Abstract
A public relations officer of the US forces used to ask students the following question: ‘What is the purpose of an army?’ The audience was regularly surprised to hear his answer: ‘To kill people and destroy property — in great numbers.’ This statement leads us to two conclusions: Firstly, armed forces are a tool of war, but do not start war themselves; secondly, they are a dangerous instrument in the hands of those who control them.2
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
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
See G. Hoffmann, ‘Zur Legitimität der Kontrolle’, in R. Brecht and P. Klein, eds, Streitkräfte in der Demokratie (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 1994), pp. 11, 17.
Theory founded by Clausewitz; see later: S. Huntington, The Soldier and the State: The Theory and Politics of Civil—Military Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1957) p. 7
see M. Mae Johnson, ‘Civil—Military Relations and Military Reform in Bulgaria’, European Security, 4, 3 (Autumn 1995) 489–90.
J. Kornblum, ‘NATO’s Enlargement. A Natural Progression’, in S. Cam-bone, ed., NATO’s Role in European Security (Washington, DC: CSIS, 1995), p. 16.
J. Köpfer, ‘Vertragliche Grundlagen und Strukturen des westlichen und östlichen Bündnisses’, in Bayerische Landeszentrale für politische Bildungsarbeit, NATO—WP (Munich: Bayerische Landeszentrale für politische Bildungsarbeit, 1980), pp. 111–12
Institute of International Relations, Democratic Control Oyer Security Policy and Armed Forces (Prague: Institute of International Relations, 1995), p. 19.
J. Simon, Central European Civil—Military Relations and NATO Expansion, McNair Paper 39, (Washington, DC: Institute for National Strategic Studies, 1995), p. 154.
R. Joó, The Democratic Control of Armed Forces, Chaillot Paper 23 (Paris: WEU Institute for Security Studies, 1996), pp. 12, 15.
Z. Barany, Soldiers and Politics in Eastern Europe 1945–1990 (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1993), pp. 17, 19
Directorate of Management and Consultancy Services (DMCS), Review of Parliamentarian Oversight of the Hungarian MoD and Control of the Hungarian Defence Forces (London: Ministry of Defence, Study 810, February 1996), p. 51.
L. Starve, ‘Common Interests, Values and Criteria for Action’, in L. Martin and J. Roper, eds, Towards a Common Defence Policy (Paris: WEU Institute for Security Studies 1995), p. 17.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1997 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Manig, W. (1997). Problems of Transformation of the Defence Establishments in Central and Eastern Europe. In: von Bredow, W., Jäger, T., Kümmel, G. (eds) European Security. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-25894-9_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-25894-9_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-25896-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-25894-9
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)