Suchergebnisse

Main description: Donald Abenheim schildert die seit der Aufbauphase der Bundeswehr bis heut geführte Traditionsdebatte, die im Schatten des Dritten Reiches stattfand. Es geht dabei um die Legitimierung des neuen deutschen Soldaten sowie um die geistig-politische Grundlegung der Bundeswehr.

Recent controversies about Ronald Reagan's visit to the Bitburg military cemetery and revelations about Kurt Waldheim's past underscored the political problems inherent in Germany's military traditions and in the relationship of the army to National Socialism. The Allied victors disbanded the German armed forces after World War II, only to press for the arming of the Federal Republic of Germany under the altered political conditions of the cold war. This book is the first comprehensive narrative and analysis of the efforts of German military professionals to discover for their new army an acceptable body of tradition in the proud, ambiguous, and at times criminal history of the German soldier. The author shows that, despite a complex of political obstacles, the founders of the Bundeswehr generally succeeded in persuading the international community and Germany itself that the army of the 1950s and 1960s would not revive the militarism of the past. However, the rapidity of the military buildup was a major drawback to their reform ideas. Certain officers and NCOs in the Bundeswehr undercut changes made by the leadership, and the debate on tradition building became a major political issue in the Federal Republic and NATO. Originally published in 1989. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.

NPS NRP Technical Report ; The strategic focus on enhanced forward presence of US and NATO forces in the Baltics must include maritime forces as vital to this theater of contemporary and possible future grey zone or high intensity conflict in great power competition with Putin's Russia and its allies. In bi lateral exchange between OPNAV with select Baltic NATO allies' navy staffs, discussion has examined the basing of an LCS Baltic ports with strong host nation support to meet and repel Russian Federation maritime Anti Access and Area denial operations. This study responds to a potential political military requirement to explore the issues listed below of policy, strategy, and operations in the USN, US armed forces in Europe and select allies as host nations. ; N3/N5 - Information, Plans & Strategy ; This research is supported by funding from the Naval Postgraduate School, Naval Research Program (PE 0605853N/2098). https://nps.edu/nrp ; Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) ; Approved for public release. Distribution is unlimited.

NPS NRP Executive Summary ; The strategic focus on enhanced forward presence of US and NATO forces in the Baltics must include maritime forces as vital to this theater of contemporary and possible future grey zone or high intensity conflict in great power competition with Putin's Russia and its allies. In bi lateral exchange between OPNAV with select Baltic NATO allies' navy staffs, discussion has examined the basing of an LCS Baltic ports with strong host nation support to meet and repel Russian Federation maritime Anti Access and Area denial operations. This study responds to a potential political military requirement to explore the issues listed below of policy, strategy, and operations in the USN, US armed forces in Europe and select allies as host nations. ; N3/N5 - Information, Plans & Strategy ; This research is supported by funding from the Naval Postgraduate School, Naval Research Program (PE 0605853N/2098). https://nps.edu/nrp ; Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) ; Approved for public release. Distribution is unlimited.

The world order anchored by the U.S.-German relationship has integrated Germany into Europe without more bloodshed, brought the transformation of communist Europe, and visited prosperity on a part of the world that could easily have been embroiled in strife. That world order, however, is being severely eroded by misunderstanding and rhetoric on all sides. A statecraft is needed that comprehends the nature of military power and what a given country can and cannot do to defend itself.

Im Mittelpunkt der Thematik steht der "Staatsbürger in Uniform" und gleichzeitig die Sorge um diese Institution. Die Sorge gilt dem Inbegriff für eine zivil-militärische Kultur, die in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und in den Vereinigten Staaten dazu beigetragen hat, die Streitkräfte in der Demokratie zu verankern. Die einzelnen Beiträge analysieren aus unterschiedlicher Perspektive, dabei mit einem besonderen Augenmerk auf die Traditionsproblematik, welchen Anfechtungen diese Kultur und ein entsprechendes soldatisches Selbstverständnis diesseits und jenseits des Atlantiks ausgesetzt waren. Sie zeigen, wie beides unter den Bedingungen der "neuen Kriege" der letzten Jahrzehnte, mit ihren erheblichen innenpolitischen Rückwirkungen, Schaden nimmt - zum Schaden für die Demokratie insgesamt. Die Analyse beruht auf der langjährigen und intimen Kenntnis der Autoren von den politisch-militärischen Verhältnissen in Deutschland wie in den Vereinigten Staaten.

Innere Führung should remain the professional code of all German soldiers especially at a time of upheaval in the German nation, on the European continent, and beyond. The record of leadership, command, morale, ethics, and obedience among the soldiers of the Western alliance since September 11, 2001, has become ensnarled in various civil-military interpretations of how soldiers have managed irregular warfare and counterinsurgency campaigns now and in the past. This debate gives rise to the well-meaning, if frequently facile, arguments by some who, in the face of jihadist violence and "hybrid war," would junk Innere Führung as a nostalgic absurdity. Instead, the times call for more, not less, Innere Führung, adapted and modernized to continue the German legacy of soldiers in democracy among young combat veterans unsure of their place in state and society in the wake of their experience of irregular warfare in Afghanistan and elsewhere. For anyone familiar with the history of theBundeswehr and its almost forgotten origins, the story ofInnere Führung comprises the accounts of its critics and the misunderstandings that either consciously or unconsciously surround this ideal of soldierly professionalism in the FRG. These core principles of command, obedience, and ethics rightly emphasize the remarkable trinity of political purpose, constitutional essentials, and soldierly command and discipline in the blast of fighting, anger, and hatred native to war and political violence in its variety.

How do defense institutions adjust to reductions in budgets amid an epoch of upheaval? This process of demobilization and retrenchment takes place amid the intensification of partisan politics in Western democracies made more toxic by an economic crisis all too similar to the 1930s. For young U.S. offic- ers this situation burst forth without precedent. It is a shock for them unlike any in the decade prior of hard service. This article regards such a shock as a point of departure for deeper reflections about the theme of austerity and mil- itary professionalism in the past and present.

CMR Vienna 2007 ; The historian should be a partner to the soldier in the attempt better to understand culture as a feature of present-day military service. To do so, however, such historians must also be experts in the culture of soldiers — a different kind of inter-cultural expertise that must underlie any serious effort to bring the nuances of cultural study and understanding to the practice of soldiering. The study of the past faces notable limits in the higher aspects of security, defense and war that inhere in the culture of soldiers as well as the regard (or rather disregard) for the past in our post-modern society, especially in the United States. These professional limits and the challenges to what one might call an understanding of inter-cultural expertise at the strategic level form the subjects for the next forty minutes. (The question at hand also has implications for democratic civil military relations, a subject that remains at the heart of these seminars, now in their tenth year — something historical in its own right. Might I also add that what follows is a distillate of my own more than thirty years' experience in this matter as an historian in university think-tanks and the US government.)

Reviewed: Politics and the Russian Army: Civil–Military Relations, 1689–2000. Brian D. Taylor. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003. 355 pp. ; The article of record may be found at http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2004.00269.x ; From the cinematic clatter of hooves on soundstage palace stairwells of July 1762, as depicted in Josef von Sternberg's 1934 movie, The Scarlet Empress, to the televised clank of real armored treads on Moscow's loop highway in August 1991, the specter of the martial figure thrusting himself into politics astride a horse or a tank turret has been a constant feature in thinking about the character of the Russian and Soviet state. Yet, in the important analysis of Professor Brian D. Taylor - a political scientist of promise at the University of Oklahoma - this age-old perceived wisdom poorly describes the reality of the soldier and the state in Russia from the end of the 17th century until the beginning of this century.