Concepts of Soldiering between National Norms and International Operations : Results of a Comparative European Research Project (original) (raw)
Related papers
The " Democratic Soldier " : Comparing Concepts and Practices in Europe
Since the end of the Cold War almost all European countries have reformed their armed forces, focusing on downsizing, internationalization and professionalization. This paper examines how these changes in security sector governance have affected the normative model underlying the military’s relationship to democracy, using the image of the “democratic soldier”. Drawing on a comparative analysis of 12 post-socialist, traditional and consolidated democracies in Europe, the different dimensions of the national conception of soldiering are analysed based on the official norms that define a country’s military and the ways in which individual members of the armed forces see their role.
Can 'Citizen in Uniform'Survive? German Civil-Military Culture Responding to War.
2011
This article points out the role of perceptions, hereafter referred to as ‘civil– military culture’, that German society holds about the German armed forces. Analysing the discourse in German newspapers concerning Bundeswehr missions abroad since the early 1990s, and the engagement in Afghanistan in particular, it is argued that options to use the military abroad were circumscribed mainly to humanitarian tasks. This was so because German soldiers have been perceived in accordance with the official concept of a ‘citizen in uniform’, which has strong ethical implications, and consequently the Bundeswehr was seen as a humanitarian and rescue organisation. However, since the discourse in 2009 made it clear that the internalised civil–military culture no longer provides adequate guidance regarding how to approach a war-like situation such as that in Afghanistan, the entire German civil–military culture is challenged.
Democracy, the Armed Forces and Military Deployment: The ‚Second Social Contract‘ is on the Line
PRIF Report No. 108, 2011
The increasing number of troop deployments by democratic states after the end of the Cold War has subjected the 'second social contract' – the (in most cases unwritten) agreement regulating relations between society, government and the armed forces – to new stresses. This report sets out to name the causes and subsequent dangers of this development, urging for future deployment decisions to be more thoroughly and carefully considered. If the democratic responsibility for military deployments is not taken seriously, the gap grows between the armed forces and civilian society.
New societies, new soldiers? A soldier typology Iselin Silja Kaspersen
New societies, new soldiers? A soldier typology, 2020
The term ‘soldier’ is frequently conceptualized as a warrior, a peacekeeper, or a hybrid of both. However, recent changes in the utilization of soldiers in societies have moved the repertoire of possible ways to think, act, and behave beyond these notions. As such, there exists an undertheorized gap between different expectations of soldiers and actual soldier roles. This presents a need for more nuanced and analytically useful conceptualizations of soldier roles. This article provides a more thorough understanding of the soldier role by identifying seven ideal types of soldiers: the warrior, nation-defender, law-enforcer, humanitarian, state-builder, and the ideological, and contractor soldiers. The typology offers an analytical tool with the capacity to maneuver the empirical reality, which is important because how soldier roles are constructed affect how military personnel understand their role in the postmodern world, where identity is multifaceted and negotiable. Ultimately, identity influences how soldiers interact with societies and how societies respond to war, conflicts, and crises.
Aspects of Military Ethics in Missions Abroad - a European Approach for Professional Soldiers
Academia Letters, 2022
Given the status of being a soldier in mission abroad means to be in a position of power, authority and trustworthiness. And like the Soldier as an individual the military as a profession in general has a very specific status. As it is with all professions that deal with other people, this profession is defined and governed in large part by its ethics; the rules and behaviors by which its members conduct themselves. Any professional military force, anywhere in the world, must distinct itself from the so-called "profession" of mercenaries or contractors in PSC or "holy warriors". It has to give shape to a certain form of identity. This identity is based on more than simply being a servant of the state, a person in uniform. It is someone who is authorized to employ violence when required. A big part of this identity consists of the level of autonomy over how that violence is applied. The structured adherence to laws, codes and accepted norms is part of that identity also.[1] In addition, it is the use of brute force, that constitutes military competence as an exercise of power sui generis, that is necessary for causation as well as avoidance of a state of emergency.[2] However, the proof of value is not always easy. There exist two possible pitfalls. They may arise when not dealing with the circumstances properly: If there is a breach of those rules, the action may be legally wrong and therefore make the perpetrator liable to legal sanction. In addition, it also could be seen as institutionally wrong. Then it will be considered unprofessional too. Within the many forces around the globe, we can state many different views on this topic, many different profiles of the construction what being a soldier consists of. One of these concepts may be the Citizen in Uniform[3] like the Germans put it forth, another one may be the US-American model of the Soldier as a Citizen[4]-Both concepts cover the role of military core values in the soldiers' everyday life and the role of personal values in the military profession. In addition, there are concepts of the different institutions,
Boots on the streets: a “policization” of the armed forces as the new normal?
Journal of Military Studies, 2019
The article analyses how the boundaries of postmodern military organizations are changing and how these evolutions affect their relations with the civilian society. The case of the Belgian Defence and the deployment of its military personnel in the streets are used as a case study to illustrate this transformation. Since January 2015, in response to the imminent terrorist threat in Belgium, military units have been deployed in support of the police to monitor sensitive areas, guard buildings and patrol the streets. The article analyses, first, how the population reacted to these new "proximity" roles and, second, the impact of these homeland deployments on the expeditionary readiness of the Belgian Defence and its capacity to carry out its primary missions. The empirical analyses are, based on several quantitative and qualitative surveys, carried out among the Belgian population and the personnel of the Belgian Defence. In particular, the impact of the evolution of the public's support over time on the blurring of the traditional roles of the military and the use of the military for internal security tasks is analysed.
New societies, new soldiers? A soldier typology
Small Wars & Insurgencies
The term 'soldier' is frequently conceptualized as a warrior, a peacekeeper, or a hybrid of both. However, recent changes in the utilization of soldiers in societies have moved the repertoire of possible ways to think, act, and behave beyond these notions. As such, there exists an undertheorized gap between different expectations of soldiers and actual soldier roles. This presents a need for more nuanced and analytically useful conceptualizations of soldier roles. This article provides a more thorough understanding of the soldier role by identifying seven ideal types of soldiers: the warrior, nation-defender, lawenforcer, humanitarian, state-builder, and the ideological, and contractor soldiers. The typology offers an analytical tool with the capacity to maneuver the empirical reality, which is important because how soldier roles are constructed affect how military personnel understand their role in the postmodern world, where identity is multifaceted and negotiable. Ultimately, identity influences how soldiers interact with societies and how societies respond to war, conflicts, and crises.
The European Union Military Staff (EUMS) and the Social Construction of Military Doctrine
Military doctrine is far more than reified concepts written into field manuals to blindly follow. Rather, it is socially constructed and continually re-constructed through discourse. This process is best seen in the European Union (EU), which has no traditional military doctrine but has security concepts which must be applied in a complex, multinational and normatively diverse geographic and metaphorical space. The article re-interprets the process of military and security doctrine formation and provides answers to the crucial question of how norm diffusion is operationalized in the European Union’s security sphere via an examination of the Concepts and Doctrine Division of the European Union Military Staff (EUMS) in Brussels, Belgium.
Democratic Duty and the Moral Dilemmas of Soldiers
Ethics, 2011
This article explores the personal responsibility of soldiers for fighting in unjust wars. Its reference point is the position developed by Jeff McMahan in his recent Killing in War. I claim that McMahan fails to give sufficient importance to institutional justifications on this matter. I argue for this by developing what I call the argument to democratic duty, which I claim embodies much current thinking about the obligations of soldiers in a democratic culture. The upshot of my argument is that soldiers are placed in a contradictory position, between personal and institutional obligations. This is one sense in which soldiers can be victimized by the institution of war itself.
2022
Democratic societies expect their armed forces to act in a morally responsible way, which seems a fair expectation given the fact that they entrust their armed forces with the monopoly of violence. However, this is not as straightforward and unambiguous as it sounds. Present-day military practices show that political assignments, social and cultural contexts, innovative technologies and organisational structures, present military personnel with questions and dilemma’s that can have far-reaching consequences for all involved – not in the last place for the soldiers themselves. A thorough training and education, in which critical thinking is developed and stimulated, seems therefore a necessary condition for morally responsible behaviour. This book aims to contribute to this form of ‘reflective practitioning’ in military practice.