2012Ike Skelton Combined Arms Research Library (CARL) Digital Library (US Army Combined Arms Center)Requires access

Military Advice and Civil-Military Relations

Douglas W Bennett

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

This monograph examined three of the variables that impact the civil-military relationship with regard to understanding how military advice is received by civilian leadership -- combat military experience of civilian leaders, political expertise of military leaders, and service parochialism -- and examined them in the context of the Vietnam War and Operation Iraqi Freedom. The lack military experience of civilian leaders did not detract from the military security of the nation with respect to the health of civil-military relations. The conclusion about political expertise in military leaders largely depends on the type of conflict. Service parochialism is a factor of the civilian leaders' receptiveness to military advice. In the aggregate, politicians will only hear and listen to military leaders if several things manifest themselves simultaneously. First, regardless of the civilian leadership's experience in the military, the political administration must respect military culture as suggested by Herspring. Second, military leaders must have political experience to understand the ancillary functions of irregular warfare as recommended by Janowitz. Finally, there must exist a service culture that is divided enough to offer different opinions and alternatives, but not so divisive that it appears ineffectual and incoherent as indicated by Feaver.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This monograph examined three of the variables that impact the civil-military relationship with regard to understanding how military advice is received by civilian leadership -- combat military experience of civilian leaders, political expertise of military leaders, and service parochialism -- and examined them in the context of the Vietnam War and Operation Iraqi Freedom. The lack military experience of civilian leaders did not detract from the military security of the nation with respect to the health of civil-military relations. The conclusion about political expertise in military leaders largely depends on the type of conflict. Service parochialism is a factor of the civilian leaders' receptiveness to military advice. In the aggregate, politicians will only hear and listen to military leaders if several things manifest themselves simultaneously. First, regardless of the civilian leadership's experience in the military, the political administration must respect military culture as suggested by Herspring. Second, military leaders must have political experience to understand the ancillary functions of irregular warfare as recommended by Janowitz. Finally, there must exist a service culture that is divided enough to offer different opinions and alternatives, but not so divisive that it appears ineffectual and incoherent as indicated by Feaver.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This monograph examined three of the variables that impact the civil-military relationship with regard to understanding how military advice is received by civilian leadership -- combat military experience of civilian leaders, political expertise of military leaders, and service parochialism -- and examined them in the context of the Vietnam War and Operation Iraqi Freedom. The lack military experience of civilian leaders did not detract from the military security of the nation with respect to the health of civil-military relations. The conclusion about political expertise in military leaders largely depends on the type of conflict. Service parochialism is a factor of the civilian leaders' receptiveness to military advice. In the aggregate, politicians will only hear and listen to military leaders if several things manifest themselves simultaneously. First, regardless of the civilian leadership's experience in the military, the political administration must respect military culture as suggested by Herspring. Second, military leaders must have political experience to understand the ancillary functions of irregular warfare as recommended by Janowitz. Finally, there must exist a service culture that is divided enough to offer different opinions and alternatives, but not so divisive that it appears ineffectual and incoherent as indicated by Feaver.

Key concepts: Parochialism, Military science, Military service, Politics, Civil–military relations, Military threat, Political science, Military theory

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Military Advice and Civil-Military Relations — Research Paper | ScholarLens