Civil-Military Relations: Is There Really a Problem?

The author has argued in a previous article that Security Sector Reform (SSR) is essentially a melange of Anglo-Saxon Civil-Military Relations (CMR) theory and the traditional dim view of the military usually held by those in the development sector. This article, treats the first component in more detail, since the main theoretical assumptions of SSR about the security sector, the place of the military, and so forth, are essentially dependent on the validity of certain propositions advanced by CMR theorists in the past. Thus, if these propositions are shown to be false, or even incomplete, then there must be important reservations about the validity of much SSR thinking, not to mention practice. It is, indeed, the element of practice which is especially important here, because, unlike CMR which was essentially descriptive, SSR is overtly prescriptive. A theory which describes reality incorrectly or incompletely is unfortunate, but that a doctrine which prescribes action on the basis of a fallacious theory is positively dangerous. Adapted from the source document.