Suchergebnisse

Title Page; Contents; Foreword; Introducing Army Fundamentals; 1: Locking in a Military Identity: Making soldiers; 2: Closing the Door on Military Life: The unmaking of officers; 3: Reconsidering Military Identities: Professional Anzacs doing development?; 4: New Zealand Military as Peacekeepers: International perceptions; 5: The Kiwi PRT Experience in Afghanistan; 6: The New Zealand Army, Peacekeeping and Masculinities in the Solomon Islands; 7: Women in the Armed Forces; 8: Beyond Rote: The New Zealand Army training foreign security forces; 9: The Limits of the Military Instrument

Throughout the Cold War, the United States and Soviet Union strategized to prop up friendly dictatorships abroad. Today, it is commonly assumed that the two superpowers' military aid enabled the survival of allied autocrats, from Taiwan's Chiang Kai-shek to Ethiopia's Mengistu Haile Mariam. In Up in Arms, political scientist Adam E. Casey rebuts the received wisdom: Cold War-era aid to autocracies often backfired. Casey draws on extensive original data to show that, despite billions poured into friendly regimes, US-backed dictators lasted no longer in power than those without outside help. In fact, American aid regularly destabilized autocratic regimes. The United States encouraged the establishment of strong, independent armies like its own, which then often incubated coups. By contrast, Soviet aid incentivized the subordination of the army to the ruling regime, neutralizing the threat of military takeover. Ultimately, Casey concludes, it is subservient militaries-not outside aid-that help autocrats maintain power. In an era of renewed great power competition, Up in Arms offers invaluable insights into the unforeseen consequences of overseas meddling, revealing how military aid can help pull down dictators as often as it props them up.

"This book contributes to an increasingly important branch of critical security studies that combines insights from critical geopolitics and postcolonial critique by making an argument about the geographies of violence and their differential impact in contemporary security practices, including but not limited to military intervention. The book explores military intervention in Libya through the categories of space and time, to provide a robust ethico-political critique of the intervention. Much of the mainstream international relations scholarship on humanitarian intervention frames the ethical, moral and legal debate over intervention in terms of a binary, between human rights and state sovereignty. In response, O'Sullivan questions the ways in which military violence was produced as a rational and reasonable response to the crisis in Libya, outlining and destabilising this false binary between the human and the state. The book offers methodological tools for questioning the violent institutions at the heart of humanitarian intervention and asking how intervention has been produced as a rational response to crisis. Contributing to the ongoing academic conversation in the critical literature on spatiality, militarism and resistance, the book draws upon postcolonial and poststructural approaches to critical security studies, and will be of great interest to scholars and graduates of critical security studies and international relations."--Provided by publisher.