The Dynamics of the Contemporary Military Role: In Search of Flexibility

• Authors: Agata Mazurkiewicz
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The article offers an overview and reflection on the dynamics of the military role taking into account different security contexts and significant others. It analyses two dominant types of military roles: warrior embedded in the realistic perspective on security and peacekeeper grounded in the liberal approach. Finally, it examines the dynamics of the modern military role in the light of the internal-external security nexus. The article shows that the contemporary military role needs not only to combine warrior and peacekeeper roles but also develop some new elements in order to meet the requirements of the contemporary security context.The article begins by setting a theoretical framework that allows for an analysis of drivers of change of the military role. It then moves towards an examination of the contextual drivers of change which influence the two traditional conceptualisations of military role: a “warrior” and a “peacekeeper”. Next, the article turns towards the topic of internal-external security nexus as characteristic to the contemporary security context. Finally, it considers the contextual drivers of change within two areas of military involvement: domestic counter-terrorism operations and cyber security. The article ends with three main conclusions. Firstly, the contemporary military role requires more adaptability with regards to referent objects. Secondly, the contemporary military role requires more flexibility with regards to countering threats and the application of violence. Thirdly, the flexibility of the contemporary military role is necessitated by close collaboration with other actors who participate in provision of security.

PL

The article offers an overview and reflection on the dynamics of the military role taking into account different security contexts and significant others. It analyses two dominant types of military roles: warrior embedded in the realistic perspective on security and peacekeeper grounded in the liberal approach. Finally, it examines the dynamics of the modern military role in the light of the internal-external security nexus. The article shows that the contemporary military role needs not only to combine warrior and peacekeeper roles but also develop some new elements in order to meet the requirements of the contemporary security context.

Keywords

EN

Role theory; military role; warrior; peacekeeper; internal-external security nexus

PL

role theory; military role; warrior; peacekeeper; internal-external security nexus

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej
• Journal: Annales Universitatis Mariae Curie-Skłodowska, sectio K – Politologia
• Year: 2018
• Volume: 25
• Issue: 2

Dates

published

2018

online

2019-02-05

Contributors

author

Agata Mazurkiewicz

References

• Bartunek, R. 2017. Troops Switch Tactics on Belgium’s Streets to Guard against Attacks, “Reuters”, 29.08., https://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-attacks-belgium-military/troops-switch-tactics-on-belgiums-streets-to-guard-against-attacks-idUSKCN1B90Q6 (access: 23.11.2018).
• Biddle, B. 1986. Recent Development in Role Theory, “Annual Review of Sociology”, vol. 12, p. 67–92.
• Bigo, D. 2001. Internal and External Security(Ies): The Möbius Ribbon [in:] Identities, Borders, Orders. Rethinking International Relations Theory, M. Albert, D. Jacobson, and Y. Lapid (eds.), University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, p. 91–116.
• Boeke, S., Heinl, C.H., and Veenendaal, M. A. 2015. Civil-Military Relations and International Military Cooperation in Cyber Security: Common Challenges & State Practices across Asia and Europe, [in:] 7th International Conference on Cyber Conflict. Architectures in Cyberspace, Vol. 2015–Janua, M. Maybaum, A. Osula, and L. Lindström (eds.), NATO CCD COE Publications, Tallin, p. 69–80.
• Broesder, W.A., Op den Buijs, T.P., Vogelaar, A.L.W., Euwema, M.C. 2015. Can Soldiers Combine Swords and Ploughshares?: The Construction of the Warrior-Peacekeeper Role Identity Survey (WPRIS), “Armed Forces & Society”, vol. 41(3), p. 519–40, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X14539326.
• Buzan, B., Waever, O., de Wilde, J. 1998. Security: A New Framework for Analysis, Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder, London.
• Campbell, D. 1992. Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
• Campbell, D.J., Campbell, K.M. 2010. Soldiers as Police Officers/ Police Officers as Soldiers: Role Evolution and Revolution in the United States, “Armed Forces & Society”, vol. 36(2), p. 327–50, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X09335945.
• Castells, M. 2008. The New Public Sphere: Global Civil Society, Communication Networks, and Global Governance, “The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science”, vol. 616(1), p. 78–93, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716207311877.
• Chandler, D. 2004. The Responsibility to Protect? Imposing the ‘Liberal Peace’, “International Peacekeeping”, vol. 11(1), p. 59–81, DOI: https://doi.org/abs/10.1080/1353331042000228454.
• Chrisafis, A. 2016. Thousands of Troops on Paris Streets but Are They France’s New Maginot Line?, “The Guardian”, 15.04., https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/15/paris-attacks-operation-sentinelle-soldiers-patrolling-streets-france-safer (access: 23.11.2018).
• Coker, C. 2007. The Warrior Ethos. Military Culture and the War on Terror, Routledge, London-New York.
• Côté, A. 2016. Agents without Agency: Assessing the Role of the Audience in Securitization Theory, “Security Dialogue”, vol. 47(6), p. 541–58, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010616672150.
• Dalgaard-Nielsen, A. 2010. Violent Radicalization in Europe: What We Know and What We Do Not Know, “Studies in Conflict and Terrorism”, vol. 33(9), p. 797–814, DOI: https://doi.org/abs/10.1080/1057610X.2010.501423.
• Darnton, G. 2006. Information Warfare and the Laws of War, [in:] Cyberwar, Netwar and the Revolution in Military Affairs, E. Halpin, P. Trevorrow, D. Webb, and S. Wright (eds.), Palgrave Macmillan, New York, p. 139–53.
• La Defence. 2015. Plaisirs D’Hiver Sous Haute Surveillance, “www.mil.be”, 11.12., https://www.mil.be/fr/article/plaisirs-dhiver-sous-haute-surveillance (access: 23.11.2018).
• La Defence. 2017. 21 Juillet: Fier de Vigilant Guardian, “www.mil.be”, 10.07, https://www.mil.be/fr/article/21-juillet-fier-de-vigilant-guardian (access: 20.11.2017).
• Dunn Cavelty, M. 2013. Cyber Security, [in:] Contemporary Security Studies, A. Collins, Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. 362–78.
• Edmunds, T. 2006. What Are Armed Forces For? The Changing Nature of Military Roles in Europe, “International Affairs”, vol. 82(6), p. 1059–1075, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2346.2006.00588.x.
• Eriksson, J., and Rhinard, M. 2009. The Internal—External Security Nexus. Notes on an Emerging Research Agenda, “Cooperation and Conflict”, vol. 44(3), p. 243–267, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836709106215.
• Franke, V.C. 1999a. Preparing for Peace: Military Identity, Value Orientations, and Professional Military Education, Praeger Publishers, Westport.
• Franke, V.C. 1999b. Resolving Identity Tensions: The Case of the Peacekeeper, “The Journal of Conflict Studies”, vol. 19(2), p. 124–143.
• Hansen, W., Ramsbotham, O., and Woodhouse, T. 2004. Hawks and Doves: Peacekeeping and Conflict Resolution, [in:] Transforming Ethnopolitical Conflict, A. Austin, M. Fischer, and N. Ropers (eds.), VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden, p. 295–319.
• Her Majesty’s Government. 2016. National Cyber Security Strategy 2016, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/567242/national_cyber_security_strategy_2016.pdf (access: 23.11.2018).
• Her Majesty Government. 2015. National Security Strategy and Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015: A Secure and Prosperous United Kingdom, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/478933/52309_Cm_9161_NSS_SD_Review_web_only.pdf (access 20.11.2017).
• Hernandez, N. 2017. L’opération Sentinelle, Le Changement Dans La Continuité, “France Inter”, 30.10., https://www.franceinter.fr/emissions/le-zoom-de-la-redaction/le-zoom-de-la-redaction-30-octobre-2017 (access: 20.11.2017).
• Herzog, S. 2011. Revisiting the Estonian Cyber Attacks: Digital Threats and Multinational Responses, “Journal of Strategic Security”, vol. 4(2), p. 49–60, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5038/1944-0472.4.2.3.
• Hirst, A. 2017. Military Replaces Nuclear Police at Sizewell in Operation Temperer Response to Manchester Terrorist Bombing, “East Anglian Daily Times”, 24.05., www.eadt.co.uk/news/armed-soldiers-at-sizewell-as-part-of-operation-temperer-response-to-manchester-terrorist-bombing-1-5033142 (access: 23.11.2018).
• Huntington, S. 1957. Soldier and the State: The Theory and Politics of Civil-Military Relations, Belknap Press, Harvard.
• Italian Presidency of the Council of Ministers. 2013. National Strategic Framework for Cyberspace Security, https://www.sicurezzanazionale.gov.it/sisr.nsf/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/italian-national-strategic-framework-for-cyberspace-security.pdf (access: 23.11.2018).
• Last, D.M. 1997. Winning the Savage Wars of Peace: What the Manwaring Paradigm Tells Us, “SSRN Electronic Journal”, July, p. 1–23, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2459736.
• Loukas, G. 2015. Cyber-Physical Attacks: A Growing Invisible Threat, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
• Lutterbeck, D. 2004. Between Police and Military. The New Security Agenda and the Rise of Gendarmeries, “Cooperation and Conflict”, vol. 39(1), p. 45–68, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0010836704040832.
• Lutz, J., and Lutz, B. 2013. Terrorism, [in:] Contemporary Security Studies, A. Collins (ed.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. 273–288.
• Manigart, P. 2017. The Blurring of Boundaries Between Security Organizations in Belgium: A Sociological Approach, [in:] Vervloeiing interne en externe veiligheid, T. Kansil, W. Bruggeman, J. Terpstra, and J. Janssens (eds.), Maklu, Antwerpern – Apeldoorn, p. 75–90.
• May, T. 2017. PM Statement Following Second COBR Meeting on Manchester Attack, Her Majesty’s Government, 23.05., https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-statement-following-second-cobr-meeting-on-manchester-attack-23-may-2017 (access: 20.11.2017).
• McAuley, J. 2016. In France, Are Soldiers Outside the Eiffel Tower and the Louvre Really Worth It?, “The Washington Post”, 04.06., https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/in-france-are-soldiers-outside-the-eiffel-tower-and-the-louve-really-worth-it/2016/06/04/e542f600-2524-11e6-b944-52f7b1793dae_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.8e2e0854d311 (access: 20.11.2017).
• Moskos, C. C. 1976. The Military, “Annual Review of Sociology”, vol. 2(1), p. 55–77, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.02.080176.000415.
• NATO Public Diplomacy Division. 2016. NATO Cyber Defence Fact Sheet, https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2016_07/20160627_1607-factsheet-cyber-defence-eng.pdf (access: 23.11.2018).
• North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. 2016. Warsaw Summit Communiqué. Warsaw: North Atlantic Council, http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_133169.htm (access: 23.11.2018).
• Radziwill, Y. 2015. Cyber-Attacks and the Exploitable Imperfections of International Law, Brill, Leiden.
• Röhrig, W., Smeaton, R. 2014. Cyber Security and Cyber Defence in the European Union. Opportunities, Synergies and Challenges, “Cyber Security Review”, p. 23–27, https://www.eda.europa.eu/docs/default-source/documents/23-27-wolfgang-r%C3%B6hrig-and-j-p-r-smeaton-article.pdf (access: 24.11.2018).
• Secrétariat Général de la Défense et de la Sécurité Nationale. 2015. French National Strategy Digital Security Strategy, Secrétariat Général de la Défense et de la Sécurité Nationale, https://www.enisa.europa.eu/topics/national-cyber-security-strategies/ncss-map/strategies/information-systems-defence-and-security-frances-strategy (access: 24.11.2018).
• Siroli, G. P. 2006. Strategic Information Warfare: An Introduction, [in:] Cyberwar, Netwar and the Revolution in Military Affairs, E. Halpin, P. Trevorrow, D. Webb, and S. Wright (eds.), Palgrave Macmillan, New York, p. 32–48.
• Smith-Spark, L. and Jordan, C. 2017. London Attack: Khalid Masood Named as Perpetrator, “CNN”, 24.04., http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/23/europe/london-attack/index.html (access: 23.11.2018).
• Smith, M. J. 1986. Realist Thought from Weber to Kissinger, Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge.
• Svircsev Tresch, T. 2007. Multicultural Challenges for Armed Forces in Theater, “Military Power Revue der Schweizer Armee”, vol. 2, p. 34–43.
• The Federal Government of Germany. 2016. White Paper on German Security Policy and the Future of the Bundeswehr, http://www.gmfus.org/publications/white-paper-german-security-policy-and-future-bundeswehr (access: 24.11.2018).
• Thelier, T. 2010. Societal Security, [in:] The Routledge Handbook of Security Studies, M. Dunn Cavelty and V. Mauer (eds.), Routledge, London-New York, p. 105–114.
• Thies, C. 2010. Role Theory and Foreign Policy, [in:] The International Studies Encyclopedia, R.A. Denemark (ed.), International Studies Association (ISA), p. 319–35, http://myweb.uiowa.edu/bhlai/workshop/role.pdf (access: 17.12.1014).
• UN DPKO and UN DFS. 2008. United Nations Peacekeeping Operations: Principles and Guidelines. United Nations, New York, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/abs/10.1080/13533310802396475.
• United Nations. 2018. Our History | United Nations Peacekeeping, “Peacekeeping.UN.org”, https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/our-history (access: 26.04.2018).
• Watson, S. 2011. The ‘Human’ as Referent Object?: Humanitarianism as Securitization, “Security Dialogue”, vol. 42(1), p. 3–20, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0967010610393549.
• Weiss, T. 2011. The Blurring Border between the Police and the Military, “Cooperation and Conflict”, vol. 46(3), p. 396–405, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0010836711416961.
• Wilner, A.S. and Dubouloz, C.J. 2010. Homegrown Terrorism and Transformative Learning: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Understanding Radicalization, “Global Change, Peace and Security”, vol. 22(1), p. 33–51, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14781150903487956.

Identifiers

DOI

10.17951/k.2018.25.2.7-24