Armed servants : agency, oversight, and civil-military relations / PeterD. Feaver.
نوع المادة :![نص](/opac-tmpl/lib/famfamfam/BK.png)
- text
- unmediated
- volume
- 0674010515 (hbk)
- JK330 F43 2003
نوع المادة | المكتبة الحالية | رقم الطلب | رقم النسخة | حالة | تاريخ الإستحقاق | الباركود | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
UAE Federation Library | مكتبة اتحاد الإمارات General Collection | المجموعات العامة | JK330 F43 2003 (إستعراض الرف(يفتح أدناه)) | C.1 | Library Use Only | داخل المكتبة فقط | 30010000164576 | ||
![]() |
UAE Federation Library | مكتبة اتحاد الإمارات General Collection | المجموعات العامة | JK330 F43 2003 (إستعراض الرف(يفتح أدناه)) | C.2 | المتاح | 30010000164575 |
Includes bibliographical references (pages 337-369) and index.
1. Introduction -- 2. Huntington's Cold War Puzzle -- 3. The Informal Agency Theory -- 4. A Formal Agency Model of Civil-Military Relations -- 5. An Agency Theory Solution to the Cold War Puzzle -- 6. Explaining the Post-Cold War "Crisis," 1990-2000 -- 7. Using Agency Theory to Explore the Use of Force in the Post-Cold War Era -- 8. Conclusion.
"In this book, Peter Feaver proposes an ambitious new theory of civil-military relations in which the civil-military connection is best conceived as a principal-agent relationship, with the civilian executive directing and monitoring the actions of military agents, the "armed servants" of the nation-state. Military obedience is not automatic. It depends on the calculations of both parties, which determine whether the connection will be tight or loose.".
"This model challenges Samuel Huntington's professionalism-based model of civil-military relations, and provides an innovative way of making sense of the U.S. Cold War and post-Cold War experience - especially the distinctively stormy civil-military relations of the Clinton era. In the decade after the Cold War ended, civilians and the military had a variety of run-ins over whether and how to use military force.
These episodes, as interpreted by agency theory, contradict the conventional wisdom that civil-military relations matter only if there is risk of a coup. On the contrary, military professionalism does not by itself ensure unchallenged civilian authority. As Feaver argues, agency theory offers the best foundation for thinking about relations between military and civilian leaders."--BOOK JACKET.