Beyond coups: terrorism and military involvement in politics

Abstract

A wealth of research in comparative politics and international relations examines how the military intervenes in politics via coups. We shift attention to broader forms of military involvement in politics beyond coups and claim that terrorist violence and the threat of terror attacks provide a window of opportunity for military intervention, without taking full control of state institutions. We highlight two mechanisms through which terrorism influences military involvement in politics: (1) government authorities demand military expertise to fight terrorism and strengthen national security and “pull” the armed forces into politics, and (2) state armed actors exploit their informational advantage over civilian authorities to “push” their way into politics and policy-making. A panel data analysis shows that domestic terror attacks and perceived threats from domestic and transnational terrorist organizations increase military involvement in politics. We illustrate the theoretical mechanisms with the cases of France (1995–1998 and 2015–2016) and Algeria (1989–1992).

Grist to the mill of subversion: strikes and coups in counterinsurgencies

“…As outlined above, internal security threats significantly change civil-military relations (Desch, 2008; Stepan, 1986). Governments depend on military expertise and resources which is why they include officers in the executive decision-making (Bove et al, 2020: 268–269). Officers commonly serve as advisers to governments, occupying posts in ministries and agencies.…”

COVID-19, Security Threats and Public Opinions

“…Terrorism also triggers hostility against out-groups and reinforces feelings of distrust and prejudice about immigrants (e.g., Legewie 2013;Nussio et al 2019). It can also increase popular support for non-democratic regulations and practices, as individuals urge their political leaders to introduce harsher security legislation (Bove, Rivera, and Ruffa 2020a;Huddy et al 2005).…”

The Military in Politics and Democracy: Its Impact on Government Spending for Education and Health

“…First, the coup or no-coup dichotomy misses many aspects of civil-military relations. Some countries may still face a challenge of a coup, but the coup or no-coup is limited to the actions to take over the government while the concept of the military in politics includes the full range of actions by the military (Bove et al, 2019). Second, the concept of the military in politics and its influence not only captures the idea of the military institution and its political power even when it does not seize direct power through a takeover, but also allows us to examine and recognize the political nature of the military both in democratic and authoritarian regimes.…”

“…Many scholars have started to shed light on the understanding of the military in politics and its influence on policy decisions (Bove et al, 2019;Ball, 1981;Bove and Nisticò, 2014;Majeed and Macdonald, 2010;Shin, 2018;Taylor, 2018;Welch, 1976;Brooks, 2019). In particular, studies that directly measure the relationship between the military in politics and military spending have found a strong positive relationship (Bove and Nisticò, 2014;Shin, 2018).…”

“…The understanding of the military is important to the extent to which it can exercise political power to influence policy decisions. The civil-military relations literature identifies the military as a political actor (Huntington, 1957;Bove et al, 2019;Feaver, 1999;Brooks, 2019), and the political economy literature has theoretically and empirically shown that the military's involvement in politics has a significant impact on the allocation of government spending for the military (Ball, 1981;Bove and Nisticò, 2014). However, the military's involvement in politics, even at a peripheral level, maybe a diminution of democratic accountability because it is not elected (Howell, 2011).…”