Listing 1 - 10 of 13 | << page >> |
Sort by
|
Choose an application
How do civilians control the military? In the wake of September 11, the renewed presence of national security in everyday life has made this question all the more pressing. In this book, Peter Feaver proposes an ambitious new theory that treats civil-military relations as a principal-agent relationship, with the civilian executive monitoring the actions of military agents, the "armed servants" of the nation-state. Military obedience is not automatic but depends on strategic calculations of whether civilians will catch and punish misbehavior. This model challenges Samuel Huntington's professionalism-based model of civil-military relations, and provides an innovative way of making sense of the U.S. Cold War and post-Cold War experience--especially the distinctively stormy civil-military relations of the Clinton era. In the decade after the Cold War ended, civilians and the military had a variety of run-ins over whether and how to use military force. These episodes, as interpreted by agency theory, contradict the conventional wisdom that civil-military relations matter only if there is risk of a coup. On the contrary, military professionalism does not by itself ensure unchallenged civilian authority. As Feaver argues, agency theory offers the best foundation for thinking about relations between military and civilian leaders, now and in the future.
Civil-military relations --- Civil supremacy over the military --- United States
Choose an application
Peter D. Feaver shows that the public's high confidence in the military is based partly on deservedness and partly based on an underlying partisan gap and social desirability bias: extremely high confidence levels among self-identified Republican respondents but much less among Democrats and still weaker confidence among Independents. Not only does Feaver helps us understand how and why the public has confidence in the military, but he also exposes problems that policymakers need to be aware of. Specifically, he elucidates how confidence or over-confidence in the institution shapes public attitudes on the use of force and may not support the best practices in democratic civil-military relations.
United States --- Armed Forces --- Public opinion. --- Warfare and Defence. --- Warfare & defence.
Choose an application
Choose an application
"The recent American debate over whether and how to invade Iraq clustered into civilian versus military camps. Top military officials appeared reluctant to use force, the most hawkish voices in government were civilians who had not served in uniform, and everyone was worried that the American public would not tolerate casualties in war. This book shows that this civilian-military argument is typical, not exceptional. It characterized earlier debates over Bosnia, Somalia, and Kosovo, and the underlying patterns has shaped U.S. foreign policy at least since 1816. Peter Feaver and Christopher Gelpi explore civilian and military attitudes through opinion surveys of elites (military and civilian) and the general public."--BOOK JACKET.
Choose an application
America's debate over whether and how to invade Iraq clustered into civilian versus military camps. Top military officials appeared reluctant to use force, the most hawkish voices in government were civilians who had not served in uniform, and everyone was worried that the American public would not tolerate casualties in war. This book shows that this civilian-military argument--which has characterized earlier debates over Bosnia, Somalia, and Kosovo--is typical, not exceptional. Indeed, the underlying pattern has shaped U.S. foreign policy at least since 1816. The new afterword by Peter Feaver and Christopher Gelpi traces these themes through the first two years of the current Iraq war, showing how civil-military debates and concerns about sensitivity to casualties continue to shape American foreign policy in profound ways.
War and emergency powers --- Civil-military relations --- Presidents
Choose an application
Choose an application
Choose an application
Choose an application
From the Korean War to the current conflict in Iraq, Paying the Human Costs of War examines the ways in which the American public decides whether to support the use of military force. Contrary to the conventional view, the authors demonstrate that the public does not respond reflexively and solely to the number of casualties in a conflict. Instead, the book argues that the public makes reasoned and reasonable cost-benefit calculations for their continued support of a war based on the justifications for it and the likelihood it will succeed, along with the costs that have been suffered in casualties. Of these factors, the book finds that the most important consideration for the public is the expectation of success. If the public believes that a mission will succeed, the public will support it even if the costs are high. When the public does not expect the mission to succeed, even small costs will cause the withdrawal of support. Providing a wealth of new evidence about American attitudes toward military conflict, Paying the Human Costs of War offers insights into a controversial, timely, and ongoing national discussion.
Public opinion --- Iraq War, 2003-2011 --- War and society --- War casualties --- Anglo-American Invasion of Iraq, 2003-2011 --- Dawn, Operation New, 2010-2011 --- Gulf War II, 2003-2011 --- Iraqi Freedom, Operation, 2003-2010 --- New Dawn, Operation, 2010-2011 --- Operation Iraqi Freedom, 2003-2010 --- Operation New Dawn, 2010-2011 --- Operation Telic, 2003-2011 --- Persian Gulf War, 2003-2011 --- Telic, Operation, 2003-2011 --- War on Terrorism, 2001-2009 --- Casualties, War --- War --- War victims --- War wounds --- Public opinion. --- Casualties --- Casualties (Statistics, etc.) --- United States --- ABŞ --- ABSh --- Ameerika Ühendriigid --- America (Republic) --- Amerika Birlăshmish Shtatlary --- Amerika Birlăşmi Ştatları --- Amerika Birlăşmiş Ştatları --- Amerika ka Kelenyalen Jamanaw --- Amerika Qūrama Shtattary --- Amerika Qŭshma Shtatlari --- Amerika Qushma Shtattary --- Amerika (Republic) --- Amerikai Egyesült Államok --- Amerikanʹ Veĭtʹsėndi︠a︡vks Shtattnė --- Amerikări Pĕrleshu̇llĕ Shtatsem --- Amerikas Forenede Stater --- Amerikayi Miatsʻyal Nahangner --- Ameriketako Estatu Batuak --- Amirika Carékat --- AQSh --- Ar. ha-B. --- Arhab --- Artsot ha-Berit --- Artzois Ha'bris --- Bí-kok --- Ē.P.A. --- EE.UU. --- Egyesült Államok --- ĒPA --- Estados Unidos --- Estados Unidos da América do Norte --- Estados Unidos de América --- Estaos Xuníos --- Estaos Xuníos d'América --- Estatos Unitos --- Estatos Unitos d'America --- Estats Units d'Amèrica --- Ètats-Unis d'Amèrica --- États-Unis d'Amérique --- Fareyniḳṭe Shṭaṭn --- Feriene Steaten --- Feriene Steaten fan Amearika --- Forente stater --- FS --- Hēnomenai Politeiai Amerikēs --- Hēnōmenes Politeies tēs Amerikēs --- Hiwsisayin Amerikayi Miatsʻeal Tērutʻiwnkʻ --- Istadus Unidus --- Jungtinės Amerikos valstybės --- Mei guo --- Mei-kuo --- Meiguo --- Mî-koet --- Miatsʻyal Nahangner --- Miguk --- Na Stàitean Aonaichte --- NSA --- S.U.A. --- SAD --- Saharat ʻAmērikā --- SASht --- Severo-Amerikanskie Shtaty --- Severo-Amerikanskie Soedinennye Shtaty --- Si︠e︡vero-Amerikanskīe Soedinennye Shtaty --- Sjedinjene Američke Države --- Soedinennye Shtaty Ameriki --- Soedinennye Shtaty Severnoĭ Ameriki --- Soedinennye Shtaty Si︠e︡vernoĭ Ameriki --- Spojené staty americké --- SShA --- Stadoù-Unanet Amerika --- Stáit Aontaithe Mheiriceá --- Stany Zjednoczone --- Stati Uniti --- Stati Uniti d'America --- Stâts Unîts --- Stâts Unîts di Americhe --- Steatyn Unnaneysit --- Steatyn Unnaneysit America --- SUA (Stati Uniti d'America) --- Sŭedineni amerikanski shtati --- Sŭedinenite shtati --- Tetã peteĩ reko Amérikagua --- U.S. --- U.S.A. --- United States of America --- Unol Daleithiau --- Unol Daleithiau America --- Unuiĝintaj Ŝtatoj de Ameriko --- US --- USA --- Usono --- Vaeinigte Staatn --- Vaeinigte Staatn vo Amerika --- Vereinigte Staaten --- Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika --- Verenigde State van Amerika --- Verenigde Staten --- VS --- VSA --- Wááshindoon Bikéyah Ałhidadiidzooígíí --- Wilāyāt al-Muttaḥidah --- Wilāyāt al-Muttaḥidah al-Amirīkīyah --- Wilāyāt al-Muttaḥidah al-Amrīkīyah --- Yhdysvallat --- Yunaeted Stet --- Yunaeted Stet blong Amerika --- ZDA --- Združene države Amerike --- Zʹi︠e︡dnani Derz︠h︡avy Ameryky --- Zjadnośone staty Ameriki --- Zluchanyi︠a︡ Shtaty Ameryki --- Zlucheni Derz︠h︡avy --- ZSA --- Η.Π.Α. --- Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες της Αμερικής --- Америка (Republic) --- Американь Вейтьсэндявкс Штаттнэ --- Америкӑри Пӗрлешӳллӗ Штатсем --- САЩ --- Съединените щати --- Злучаныя Штаты Амерыкі --- ولايات المتحدة --- ولايات المتّحدة الأمريكيّة --- ولايات المتحدة الامريكية --- 미국 --- Military policy --- Spojené obce severoamerické --- Militarism --- États-Unis --- É.-U. --- ÉU
Choose an application
"At a time of fiscal constraint and global uncertainty, should the United States retrench geopolitically or seek to reinvigorate its international leadership? This collection of essays puts this pressing question in historical and theoretical context. The authors examine past episodes in which U.S. policymakers confronted similar choices, and draw insights from the strategies that they fashioned in response. The essays also consider the major theoretical and policy debates pertaining to the issues of retrenchment and renewal today"--Publisher's web site.
Strategy --- Economic aspects. --- United States --- Foreign relations --- Military policy
Listing 1 - 10 of 13 | << page >> |
Sort by
|