Towards a New Conceptualization of Democratization and Civil-Military Relations

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to contribute to a better understanding of the contemporary importance for democracy of the relationship between elected leaders and the security forces. It attempts to present a conceptualization and framework to help comprehend what security forces actually do and how they interface with democratic governments. The article aims to extend the conceptual breadth of the literature on civil-military relations beyond control to include two further dimensions -effectiveness and efficiency. The research is based on the authors' experience in conducting programmes for officers and civilians throughout the world in line with at least six different roles and missions of security forces. The conceptualization draws on literature in comparative politics, organization theory, and defence economics, as well as civil -military relations, and security sector reform.

No power vacuum: national security neglect and the defence sector in Brazil

“…Scholars identified a severe gap in these studies. Despite recognizing the merits of a first wave of scholarship concerned with military professionalism, praetorianism, military coups and regimes (Feaver 1999;Finer 1962;Huntington 1981;Janowitz 1960), scholars argued that previous authors focused excessively on democratic control of the military and overlooked an important issue: democratic governance of the defence and security sectors 13 (Bruneau and Matei 2008;Bucur-Marcu et al 2009;Cottey et al 2002). Cottey, Edmunds and Forster highlighted that focusing too much on political control over the armed forces to the detriment of other variables was problematic because it: (1) emphasized subordination and did not consider differences among political regimes; (2) presupposed a confrontational relationship between civilians and the military; (3) assumed that military autonomy was the main problem; and (4) ignored other issues such as parliamentary oversight or civil society engagement on security and defence (Cottey et al 2002, 35).…”

Putting Conflict Where It Belongs: A Response to “Creating Shared Responsibility through Respect for Military Culture: The Russian and American Cases”

“…“Creating Shared Responsibility” provides much for scholars interested in either civil‐military relations or public administration. First, it answers a call for theoretical development beyond the dominant focus on civilian control, something that long has been argued to be necessary in the civil‐military literature (Avant 1998; Bruneau and Matei 2008; Burk 2002; Gibson and Snider 1999; Nielsen 2005). Once the overwhelming focus on the presence or absence of civilian control is abandoned, a more nuanced causal story between country‐level or leadership‐level characteristics and civil‐military conflict can be developed.…”

Razvoj i demokratizacija obavještajne službe u Argentini (1946. – 2001.)

“…To se vrlo često događa u novim demokracijama. Otamendi i Estevez (2016) smatraju da u Latinskoj Americi postoje znatne prepreke demokratizaciji obavještajnog sustava kao što su konfuzija zakonske, strukturalne i kulturne reforme, neadekvatan civilni menadžment, politizacija, loše upravljanje 8 Koncept reforme sigurnosnog sektora i koncept civilno-vojnih odnosa imaju određeni broj istih elemenata, stoga je upitna ispravnost teze Bruneau i Matei (2008) da se prvi koncept razvio kao reakcija na ograničenje drugoga. Prema Bruneau i Matei (2008: 912-913) zagovaratelji koncepta reforme sigurnosnog sektora smatraju da su ljudska sigurnost i razvoj jednako važni, kao i obrana od vanjskih i unutarnjih prijetnji, da se vojska sama ne može s njima boriti, već da treba surađivati s civilnim institucijama.…”