Suchergebnisse

Bringing together new research by leading scholars, this volume rethinks the role played by militaries in politics. It introduces new theories of military politics, arguing against the inherited theories and practices of civil-military relations, and presents rich new data on senior officership and on the intersection of military politics and military operations. As the first volume in Berghahn Books' Military Politics series, it provides a blueprint for a new research paradigm dedicated to tracing how militaries shape their political environments, focusing particularly on the core democratic questions raised by politically-effective (and ineffective) militaries.

It is often assumed that the Second World War marked a golden age of the US Armed Forces' control over the mass media. However, few scholars have examined the degree to which press matters occupied the time and attention of the highest levels of military command – if at all. The daily work of Army Chief of Staff George C. Marshall reveals a rather more complex portrait. If the era was indeed a golden age for the army, it was made so in part through persistent effort by both public affairs agencies and at least one top army commander.

Mediated responses to reports of abuse during the Global War on Terror are puzzling. Few of the many revelations of abuse prompted concerted reactions (e.g. scandals), and those that did were often very similar to reports that were ignored. This article draws from empirical research into responses to prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib to develop new concepts that help untangle the mediatization of American wars. Feedback helps to model the variety of polemical interventions that are adopted in public discussions as a result of a scandal. The concept of feedforward, introduced here, enables us to model polemical interventions that develop within an organization in response to such feedback. Together, these concepts encourage greater sensitivity to the cultural horizon of mediated events. Further, they point to a new theoretical focus for mediatization research, namely the cycles of feedback and feedforward that help shape new forms of understanding and behaving within organizations.

1 Introduction: Paramilitarization and the globalization of paramilitary culture -- Part 1 Projecting the post-heoric warrior in new popular cultural forms -- 2 Techniques of empathy and embodiment in the paramilitary film: Learning from The Hurt Locker -- 3 Press X to pay respects: Evolving depictions of war in Call of Duty and Battlefield -- 4 Re-narrating the paramilitary in the Colombian conflict: Examining the Medellin memory museum -- Part 2 Projecting the paramilitary warrior in practices of social memory -- 5 The social memory of the North Vietnamese soldier in Vietnam and United States popular culture -- 6 From nationalization to Islamization of the Ottoman Soldier at the Canakkale/Gallipoli WWI Battlefields -- 7 The Danish soldier reimagined: Civil religion and religion of the self in the post-9/11 era -- Part 3 Paramilitary, organisations and the advancement of paramilitary culture -- 8 Profession and identity: Warriors in the 21st Century -- 9 The poetics of paramilitarization: Hizbollah and the Shade of Resistance in Southern Lebanon -- 10 Firefights and the performance of occupational masculinity during downtime.

The first book dedicated to the sociology of privatized security, this collection studies the important global trend of shifting security from public to private hands and the associated rise of Private Military and Security Companies (PMSCs) and their contractors. The volume first explores the trend itself, making important historical and theoretical revisions to the existing social science of private security. These chapters discuss why rulers buy, rent and create private militaries, why mercenaries have become private patriots, and why the legitimacy of military missions is undermined by the use of contractors. The next section challenges the idea that states have a monopoly on legitimate violence and questions our legal and economic assumptions about private security. The collection concludes with a discussion of the contractors themselves, focusing on gender, race, ethnicity, and other demographic factors. Featuring a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods and a range of theoretical and methodological innovations, this book will inspire sociologists to examine, with fresh eyes, the behind-the-scenes tension between the high drama of war and conflict and the mundane realities of privatized security contractors and their everyday lives.

Sociologists have largely ignored the study of military tribunals and justice systems. We offer a descriptive overview of military systems of justice intended for use by political and military sociologists, focusing on the case of the United States armed services. We contextualize the principal military systems of justice and provide extended discussions of how the American case connects through formal and informal channels to international legal structures. American military law and justice link three key legal realms: international law on conflict and security at the global level; the so called National Security Constitution at the national level; and the Uniform Code of Military Justice at the institutional level.

Suzanne Nielsen and Hugh Liebert recently published "The Continuing Relevance of Morris Janowitz's The Professional Soldier for the Education of Officers" in which they argued that officer education is too enamored with Samuel Huntington's aging theory of civil–military relations from Soldier and the State. Huntington's ideal of objective control grants senior military advisors autonomy within their professional sphere, and it best ensures that unvarnished military expertise survives politically charged national security decision making processes intact, regardless of which party controls the White House. While these features explain Huntington's traditional popularity with the military, Nielsen and Liebert warn that Huntington's separation between military and civilian matters in theory engenders wishful thinking in practice, so much so that officers neglect, to the detriment of national policy, Morris Janowitz, Huntington's cofounder of the modern study of civil–military relations. However, the civil–military community should reconsider banishing Huntington in order to appreciate Janowitz.

Sociologists and political scientists have long fretted over the dangers that a politicized military poses to democracy. In recent times, however, civil–military relations experts in the United States accepted retired or indeed still serving generals and admirals in high-ranking political posts. Despite customary revulsion from scholars, the sudden waivers are an indicator that military participation in momentous national security decisions is inherently political without necessarily being partisan, including when civilian authority defers to a largely autonomous sphere for objective military expertise. Military politics is actually critical for healthy civil–military collaboration, when done prudently and moderately. Janowitz and Huntington, founders of the modern study of civil–military relations, understood the U.S. military's inevitable invitation to political influence. Here, we elaborate on two neglected dimensions, implicit in their projects, of military politics under objective civilian control based on classical virtues of civic republicanism: Aristotle's practical wisdom and Machiavelli's virtú.

In a recent issue of this journal, we published an article titled "Fault Lines of the American Military Profession". Donald S. Travis subsequently wrote a Dipustatio Sine Fine rejoinder that raised a number of criticisms of our piece and suggested several ways forward. For our part, we detect three serious problems in Travis's analysis and offer a single syncretic response. Our solution builds on the insights of Travis's critique while avoiding the pitfalls of his specific line of reasoning. We conclude by urging others to continue to debate and research these very consequential and timely issues.

AbstractThough private military and security companies (PMSCs) have been addressed extensively in the literature, little research has been done on the contractors themselves, leaving us in the dark as to who these individuals are. In this article, we focus on the critical case of the United States armed services and argue that two broad developments have been converging that both point to the need for new, microlevel sociological research on the people who are involved in the global PMSC industry. To this end, we first draw from an extensive political science literature to illustrate the rise of the PMSCs and concomitant evolution of the security sector, while noting a new trend that points to the need for moving from the macrosocial to the microsocial level of inquiry. Second, we indicate the challenges contractors pose to the sociological paradigm of military professionalism: These suggest a need to move from the mesosocial to the microsocial level of inquiry. We conclude by reviewing the existing research on the demographics of the sector and then indicating the troubling gaps in our current understanding of this critical sector of the national security apparatus.

Over the past decade, the American armed services have witnessed a near-constant stream of so-called ethical lapses. Spanning rank, specialty, and service, these "lapses" have given rise to a flood of criticism by journalists and piercing calls for reform from politicians. In response, American military leaders have pointed to the paired concepts of profession and professionalism as the solution. In this article, we use classical conceptualizations of the military profession to resituate the problem of ethical lapses as instead one of the three fault lines of the contemporary American military profession, unfolding alongside crises in military expertise and identity. The three fault lines reveal at once the large scale of the challenges facing the American armed services and our very limited social scientific understanding of those problems. We end by emphasizing the need for future research to establish an updated empirical baseline for theories of the military profession in America.