Why do militaries intervene in politics in some countries and not in others? Existing theories of civil-military relations do not adequately explain military politics around the world. This dissertation provides an alternative, political-economy explanation and argues that strength of property rights instituted by a state shapes the degree of civilian supremacy over its military. I show that secure property rights induce efficient allocation of resources and contribute to sustained economic growth, which helps accommodate group interests and increases trust among them. This helps create consensus among individuals and groups on the institutions of the state, which increases the legitimacy of the state and the credibility of its institutions. High levels of legitimacy and credibility of civilian institutions enable the state to make policy decisions independent of the military, thereby reducing the ability of the military to intervene in politics. Secure property rights also constrain the arbitrary behavior of the state to politicize the military and inspire the state to uphold merit-based, professional norms in the armed forces, which prevent spillover of social cleavages into the ranks of the military. This reinforces military professionalism and helps reduce the disposition of the military to intervene in politics. Finally, secure property rights provide incentives to the groups to uphold existing institutions and pursue their interests through the markets. As a result, groups refrain from “knocking on the door” of the military to secure their interests, which reduces the opportunity for the military to intervene in politics.

This thesis aims to test the causal connection between internal security threats and political intervention by the military in states which have recently transitioned to democracy. In order to investigate this, a comparative case study is conducted between the recent case of Myanmar and the case of the Philippines in the 1980s with the aim of investigating how the presence of internal conflict in the two countries has impacted the level of military influence post-transition. This is investigated through a qualitative analysis of the countries’ constitutions as well as statements by political and military leaders in order to investigate how the issues of internal conflict and the role of the military are defined, perceived and portrayed. The results of the study demonstrate that differences in these areas may explain why the military in Myanmar has managed to intervene more successfully. <img src="blob:https://uu.diva-portal.org/f8bb8d04-2f8c-4176-a36d-2e9876197374" />

This dissertation seeks to explain why states sometimes produce disintegrated wartime grand strategies; doing so is of both scholarly and policy importance because wartime grand strategy is a key component of military effectiveness, and therefore has a vital role to play in military victory or defeat. To do so, this dissertation explores the link between militarism, civil-military bargaining, and the formation of integrated—or disintegrated—grand strategy. I hypothesize that civilians and military leaders possess divergent preferences over the use of force that are exogenous to any one conflict, and represent enduring, rational preference divergences between civilian and military positions on the use of force. Under conditions of militarism, defined as high levels of societal admiration for the military, the civil-military bargaining space will be distorted in favor of military preferences, with the military having more power in the civil-military negotiating process due to its potentially outsized ability to shape public opinion compared to civilians. This will lead to the formation of disintegrated grand strategy—one which does not balance civilian and military preferences—which has been shown in the literature to be linked to reduced military effectiveness. I provide evidence for my hypotheses in the form of two case studies which are examined via process-tracing methodology—the United States performance in the 1991 Gulf War, and the United States performance in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. I conclude that under conditions of militarism, states produce disintegrated wartime grand strategies.

No description available.

The 2021 military coup in Myanmar is part of a much bigger trend towards democratic regression in Southeast Asia where military influence has played an important role. Previous research on the SEA region suggests that the citizenry has been overlooked in understanding how civil-military relations have been shaped. Rebecca L. Schiff’s concordance theory presumes that when concordance, i.e., agreement, between the military, political leadership, and the citizenry exists on the four indicators (1) social composition of officer corps, (2) political decision-making procedures, (3) recruitment method and (4) military style, military intervention in domestic politics is less likely to occur. The aim of this thesis is to conduct a comparative case study of Myanmar and Indonesia to understand how the three actors have shaped their respective civil-military relations. By applying concordance theory, a comparison is made to assess the theory’s predictive and explanatory power of the two cases. Results suggest that the two cases' political developments are in line with the theory. Indonesia demonstrates a higher degree of concordance among all indicators and has not experienced a military intervention in the studied time period. Comparatively, Myanmar demonstrates a low degree ofconcordance among all indicators and subsequently, military intervention in domestic politics is common. However, a lack of data on some indicators questions the strength of these claims. Collecting primary material for future research is suggested to analyse the concordance of all four indicators in depth and ensure an accurate representation of the citizenry for both cases.

This study examined the relationship between military professionalism and civil-military relations in Nigeria. Focusing on the period between 1960 and 2007, it explored the connection between understandings of professionalism amongst members of the armed forces and the way they relate to the rest of Nigerian society. Prolonged military rule (1966-1999) and the military’s heavy involvement in domestic security, resulted in increased militarization of Nigerian society and placed considerable strain on civil-military relations. The conduct of Nigerian military personnel in their dealings with civilians and their representatives faced criticism by members of the Nigerian civil society and the international community for being exploitative, heavy-handed and inconsistent with expected standards of military professionalism. Yet, during this period the military also increased its international profile, and came to be regarded, especially in the area of international peacekeeping, as a significant force within its region and beyond. Greater accountability and stricter adherence to professional standards were part of the democracy dividends expected by Nigerians when successful elections were held in 1999. Yet, two decades later, the relationship between the military sphere and the civilian sphere has been fractious and conflictual. This thesis considers that efforts to promote military professionalism need to engage with apparent and evidential understandings of military professionalism held amongst military personnel themselves. On this basis, the study has sought to introduce military voices into the discourse on military professionalism. The study adopted a mixed methods approach incorporating both qualitative and quantitative methods in gathering perspectives held by members of the Nigerian military and the civil population about military professionalism. It found that the military’s self-image, in terms of its professionalism and values, is markedly at odds with the way it is perceived by the civilian population many of whom see it as a highly politicised, unethical and coercive institution. Further, that the military identity is deeply complicated by pluralism, religious and ethnic diversity in Nigeria with specific consequences for its professionalism.

No description available.

The United States military is more than a tool of hard power. It provides the United States with a suite of diplomatic tools and is itself an important producer of American soft power. Though the many repertoires of American defense diplomacy have been carefully studied and the overall phenomenon has been theoretically investigated, their origins have not received similar attention. This research aims to uncover the causes of American defense diplomacy through an account of the American military's institutional development. It is common for defense diplomacy to be presented either as an outgrowth of 9/11 when the United States was engaged in globe-spanning irregular warfare or as part of a drive for global hegemony after the collapse of the Soviet Union. However, this research finds otherwise. A key factor in the development of contemporary defense diplomacy was the suite of institutional changes in the American national security apparatus in the 1980s. In particular, the Goldwater-Nichols Defense Reorganization Act of 1986 reconfigured the power relationships and interests of key elements of the US military thereby overdetermining the development of defense diplomacy. With this finding, this research centers Congress as a key driver of American foreign policy and highlights the sub-state institutional dynamics within the foreign policy apparatus that produced, and reproduce, defense diplomacy as an enduring habit of American statecraft. / Doctor of Philosophy / Using a broad array of archival documents, interviews, and other sources, this research investigated the (unintended) consequences of the Goldwater-Nichols Defense Reorganization Act of 1986. Those reforms reconfigured the power relationships, incentives, and preferences of the US foreign policy apparatus which in turn yielded new habits of American statecraft. Foremost among these new habits was "defense diplomacy" which, beginning in the late 1980s, became a common, enduring, and popular American foreign policy repertoire. This dissertation focuses on Goldwater-Nichols, the emergence of defense diplomacy, and its institutionalization. This project places special emphasis on the US military's central and eastern European state-building and democratization efforts during the twilight of the Cold War and the dawn of the New World Order. This is a historical institutionalist account contributing to the literature on both the "militarization" of foreign policy as well as the "civilianization" of the military.

Approved for public release; distribution in unlimited. / Advancing the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians is of great interest to the United States. To this aim, an understanding of the main factors involved in Israel's foreign policymaking is needed. This thesis shows internal pressures are most significant and assesses the influence of domestic access points to Israel's Palestinian policy. For a complete and current analysis of Israel's policymaking process three areas are discussed. First are the fundamentals that makeup Israel's political system such as the Knesset, political parties, ruling coalition, and prime minister. Second is the role of the Israeli Defense Force and the balance in civil-military relations. Third is the mixture of players that color Israel's societal landscape including subcultures, interest groups, and public opinion. The key finding is a combined ranking of the most important domestic forces driving Israel's Palestinian policy formation in all three areas. / Lieutenant Junior Grade, United States Navy

Approved for public release, distribution is unlimited / Since the fall of the Iron Curtain, the issue of civil-military relations has become critical to the development of the new Eastern European democracies. Both the United States and Germany have a long civil-military relations tradition. A comparison of the United States' and Germany's approaches to civil-military relations will provide clear examples for new democratic states to follow, as they develop their civil-military relations, especially as they consider multi-national NATO units. Following an overview of civil-military theory, this thesis highlights the historical and political developments of civil-military relations within both countries. The thesis further explains the similarities and differences in their developments, as well as the implications for the military profession. The thesis provides a comparison of both approaches to the military profession and to the primary civil-military relations theory, in order to determine if the requirement of democratic civilian control over the military has been met. The thesis summarizes advantages and disadvantages of both American and German approaches. / Lieutenant Colonel (GS), German Army