Betz, David J. (2002) Politics of Mimicry
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Betz, David J. (2002) Politics of mimicry - politics of exclusion: comparing post-communist civil-military relations in Poland and Hungary, Russia and Ukraine, 1991-1999. PhD thesis http://theses.gla.ac.uk/3891/ Copyright and moral rights for this thesis are retained by the author A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the Author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the Author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given Glasgow Theses Service http://theses.gla.ac.uk/ [email protected] POLITICS OF MIMICRY- POLITICS OF EXCLUSION: COMPARING POST-COMMUNIST CIVIL-MILITARY RELATIONS IN POLAND AND HUNGARY, RUSSIA AND UKRAINE, 1991-1999 David J. Betz Submitted in partial requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Research (PhD) to the Department of Central and East European Studies, University of Glasgow, 8 January 2002. © David J. Betz, 2002 ABSTRACT The dissertation looks at the transformation of civil-military relations in Poland and Hungary, Russia and Ukraine between the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact in July 1991 and the enlargement of NATO in March 1999. It presents new qualitative data based on approximately 120 elite interviews conducted by the author of politicians, military officers, defence analysts, and journalists in the countries in the study. In general, the focus is on the civilian side of the civil-military equation. Specifically, the work assesses the state of civil-military relations on the basis of three interconnected indicators: the making of security policy and defence reform as a test of civilian control, the role of civilians in the ministry of defence, and the strength of agencies of civilian oversight. It is argued that the differences observed in the state of civil-military relations among the states in the study can be explained by the interaction of three main factors. In Poland and Hungary, the external incentives to establish democratic control of the armed forces reform were positive, while in Russia and Ukraine the impact of external actors- of which NATO was by far the most significant- was negative or ambiguous. The attitude of the political and military elite in Poland and Hungary was more open to the adoption of new norms of civil-military relations than was that of the elite in Russia and Ukraine. And in Poland and Hungary the state of the polity and economy presented a less significant internal constraint on reform. The central finding of the dissertation is that in Poland and Hungary reformers tried - with mixed success -to adopt the forms of democratic civil-military relations as part of their drive to integrate with Western politico-military structures without seeking to understand the logic behind them. The result was a "politics of mimicry", a process of imperfect copying of liberal-democratic norms of civil-military relations which, nonetheless, culminated in these countries being admitted to NATO in 1999 . In Ukraine and Russia, by contrast, in a time of profound budgetary exigency, the armed forces were left to solve their own problems absent much civilian control except that exercised infrequently and arbitrarily by the head of state. The result was a "politics of exclusion", the systematic denial of any role in civilian oversight of all political actors excepting the president. By the end of 1999, these countries were barely beginning to develop some form of democratic civil-military relations, and that only tentatively. In conclusion the work suggests that the problem of civil-military relations in the region has been more a matter of sound public administration of a vital state activity than a matter of preventing coups. As such, it may be best addressed from the perspective of public administration rather than from the traditional political science or sociological perspectives of extant theory. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work is the culmination of a process of inquiry that began with a Masters thesis on "The New Russian Military" supervised by Professor Carl G. Jacobsen (Carleton University, Canada) who died in 2001. Professor Jacobsen did his PhD in Glasgow and his stories of the place were instrumental in my choosing to study here. He is missed. I owe an academic and even greater personal debt to Professor Harald Von Riekhoff (Carleton University) for being a mentor since 1992. His dedication to his craft and his students is a great inspiration to me. Professor Piotr Dutkiewicz (Carleton University) deserves particular credit for the notion and term "politics of mimicry" which at some subconscious level informed my understanding of the issue of civil-military transformation throughout the project. My incorporation of the term in the title is a salute to his intellect and insight. In the conduct of the research a few people offered substantial assistance in providing contacts, making introductions and giving advice. I would not have been able to do the work without the help of Leonid Polyakov in Kiev, Wladyslaw Staron in Warsaw, and Zoltan Szenes in Budapest. Valeriy Volkov in Moscow- if not always a great help- has been a great friend. Much of my research dovetailed with the research programme of the Canadian Department of National Defence's Democratic Civil-Military Relations Programme (DCMRP). In 1997-1998 I was the programme officer for DCMRP, and in 1999 I was a researcher on its Russian and Czech portions. DCMRP proved invaluable to me in the building of a network of contacts throughout Eastern Europe. I am grateful to the Department of National Defence. I also thank the University of Glasgow for the postgraduate scholarship and the British government for the Overseas Research Award that made the research financially feasible. I owe a great debt to my supervisors, Professors John Lowenhardt and Evan Mawdsley. Their guidance, criticism and careful reading greatly improved the dissertation. am glad of their support and attention to detail. Above all I am grateful to my wife, Taisha, for her patience, support and love. Putting up with the bad moods of a dyslexic with writer's block is no easy thing. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction . 1 The Context of Civil-Military Reform in Eastern Europe ............... 3 Central Issues of Civil-Military Reform in Eastern Europe ............. 7 Chapter 1: Approaches to Civil-Military Relations ............................... 9 Conceptualising Civil-Military Relations: Autonomy and Instrumentality ... 9 The Liberal Model of Civil-Military Relations ....................... 11 Civil-Military Relations in (Non-Post-Communist) Transition ........... 14 Democratic Civil-Military Relations .............................. 16 1.1: Putting it all Together- Indicators of Civil-Military Reform in Eastern Europe 23 Dependent Variables ......................................... 24 Independent Variables ........................................ 26 1.2: Methodology ................................................. 29 Structured, Focussed Comparison ............................. 29 Qualitative vs Quantitative Data ................................ 30 Chapter 2: Security Policy-Making and Defence Reform ......................... 32 The Soviet-Type Defence Establishment ......................... 33 2.1: Security Policy-Making and Defence Reform - Central Europe .......... 37 From the Revolutions of 1989 to the Partnership for Peace: Rapid Demilitarisation, Limited Reform .......................... 39 Partnership for Peace To NATO: A More Pro-Active Approach to Defining Priorities ............................................ 47 The First Year in NATO: Implementing Reforms, Persisting Problems ... 57 2.2: Security Policy-Making and Defence Reform - Former Soviet Union ...... 63 From the Collapse of the Soviet Union to the War in Chechnya: Reform By Declaration ........................................... 66 From the War in Chechnya to the Reforms of 1996-1997: Holding on to Everything, Saving Nothing .............................. 80 From the National Security Concepts of 1997 to the Reform Plans of 1998- 1999: The Crises Deepen ............................... 89 2.3: Security Policy-Making and Defence Reform -Comparative Conclusions .. 96 Security Policy-Making and Defence Reform as a Test of Civil-Military Relations ............................................ 99 Chapter 3: Civilian Integration in the Ministry of Defence ........................ 103 The Soviet-type Ministry of Defence ............................ 104 3.1: Civilian Integration in the Ministry of Defence- Central Europe ......... 108 A Civilian Minister of Defence 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 111 "Raisins In Bread": Integrating Civilians in the Defence Bureaucracy 0 0 0 122 Reforming the General Staff 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 130 302: Civilian Integration in the Ministry of Defence- Former Soviet Union 0 0 0 0 0 135 The Minister of Defence 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 137 Integrating Civilians in the Defence Bureaucracy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 148 Dealing with the General Staff 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 156 303: Civilian Integration in the Ministry of Defence-