New societies, new soldiers? A soldier typology

Abstract

The term 'soldier' is frequently conceptualized as a warrior, a peacekeeper, or a hybrid of both. However, recent changes in the utilization of soldiers in societies have moved the repertoire of possible ways to think, act, and behave beyond these notions. As such, there exists an undertheorized gap between different expectations of soldiers and actual soldier roles. This presents a need for more nuanced and analytically useful conceptualizations of soldier roles. This article provides a more thorough understanding of the soldier role by identifying seven ideal types of soldiers: the warrior, nation-defender, law-enforcer, humanitarian, state-builder, and the ideological, and contractor soldiers. The typology offers an analytical tool with the capacity to maneuver the empirical reality, which is important because how soldier roles are constructed affect how military personnel understand their role in the postmodern world, where identity is multifaceted and negotiable. Ultimately, identity influences how soldiers interact with societies and how societies respond to war, conflicts, and crises.

Evolution of Military Logistics

“…The study of military logistics in many armies is limited to the basic needs of the soldier, such as: lodging, clothing, transportation, food, etc. [6]. This is due to the fact that the needs of the troops in this sense have evolved slowly, especially in the armies that, due to the economic conditions of their countries, do not obtain sufficient resources and those assigned are scarcely enough for their operation, neglecting the need to adapt military logistics to the dynamics of the new way of making war [7].…”

“…In contrast, in military logistics, the study approach was limited to supplying the basic needs of the soldier, such as accommodation, clothing, transportation, food, etc. [6]. The foregoing is due to the insufficiency of economic resources, which is an aspect that led to the neglect of the need to adapt military logistics to the dynamics of the new ways of waging war [7].…”