Abstract
This essay discusses how multinational cooperation has become a dominant feature of international military operations by examining its dimensions and characteristics, as well as the challenges and chances it poses. The first part of the essay deals with the changes in the international scenarios that have increased the phenomenon. The second part, besides providing some remarks on models and terminology, identifies a number of potential areas of conflict or stress factors between armed forces of cooperating countries. The essay examines not only the challenges to mutual trust and cohesion among all organizational actors but also how from the positive interaction of different national cultures a new hybrid multinational culture may arise. Military sociology, through research on multinational cooperation, could provide new keys of interpretation for the broad intercultural processes and dynamics that characterize today’s societies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The Hellenic League was the association of Greek city-states during the Greco-Persian wars of the 5th century B.C.
- 2.
- 3.
In general, interoperability refers to the capability of units, forces or systems to offer services to and accept services from units, forces and systems, using these services to enable them to operate effectively together. NATO has accomplished a huge organizational task by creating the so called “standard operating procedures” (SOPs) to achieve interoperability.
- 4.
According to Tugsbilguun, SCO represents a mature security organization which doesn’t necessarily have to conform to traditional alliance theories (Tugsbilguun 2008–2009).
- 5.
Other multinational military exercises have been carried out in this area, as in the case of the Central Asian Battalion (CentrAsBat) exercises, organized to improve interaction with the central Asian States, by focusing on peacekeeping/humanitarian operations and exercising command, control, and logistics within a multinational framework. CentrAsBat exercises have been conducted in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. Participating nations (Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, United Kingdom, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Mongolia as well as a US battalion) used these exercises as a tool to increase interoperability and improve the participating forces’ abilities to acquire a good level of cooperation conducting basic peacekeeping and humanitarian operations.
- 6.
Good examples of such command structures can be seen in many UN operations such as UNPROFOR (United Nations Protection Force in Former Yugoslavia) and UNAMIR (United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda).
- 7.
According to King (2011) in his research on the formation of a transnational network of headquarters, the British defence doctrine highlights a war fighting ethos as one of its central military principles, distinguishing Britain’s armed forces from other European ones; the French leadership style is highly dirigiste, reflecting a command culture that impedes operational planning and initiative; on the contrary the Bundeswehr has a “weak” command culture.
- 8.
Generally speaking, culture is a system of shared beliefs, values, customs, behaviours, and artefacts on the basis of which people interpret and behave, individually and in groups. For further discussion on the distinctive features of military culture, see chapter Military Culture by J. Soeters, in section IV of this volume.
- 9.
Geert Hoftsede (1991) identified five dimensions in cultural differentiation: (a) power distance (the degree of inequality among people that is considered normal); (b) uncertainty avoidance (the degree of preference of situations in which there are clear rules); (c) masculinity vs. femininity (the degree to which values like assertiveness, performance, success, and competition typically associated with the role of men prevail over values like the quality of life, warm personal relationships, service and care for the weak, that are more associated with the role of women); (d) individualism vs. collectivism (the degree whether one’s identity is defined by personal choices and achievements or by the character of the collectivity; (5) long-term versus short-term orientation (the degree to which a culture embraces, or does not embrace, future-oriented values, such as perseverance and thrift).
- 10.
In general, the military personnel of the small and medium powers have shown a different approach. Italian soldiers, for example, have managed to integrate their new tasks with their traditional professional mission without significant difficulties (Battistelli 1996).
- 11.
Criminal, violent or dubious actions perpetrated by the members of an organization during the implementation of their duties can remain as open wounds in their institutional image, representing a sort of “organizational trauma”. One could talk of a trauma of the “culpable” ones as a concept relating to a common responsibility shared by all the members of the organization, rather than to specific individuals, that is, the “actual” offenders. The criminal facts mark a decisive and negative turning point in the history of the organization, which can’t represent itself anymore in its usual manner. The organizational identity undergoes a crisis and it is necessary to introduce procedures aimed at restoring a sense of belonging to it. The case of Dutchbat (the UNPROFOR’s Dutch Battalion), after the massacre of Srebrenica in 1995, is a relevant example.
- 12.
As it emerged from field research studies in Kosovo and Bosnia, (Maniscalco 2010), the more the risk increases, the less the multi-national cooperation seems to work.
- 13.
Almost all research reports highlighted language difficulties and differences in the interpretation of even crucial information, such as a commander’s intent, among different nationalities. The language barriers and the lack of understanding can lead to miscommunications in performing the mission’s duties.
- 14.
Multinational contingents may include a great variety of religions: Catholicism, Protestantism, Orthodox Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and others. Each one of these has special requirements, including different food restrictions, times for praying and fasting, religious holidays, etc. Sometimes these differences may be unbridgeable and provide a substantial barrier to mutual understanding and cohesion.
- 15.
For further discussion on the issues related to the integration of women in the armed forces, see chapter Participation and Change in Gendered Organization. Women in the Military Forces, by M. Nuciari, in section IV of this volume.
- 16.
The military organizational culture can fall either in the “burocratic type” or the “network type”, although in general the armed forces show a strong tendency towards bureaucratization with an authoritarian style of leadership and communication. The military organization is functionally shaped by bureaucracy, because of the continuous need for readiness and difficulties in controlling the implementation of duties in unsafe situations, which require the certainty of command, typically associated with bureaucracy.
- 17.
Some research studies focusing on the mutual perceptions of soldiers working in multinational units have highlighted the persistence of stereotypes and prejudices. As Hofstede (1991) explains, intercultural encounters among groups, rather than with single foreign individuals, provoke group feelings that are not automatically and mutually understood. Indeed, intercultural encounters usually confirm each group in its own identity. The members of the other group are not perceived as individuals but in a stereotyped manner.
- 18.
For an analysis of leadership, see chapter Leadership in the military: the foundations and process of change, by U. Lebel, in section V of this volume.
- 19.
I am referring here to the monumental study conducted by Stouffer (1949).
References
Adam, G., & Ben-Ari, G. (2006). Transforming European militaries: Coalition operations and the technology gap. London: Routledge.
Ammendola, T. (Ed.). (1999). Missione in Bosnia. Milano: Franco Angeli.
Aubry, G. (2010). L’incontro con l’Altro nel teatro Balcanico. Lavoro e loisir nella prospettiva dei militari italiani. In M. L. Maniscalco (Ed.), La pace nel vicinato (pp. 93–111). Milano: Franco Angeli.
Bahu, J. (1990). Gedanken zur Deutsch-Französischen Verteidigungskooperation und zur Deutsch-Französischen Brigade. In P. Klein (Ed.), Deutsch-französische Verteidigungskooperation—Das Beispiel der Deutsch-Französischen Brigade (pp. 39–44). Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Battistelli, F. (1996). Sociologia dei militari italiani nell’era del peace-keeping. Milano: Franco Angeli.
Baud, J. (2003). La guerre asymétrique ou la défaite du vainqueur. France: Éditions du Rocher.
Ben-Ari, E., & Efrat, E. (2001). Blue helmets and white armor. Multi-nationalism and multi-culturalism among UN Peacekeeping Forces. City & Society, 13(2), 271–302.
Bensahel, N. (2003). Preparing for coalition operations, in L. E. Davis & J. Shapiro (Eds.), The U.S. Army and the new national security strategy, Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
Bisho, A. (2004). Multinational operations. Kingston, Ontario, Canada: Canadian Forces College.
Bowman, S. (1997). Historical and cultural influences on coalition operations. In T. J. Marshall et al. (Eds.), Problems and solutions in future coalition operations (pp. 2–12). Carlisle PA: US Army War College Strategic Studies Institute.
Burdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1970). La reproduction: Éléments pour une théorie du système d’enseignement. Paris: Minuit.
Burk, J. (Ed.). (1994). The military in new times: Adapting armed forces to a turbulent world. Boulder, CO, Westview Press.
Caforio, G. (2008). The asymmetric warfare: In search of a symmetry. In G. Caforio et al. (Eds.), Armed forces and conflict resolution: A sociological perspectives (pp. 7–23). Bingley UK: Emerald Group.
Caforio, G. (2012). The military profession and asymmetric warfare. In G. Kümmel & J. Soeters (Eds.), New wars, new militaries, new soldiers: Conflicts, the armed forces and soldierly subject (pp. 3–18). Bingley UK: Emerald Group.
Caforio, G. (Ed.). (2013). Soldiers without frontiers: The view from the ground. Experiences of asymmetric warfare. Acireale-Roma: Bonanno.
Durell-Young, T. (1997). Command in coalition operations. In T. J. Marshall et al. (Eds.), Problems and solutions in future coalition operations (pp. 23–47). Carlisle PA: US Army War College Strategic Studies Institute.
Elron, E., et al. (1999). Why don’t they fight each other? Cultural diversity and operational unity in multinational forces. Armed Forces & Society, 26(1), 73–98.
Elron, E., et al. (2003). Cooperation and coordination across cultures in the peacekeeping forces: Individual and organizational integrating mechanisms. In T. W. Britt & A. B. Adler (Eds.), The psychology of the peacekeeper. Lesson from the Field (pp. 261–282). Westport CT: Praeger.
Fabian, L. (1971). Soldiers without enemies. Washington: Brooking Istitution.
Gareis, S. B. (2007). Military multinationality as a European challenge. La cittadinanza europea, IV(2), 93–122.
Gareis, S. B., & Hagen, U. (2005). “The difficult practice of military multinationality: The multinational corps Northeast in Szczecin. In F. Kernic et al. (Eds.), The European armed forces in transition: A comparative analysis (pp. 157–176). Berlin: Peter Lang.
Gasperini, G., et al. (2001). Sociological aspects concerning the relations within contingents of multinational units. The case of the Italian-Slovenian-Hungarian Brigade. Gaeta: A&P.
Guibert N. (2013). Manœuvres inédites d’une flottille chinoise en mer Méditerranée. Le Monde, 3, Mars.
Hagen, U., et al. (2003). True love. A study in integrated multinationality within 1. (German/Netherlands) corps. Breda&Strausberg: December, SOWI.
Hoftsede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Janowitz, M. (1960). The professional soldier. A sociological and political portrait. Glencoe: The Free Press.
Kaldor, M. (1999). New and old wars, organized violence in a global era. Cambridge: Polity Press.
King, A. (2011). The transformation of Europe’s armed forces. From Rhine to Afghanistan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Klein, P. (1993). Probleme in multinationalen militärischen Verbänden am Beispiel der Deutsch-Französischen Brigade. München: SOWI Arbeitspapier, n. 83.
Klein, P., & Lippert, E. (1991). Die Deutsch-Französische Brigade als Beispiel für die Integration Europas. München: SOWI Arbeitspapier, n. 53.
Klein, P., & Kümmel, G. (2000). The internationalization of military life: Necessity, problems and prospects of multinational armed forces. In G. Kümmel & A. Prüfert (Eds.), Military sociology: The richness of a discipline (pp. 311–328). Baden Baden: Nomos.
Lescoutre, C. S. R. (2003). Command structure for coalition operations: A template for future force Commanders. Kingston, Ontario, Canada: Canadian Forces College.
Leonard, N., et al. (Eds.). (2008). Military co-operation in multinational missions: The case of EUFOR in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Strausberg: SOWI.
Longhurst, K. (2000). The concept of strategic culture. In G. Kümmel & A. Prüfert (Eds.), Military sociology: The richness of a discipline (pp. 301–310). Baden Baden: Nomos.
Maniscalco, M. L. (2008a). La pace in rivolta. Milano: Franco Angeli.
Maniscalco, M. L. (2008b). Working in International Environments. In N. Leonard et al. (Eds.), Military co-operation in multinational missions: the case of EUFOR in Bosnia and Herzegovina (pp. 89–100). Strausberg: SOWI.
Maniscalco, M. L. (a cura di) (2010). La pace nel vicinato. Milano: Franco Angeli.
Marshall, T. J., et al. (Eds.). (1997). Problems and solutions in future coalitions. Carlisle PA: Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College.
Merton, R. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure. New York: Free Press.
Miller, L. (1997). Do soldiers hate peacekeeping? The case of preventive diplomacy operations in Macedonia. Armed Forces & Society, 23(3, Spring), 415–450.
Miller, L., & Moskos, C. (1995). Humanitarians or warriors? Race, gender and combat status in operation restore hope. Armed Forces & Society, 21(4, Summer), 615–637.
Moskos, C. (1975). “ The American Combat Soldier in Vietnam” in The. Journal of Social Issues, 31(4), 25–37.
Moskos, C. (1976). Peace soldiers: The sociology of United Nations Military Forces. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Moskos, C., et al. (2000). The postmodern military. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Münkler, H. (2002). Die neuen Kriege. Reinbek: Rowohlt.
Plante, E. D. J. (1998). Leading a multinational force without leaving anyone behind: The human dimensions of marginalisation. Ottawa, Canada: Department of National Defence.
Ruffa, C. (2014). What peacekeepers think and do: An exploratory study of French, Ghanaian, Italian and South Korean Armies in the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon. Armed Forces & Society, 40(2), 199–225.
Resteigne, D., & Soeters, J. (2007). Belgian troops in UNIFIL. In C. M. Coops & T. S. Tresch (Eds.), Cultural challenges in military operations (pp. 185–196). Rome: NATO Defense College.
Rush, R. S., & Epley, W. W. (Eds.). (2006). Multinational operations, alliances, and international military cooperation. Past and future. Washington DC: Center of Military History United States Army.
Savage, P. L., & Gabriel, R. A. (1976). Cohesion and disintegration in the American Army: An alternative perspective. Armed Forces & Society, 2, 340–376.
Segal, D. R., & Wechsler, S. M. (Eds.). (1993). Peacekeepers and their wives. Westport CT: Greenwood Press.
Soeters, J., & Bos-Bakx, M. (2003). Cross-cultural issues in peacekeeping operations. In T. W. Britt & B. Adler (Eds.), Psychology of the peacekeeper, lessons from the field (pp. 283–294). Westport: Praeger Publishers.
Soeters, J., & Moelker, R. (2003). Soldat- Militär- Politik- Gesellschaft. Facetten militärbezogener sozialwissenschaftlicher Forschung. In G. Kümmel & S. Collmer (Eds.), Soldat—Militär—Politik—Gesellschaft. Facetten militärbezogener Sozialwissenschaftlicher Forschung (pp. 63–75). Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Soeters, J., & Manigart, P. (2008a). Introduction, In J. Soeters & Manigart P. (Eds.), Military cooperation in multinational peace operations. Managing cultural diversity and crisis response (pp. 16–25). New York: Routledge.
Soeters, J., & Manigart, P. (Eds.). (2008b). Military cooperation in multinational peace operations. Managing cultural diversity and crisis response. New York: Routledge.
Soeters, J., & Tresch, T. S. (2010). Toward cultural integration in multinational peace operations. Defence Studies, 10(01–02), 272–278.
Stouffer, S. A. et al. (1949). Studies in social psychology in World War II (vol. 4). Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
Taylor, I. (2014). China’s peacekeeping efforts in Africa. In T. Tardy & M. Wyss (Eds.), Peacekeeping in Africa. The evolving security architecture. New York: Routledge.
Tomforde, M. (2007). How about pasta and beer? Intercultural challenges of German-Italian cooperation in Kosovo. In C. M. Coops & T. S. Tibor (Eds.), Cultural challenges in military operations (pp. 155–169). Rome: NATO Defense College.
Tugsbilguun, T. (2008–2009). Does the Shanghai cooperation represent an example of a military alliance? The Mongolian Journal of International Affairs (15–16), 59–106.
Yanakiev, Y., & Markov, Z. (2013). Interaction with the military of other countries. In G. Caforio (Ed.), Soldiers without frontiers: The view from the ground. Experiences of asymmetric warfare. Acireale-Roma: Bonanno.
Wieland-Karimi, A., & von Gienanth, T. (2012). Enabling United Nation and regional organizations partnerships in Africa-priorities for the future. International Forum of Challenges of Peace Operations Background Paper, February.
Zanini, M., & Morrison Taw J. (2000). The army and multinational forces compatibility, Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation-MR-D 1154-A.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Maniscalco, M.L. (2018). Military Cooperation in Multinational Missions. In: Caforio, G., Nuciari, M. (eds) Handbook of the Sociology of the Military. Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71602-2_28
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71602-2_28
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-71600-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-71602-2
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)