How have nations adapted their defence policies to the post-Cold War world? What is required to manage armed forces effectively in a democracy? This Institute for Security Studies (ISS) paper provides a practical guide to defence transformation, beginning with fundamental questions about the role and place of the military in civil society. It argues that defence transformation is not a single process with a generic blueprint; rather it must be an organic process that grows out of each country’s particular circumstances.
The military’s role is to provide violence, or the threat of it, at the behest of the state. It needs to be able to perform tasks effectively in a way that is responsive to public opinion, without compromising the political process. Military operations must be planned and implemented so they are both practical and acceptable to the public. The planning and implementation of defence transformation should be informed by consideration of a particular state’s wants and needs.
Civil-military relationships based on power and subordination can encourage resentment and lack of cooperation. Establishing a sound structure of civil-military relations based on mutual trust and clearly defined roles and responsibilities is essential. The following management points are important to success:
- Civil control where the military is obedient to the state that employs it on behalf of its citizens. However, formal and institutional methods of control are useless unless the assent of the military is first obtained. Informal methods, such as interpenetration of military and civilian elites and forging productive relationships between the military and civil society can be more effective.
- An interactive system of control utilising the skills of both civilian and military personnel; the unworkable distinction between political and military issues should be abandoned. Building individual relationships and a spirit of cooperation across institutional boundaries is important. The successful planning and implementation of military operations requires mutual respect of expertise between the political leadership, civilian and military officials.
Defence policy is largely a series of accommodations made to suit the inevitable, and involves respecting immovable forces. Strategies generally arise from the political context, rather than being based on issues of principle:
- Defence strategies are shaped by a state’s size and position, its allies and neighbours, the money available and domestic political factors.
- In determining strategy, major considerations include whether to specialise or develop all-round capabilities, forming alliances, contributions to UN and other operations, and development of WMDs.
- Defence ministries vary enormously in their size, scope and organisation. The separation or integration of the functions of planning and conducting operations, and advising on defence policy, is the biggest reason for organisational differences between ministries.
- Defence programme formulation should be the responsibility of defence ministries’ central staffs, making it easier to balance commitments and resources and avoid duplication between services.
- Defence policy and force structure should be decided together, by the same people. This aids both effective planning and cost efficiency.
