Revolutions and Coups

2019 ◽  
pp. 12-45
Author(s):  
Amy Austin Holmes
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Civilian Control ◽  
Business Elite ◽  
The People ◽  
State Apparatus ◽  
The Military ◽  
Regime Support ◽  
New Framework

Because the revolution in Egypt was directed at the state, it is important to properly conceptualize the state apparatus and the regime that ruled it. Thus, chapter 2 provides an overview of the literature on authoritarian regimes and explains why it is important to distinguish between states and regimes. Hosni Mubarak’s powerful presidency did not preclude the development of a diverse and unruly civil society, including tens of thousands of nongovernmental organizations. A new framework is employed in order to understand which parts of the state apparatus are most crucial during a period of revolutionary upheaval. It is important to distinguish between tools of the regime and pillars of support for the regime; the latter have the ability to either prop up or potentially withdraw their support. Mubarak relied on four pillars of regime support: the military, the business elite, the United States, and the acquiescence of the people. The chapter then turns to an overview of the literature on revolutions and military coups, which have usually been studied separately, as well as the literature on how establishing civilian control over the military constitutes the neuralgic point of democratic consolidation.

Democracy and Excellence: Concord or Conflict?

2007 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 535-537
Author(s):  
Laura Stephenson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Class Structure ◽  
The People ◽  
Democratic Societies ◽  
The Relationship

Democracy and Excellence: Concord or Conflict?, Joseph Romance and Neil Reimer, eds., Westport CN: Praeger, 2005, 166, pp. xiv.This volume is the product of a question, asked by Neal Reimer, about the relationship between democracy and excellence. Reimer provides background for this relationship in the first chapter, noting that it can be framed as government by the people versus standards of the good, true and beautiful. Conflict can arise between the two ideas because democracy prioritizes equality of citizens—but excellence depends upon the recognition of differentiating merit. While democracy provides citizens freedom from a limiting class structure, the lack of structure can make citizens indifferent to pursuing a noble vision of the state. Reimer argues, however, that there is a fundamental harmony between democracy and excellence and that examples of excellence in democratic societies (such as the United States) are many. It is possible and likely that democratic societies will attain excellence in practice.

The United States and the Rise of General Maximiliano Hernández Martínez

1971 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 151-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth J. Grieb
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
El Salvador ◽  
Central America ◽  
American Politics ◽  
State Department ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Central American ◽  
Coup D'etat ◽  
The Military

The militarycoup d'étatwhich installed General Maximiliano Hernández Martínez as President of El Salvador during December 1931 created a crisis involving the 1923 Washington Treaties. By the terms of these accords, the Central American nadons had pledged to withhold recognition from governments seizing power through force in any of the isthmian republics. Although not a signatory of the treaty, the United States based its recognition policy on this principle. Through this means the State Department had attempted to impose some stability in Central America, by discouraging revolts. With the co-operation of the isthmian governments, United States diplomats endeavored to bring pressure to bear on the leaders of any uprising, to deny them the fruits of their victory, and thus reduce the constant series ofcoupsandcounter-coupsthat normally characterized Central American politics.

US Civil-Military Relations in the Gray Zone

2020 ◽  
pp. 263-282
Author(s):  
Sarah Sewall
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
The United States ◽  
Civilian Control ◽  
Gray Zone ◽  
Civil Military Relations ◽  
Civilian Leaders ◽  
The Face ◽  
Military Relations ◽  
The Military

This chapter argues that the changing character of conflict demands rethinking U S civil-military relations. The United States has long relied on a nuclear deterrent and conventional military superiority to defend itself, but its adversaries have changed the rules of the game to exploit civilian vulnerabilities in the U S homeland using non kinetic tools. To ensure continued civilian control of the military use of force and effective management of competition below the threshold of war, civilian leaders must assume greater responsibility for the political and operational management of hostilities in the Gray Zone. Because civilian leaders are underprepared for this new global competition, they will be tempted to default to conventional military solutions. Traditional civil-military frameworks did not envision permanent conflict or the centrality of civilian terrain, capabilities, and operational responsibilities. The United States needs civilian-led tools and approaches to effectively avoid the dual extremes of national immobilization in the face of non kinetic threats and inadvertent escalation of conflict without civilian authorization or intent. Civilian adaptation could also diminish the traditional role of the armed forces in defending the nation. The United States must rewire the relationship of the military and civilians through its decisions about how to manage Gray Zone competition.

American Democracy Reconsidered: Part I

1973 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. J. Sharpe
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Government ◽  
The State ◽  
City Government ◽  
State Governments ◽  
American Democracy ◽  
The People ◽  
The Government ◽  
The One

In his celebrated study of American democracy written in 1888, Lord Bryce reserved his most condemnatory reflections for city government and in a muchquoted passage asserted: ‘There is no denying that the government of cities is the one conspicuous failure of the United States. The deficiencies of the National government tell but little for evil on the welfare of the people. The faults of the State governments are insignificant compared with the extravagance, corruption and mismanagement which mark the administration of most of the great cities'sangeetha.

Bush Characterizes North Korea, Iran and Iraq as “Axis of Evil” Intensifying Debate Over Post-9/11 National Security Strategy

2002 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 2-27
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
North Korea ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Congress ◽  
Security Strategy ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
The People ◽  
National Security Strategy ◽  
The Military

Next week I will go before Congress to lay out my priorities for the coming year. There will be no room for misunderstanding. The most basic commitment of our government will be the security of our country. We will win this war; we will protect our people; and we will work to renew the strength of our economy.Our first priority is the military. The highest calling to protect the people is to strengthen our military. And that will be the priority of the budget I submit to the United States Congress. Those who review our budget must understand that we're asking a lot of our men and women in uniform, and we'll be asking more of them in the future. In return, they deserve every resource, every weapon needed to achieve the final and full victory.

The New Civil-Military Relations

1961 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gene M. Lyons
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Minimum Cost ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fundamental Principle ◽  
Civilian Control ◽  
Military Establishment ◽  
Military Leaders ◽  
Civil Military Relations ◽  
Military Relations ◽  
The Military

Historically the character of civil-military relations in the United States has been dominated by the concept of civilian control of the military. This has largely been a response to the fear of praetorianism. As recently as 1949, for example, the first Hoover Commission asserted that one of the major reasons for strengthening the “means of exercising civilian control” over the defense establishment was to “safeguard our democratic traditions against militarism.” This same warning was raised in the report of the Rockefeller Committee on defense organization in 1953. While the overriding purpose of the committee's recommendations was to provide “the Nation with maximum security at minimum cost,” the report made it clear that this had to be achieved “without danger to our free institutions, based on the fundamental principle of civilian control of the Military Establishment.” Finally, during the debate on the reorganization proposals of 1958, senators and congressmen used the theme of a “Prussianized” military staff to attempt to slow down the trend towards centralization in the military establishment.Despite this imposing support, the concept of civilian control of the military has little significance for contemporary problems of national security in the United States. In the first place, military leaders are divided among themselves, although their differences cannot be reduced to a crass contrast between dichomatic doctrines. Air Force leaders who are gravely concerned over the need to maintain a decisive nuclear retaliatory force are by now acknowledging the need to develop a limited war capability.

Crisis in the Civil-Military Triangle?

2020 ◽  
pp. 191-206
Author(s):  
William E. Rapp
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Civil Military Relations ◽  
Us Military ◽  
The People ◽  
The Us ◽  
High Regard ◽  
The Government ◽  
Military Relations ◽  
The Military

Despite the high regard for the US military by the American public, a number of tensions continue to grow in civil-military relations in the United States. These are exacerbated by a lack of clarity, and thus productive debate, in the various relationships inherent in civil and military interaction. By trisecting civil military relations into the relations between the people and the military, the military and the government, and the people and the government on military issues, this chapter examines the potential for crisis in coming years. Doing so allows for greater theoretical and popular understanding and thus action in addressing the tensions, for there is cause for concern and action in each of the legs of this interconnected triangle.

Religious Liberty and the Founding Fathers

1990 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-102
Author(s):  
Daniel W. Hollis ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Natural Rights ◽  
Religious Liberty ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
Founding Fathers ◽  
The People

This essay traces the development of the idea of religious liberty from its origins among the "Commonwealthmen" in seventeenth-century England to its embodiment in the United States Constitution. The Commonwealthmen believed that the theory of natural law-natural rights guaranteed civil liberties, including religious liberty, and that these natural rights should be protected by the state. The Commonwealthmen also believed in a fundamental constitution derived from the people rather than the state, and the concept of individual sovereignty.

The Role of the National Problem in the Disintegration of the Soviet Union

2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-69
Author(s):  
Chaim Shinar
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Charismatic Leadership ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The People ◽  
Democratic Polity ◽  
Political Idea ◽  
Independent States

‘The Soviet Union, like the United States, was a country established to serve and promote a political idea, not to be a state for nations. The United States was founded in order to be a modern democratic polity; the Soviet Union in order to promote Marxism-Leninism. The Soviet Union thus began as a ‘modern,’ post-imperialist state. The cement holding the state together was a compound of ideology, a hierarchical, disciplinary party, charismatic leadership, and external treats. [In the 80s] this cement was crumbling… [The Soviet] state had lost its raison d’être and the people turned to the traditional and conventional basis of the state – that is, the nation. But since this was a multinational state – and unlike the multiethnic United States, most peoples in the USSR have distinct languages and territories of their own – [they returned to them to establish independent states.]’1

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document