Search results

The use of military air bases for civilian purposes is not a new idea, there are many places in the world where they make full use of this possibility to reduce the excessive reliance on the civilian airports. We have examined this kind of usability of military airports at Dezső Szentgyörgyi Air Base, in Kecskemét, Hungary. As a result of our research it seems that it may be the first mixed-service airport in the country. At the same time, an appropriate technical, infrastructural and personal background is indispensable to establish a mixed-use airport. The examination and result of this will be presented in detail subsequently. The implementation of the civilian part would be of course a challenge but everything is set to create a mixed-use air base with relatively little improvements.

Debates about the sources of presidential power in wartime often turn on constitutional separation of powers questions about where executive authority ends and legislative authority begins. Such legal premises of presidential power are both ambiguous and contested, however, lending credibility to alternative theories of presidential power that hinge on political considerations such as public support, a source of legitimacy rather than legality for particular actions. This article builds on the distinction between legality and legitimacy in presidential power in wartime and develops a legitimacy framework that identifies rational‐legal, traditional, and charismatic sources of legitimacy. An examination of the historical record of American military force from 1798 to the present suggests that executives have often pursued a legal basis for intervention and obtained legislative authorization for the use of force, but have also acted as though sources of legitimacy are viable substitutes for legality. Early in American history, those sources consisted of traditional authority such as Manifest Destiny; in the early half of the twentieth century, they took the form of charismatic authority such as the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine; and since 1945, rational‐legal authority through international organizations. Analyzing the argument in light of the historical record shows that the turn to unilateralism is not a new feature of the executive–legislative balance of power, but rather an undercurrent of intervention politics, atop of which rest efforts at legitimation for the use of force.

As the U.S. military moves into an uncertain future dominated by rapid change, traditional modes of thought will no longer suffice. Contributors to this volume focus on some of the major factors that will shape the American military in the 1980s: a complex, interdependent international arena, a changing domestic political context, broad societal forces and trends, the imperatives of advanced technology, conflicting bureaucratic and management orientations, and the emergence of new elites. The articles collected here present the diverse views of civilian scholars, of all services and ranks of the military, and of Department of Defense and congressional civilians; they feature the results of surveys conducted at the three service academies and among other civilian and military populations that number in the tens of thousands. The focus moves from a historical and current assessment of military professionalism to potential influences in the changing international and domestic environments. A major section is devoted to important military manpower issues. Analyses of organizational dynamics and change address the implications of advanced technology, bureaucratization, and centralization of control. The book concludes with contrasting views of the future demands on military professionalism and with a final summary that suggests future research avenues.

A common concern in the United States is the supposed drift of American society toward militarism. Observers claim to see persuasive evi­dence of a foreign policy dominated by military considerations; of the Armed Forces of the United States essentially beyond the control of the people, Con­gress, and even the executive branch; of a major segment of American industry dependent upon the "war machine."

Conflicts over citizenship and military service became a central issue in Italian-American rela tions in the early twentieth century. The United States and Italy founded their concepts of citizenship on two different bases, jus soli and jus sanguinis. As a consequence of this differ ence and the swelling number of Italian immigrants naturalized in America, the two govern ments' policies about naturalization and military service collided until 1918. The Italian gov ernment's policy put Italian Americans' loyalty to the United States in jeopardy, especially for men who wished to return to Italy for business or educational purposes. Thus, the study of Italian Americans' experiences in the context of the policies of both countries illustrates a key aspect of the relationship between the United States and Italy, both in terms of social experience and public policy.