely to protect human rights and uphold the rule of law, as it is based on democratic principles and the protection of individual freedoms
• Economic development : Civilian rule is more conducive to economic development, as it fosters a stable political environment and encourages investment and growth
• Peaceful transfer of power : Civilian rule allows for a peaceful transfer of power through elections, ensuring that political change occurs through democratic means rather than through force or violence
• Respect for international law : Civilian rule is more likely to respect international law and cooperate with other nations, as it is based on diplomacy and cooperation rather than force and coercion
• Promotion of democracy : Civilian rule promotes the spread of democracy and democratic values, as it demonstrates the benefits of democratic governance and encourages other nations to adopt similar systems
• Protection of minority rights : Civilian rule is more likely to protect the rights of minority groups, as it is based on the protection of individual freedoms and the promotion of diversity
• Reduction of corruption : Civilian rule is more likely to reduce corruption, as it promotes transparency and accountability in government
• Promotion of peace and stability : Civilian rule is more likely to promote peace and stability, as it fosters a stable political environment and encourages dialogue and compromise rather than force and coercion.
• JAMB Regularization for NYSC Registration & Mobilization 2024 Batch A, B and C PCMs
• How To Contact JAMB For Complaints, Inquiries and Other issues

DEBATE TOPIC: Civilian Rule is Better than Military Rule

Civilian rule refers to a government led by individuals who are not affiliated with the military. It is characterized by a focus on democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. Military rule, on the other hand, involves the direct control of a nation by the armed forces. While both forms of governance have been prevalent in various parts of the world, there are compelling reasons why civilian rule is widely regarded as the superior option.

Advantages of Civilian Rule

Democratic principles and representation.

Civilian rule inherently promotes democratic principles, ensuring that the government is accountable to the people it governs. Elected officials represent the interests of the citizens, creating a system where policies and decisions are made with the welfare of the populace in mind. This democratic process encourages transparency, participation, and a sense of ownership among citizens.

Protection of Human Rights

Under civilian rule, the protection of human rights is a fundamental priority. Constitutions and legal frameworks are designed to safeguard individual freedoms and prevent abuse of power. This commitment to human rights fosters an environment of equality and justice, allowing citizens to live without fear of oppression.

Sustainable Socioeconomic Development

Civilian governments are often better equipped to focus on long-term socioeconomic development. Policies can be formulated and executed based on comprehensive assessments of the nation’s needs and resources. Moreover, civilian rule promotes a stable environment that attracts foreign investments, encourages innovation, and supports economic growth.

Peaceful Conflict Resolution

Civilian governments emphasize diplomacy and negotiation in resolving conflicts, both domestically and internationally. Open dialogue and peaceful negotiations are preferred methods for resolving disputes, reducing the likelihood of armed conflicts that can arise under military rule.

Strengthening International Relations

Civilian rule tends to foster better diplomatic relations with other countries. International cooperation and collaboration are prioritized, contributing to a more interconnected world. Such interactions open doors for trade, cultural exchange, and mutual understanding.

• APPLY: Farleigh Dickinson University, USA degree scholarship, 2024 (Up to $24,000 every year)

Historical Examples of Successful Civilian Rule

The united states: a beacon of democracy.

The United States stands as a prime example of the success of civilian rule. With a government founded on democratic principles, it has demonstrated how a system based on checks and balances, individual rights, and regular elections can lead to stable governance and widespread prosperity.

South Korea: A Transition to Democracy

South Korea’s transition from military rule to civilian rule marked a turning point in its history. The country’s journey toward democracy led to economic growth, improved human rights, and a vibrant civil society. This transformation underscores the positive impact of civilian governance.

• APPLY: NNPC/SNEPCo University Undergraduate degree Scholarship

India: Diversity and Democracy

India, with its diverse population and complex social fabric, has embraced civilian rule since its independence. Despite challenges, the country’s democratic institutions have provided a platform for various voices to be heard and for peaceful power transitions to occur.

Expert Opinions on Civilian Rule

Renowned political scholars and experts overwhelmingly advocate for civilian rule as the preferred form of governance. Dr. Emily Carter, a political scientist, emphasizes, “Civilian governments are rooted in the aspirations of the people. They ensure inclusivity, progress, and a foundation for sustained development.”

• YABATECH Change of Course Form 2024: How To do It?

FAQs (Civilian Rule is Better than Military Rule )

Q: Can military rule bring stability in times of crisis? A: While military rule might initially restore order, it often comes at the cost of human rights and long-term development. Civilian rule is better equipped to address crises while upholding democratic values.

Q: Are there instances where military rule led to positive outcomes? A: Some argue that military interventions have resulted in short-term stability. However, sustained progress requires civilian governance that prioritizes human rights and accountability.

Q: How does civilian rule prevent abuse of power? A: Civilian governments are structured with checks and balances, ensuring that power is distributed and decisions are made collectively. This reduces the risk of concentrated authority and its potential abuse.

Q: What role does civilian rule play in economic growth? A: Civilian rule fosters an environment conducive to sustainable economic development. Policies can be tailored to address economic challenges, attract investments, and promote innovation.

Q: Can military rule effectively handle diplomatic relations? A: Military regimes often lack the diplomatic finesse required for healthy international relations. Civilian governments engage in diplomatic dialogues, contributing to global stability and cooperation.

Q: Are there risks associated with civilian rule? A: Civilian rule can face challenges such as bureaucracy and political gridlock. However, these challenges can be addressed through effective leadership and democratic processes.

In the ongoing debate Civilian Rule is Better than Military Rule, the advantages of civilian governance stand out as crucial components of a thriving society. With a commitment to democratic principles, human rights, and sustainable development, civilian rule provides a platform for inclusive growth and progress. By examining historical examples, expert opinions, and the merits of this form of governance, it becomes evident that civilian rule is indeed better than military rule in fostering stability, prosperity, and a brighter future.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

• Username Password Remember me Sign in New here ? Join Us

• English Language
• 2001 WAEC English La...

2001 WAEC English Language Theory You are a speaker in a debate on the topic “Civilian rule is better than...

You are a speaker in a debate on the topic “Civilian rule is better than military." Write your contribution for or against the motion. 

Explanation

Good morning Mr. Chairman, panel of Judges, accurate time-keeper, co-debaters, ladies and gentlemen. I am here to support the motion which says: "Civilian rule is better than military rule."        Firstly, I would like to take the pains to enlighten some of the younger ones here about what civilian rule and military rule are actually all about. Civilian rule can be likened to a democratic rule. Democracy, in the opinion of the layman, is government for the people, of the people and by the people. From the definition, it can be noted that civilian rulers are actually chosen by the people and they work for the benefit of the people who choose them.        On the other hand, military rule can be likened to an autocratic rule where the people are instructed to go and comes without any argument from anyone. It is like a do or die affair. Let me now get down to the motion.        First and foremost, in every democratic dispensation, there is freedom to vote and be voted for, which is not present in the military rule. The civilians only rule when they have been elected by the people. They do not impose themselves on anyone. Meanwhile, the people have no say when the military is ruling. Military rule is imposed on the people and military heads of state rule without the consent of the people. Because military men have guns, the people can not protest, they just have to accept them. Moreover, when civilians rule, the people enjoy freedom of speech and of the press. An indigene can criticise a civilian leader either in the newspaper or on television without any fear of molestation. Nowadays, it is very common to see people criticising or admonishing the civilian president of Nigeria on the television. Everybody is believed to be equal under a civilian dispensation. However, in military rule, no one has the guts to talk against a ruler even in the enclosure of his room because walls are believed to have ears.        Furthermore, in military rule, some innocent citizens, being victims of circumstances, are shot down accidentally. This often occurs in a military dispensation. There is little respect or regard for human lives and the military can be likened to armed robbers because instead of using their guns for security purposes, they maim innocent lives. However, in civilian rule, the intimidating guns are not present and this actually brings a sense of security to the citizens.        Lastly, civilian rulers execute good and popular projects which are aimed at ameliorating the suffering of the people they rule. They know that the people who vote them into power would judge them by their performance. Therefore, they execute good projects and provide infrastructural facilities that could speak for them when they are called to render account of their stewardship in governance. On the contrary, military rulers are not guided by the wishes and demands of the people they rule when it comes to project execution. This is because they are not accountable to the people.        I believe that I have been able to convince you that civilian rule is better than military rule. I thank you for your patience. 

Contributions ({{ comment_count }})

Please wait..., modal title, {{ feedback_modal_data.title }}, quick questions.

Post your Contribution

Please don't post or ask to join a "Group" or "Whatsapp Group" as a comment. It will be deleted. To join or start a group, please click here

{{ quote.posted_by.display_name }}

Argumentative essay 2 I Military rule is better than civilian rule ​

%username% is waiting for your help., expert-verified answer.

• %answers_count% answers
• %helped_users_count% people helped

Final answer:

Military rule refers to a system where the military governs a country, while civilian rule is based on democratic processes. While military rule may offer efficiency and stability, it can also lead to abuses of power and lack of democratic accountability. Examples like Myanmar highlight the negative consequences of military rule.

Explanation:

Military rule refers to a form of government where the military holds the ultimate power and makes decisions for the country. Civilian rule, on the other hand, is a system in which the government is elected by the people and power is transferred through democratic processes. While there may be arguments made for military rule in terms of efficiency and stability, it is important to consider the potential abuses of power and lack of democratic accountability that can occur under such a system. For example, military rule in Myanmar has led to violent suppression of protests and declining individual liberty and democracy.

Learn more about Military rule vs civilian rule here:

brainly.com/question/21120890

Still have questions?

Get more answers for free, you might be interested in, new questions in %subject%.