DOCSLIB.ORG

University of Hawaiii Library

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
University of Hawaiii Library 31 Sl UNIVERSITY OF HAWAIII LIBRARY AMERICAN CIVIL-MILITARY RELATIONS AND THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI'I IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTERS OF ARTS IN POLITICAL SCIENCE MAY 2004 By Matthew J. Morgan Thesis Committee: John Wilson, Chairperson Carolyn Stephenson Richard Chadwick ~\S\ CONTENTS Abstract v Chapter 1: Introduction 1 Civil-Military Relations 2 ANew Age? 7 Overview 12 PART I- CIVIL-MILITARY RELATIONS IN THE INTER-WAR YEARS....... 15 Chapter 2: The International Environment 16 From State Sovereignty to Individual Rights 16 Foundations ofSovereignty and Norms ofIntervention 17 The Practice of Sovereignty and Intervention 23 New International Regimes 26 Strategic Implications ofAmerican Interventions 30 Military Attitudes 36 Decisiveness and Directness 39 Casualty Aversion 47 Chapter 3: The Civil-Military Gap 51 Army Recruiting 52 Social Attitudes About the Relevance ofthe Military 54 The American Public :57 Values 59 Professionalism and Citizen-Soldiers 60 The Isolated Military 61 Social Imperatives 63 Chapter 4: Case Studies on Social-Military Interaction 65 Women in the Military 66 Women and the Profession ofArms '" 67 Gender-Based Differences 69 The Landmine Ban 78 The United States Decision to Ban Landmines 81 Operational Effectiveness 82 Landmines and Just War Theory 84 Humanitarian Concerns 87 PART II - THE AGE OF TERRORISM AND THE NEW WAR 92 Chapter 5: The New War 93 Cultural Factors 96 Political and Organizational Factors 102 Technological Factors 106 111 The American Strategic Response 110 Chapter 6: The Reconstruction ofSocial Identity 119 Postmodernity: Origins and Effects 121 The Rejection ofAbsolutes 126 Power and Authority 128 Difference 130 Global Effects 132 Chapter 7: The Garrison State 136 The Garrison State Theory 137 The New Threat 145 The State 147 Conclusions 153 PART III - CONCLUSIONS 155 Chapter 8: Empire - An Alternate Perspective 156 The Concept ofAmerican Empire 157 The American Military in the Age ofEmpire 164 Implications for Civil-Military Relations 168 Chapter 9: New Civil-Military Relations 171 Military Influence 173 Civil-Military Friction 174 Military Compliance 175 Delegation and Monitoring 176 Chapter 10: Implications and Further Research 178 A New Professional Paradigm 179 Professional Jurisdiction and Technical Expertise 183 Social Influence 184 Notes 191 IV Abstract American civil-military relations have profoundly changed from the interwar years that comprised the post Cold War era. Recent terrorist activity has mobilized American society with an intensity and intransience that recalls the Cold War. In many ways, with its focus on maximizing civilian casualties, terrorism is uniquely able to arouse the popular emotion. This research suggests that changes in the international security environment and American foreign policy will have ramifications for the use ofthe military and the relationship ofthe armed forces and society. Effective civil-military relations are important for the military to successfully conduct its mission and cannot be ignored as we move into an uncertain twenty-first century. v Chapter 1: Introduction American civil-military relations have profoundly changed in recent years as the United States has engaged in a global war on terrorism unprecedented in the post Cold War era. The massive deployment ofAmerican forces into combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq has propelled the armed forces into a visible and relevant position in society. As reserve components ofthe services have been activated and media coverage ofthese operations has become widespread, the military has gained a centrality to alter the nature ofcivil-military relations in the country. The prolonged nature ofthe war, and its controversy, may also affect the civil-military balance. Perhaps even more important is the now vital importance ofnational security in the minds ofthe public. With over 3030 people killed and 2337 injured in the 11 September 2001 attacks, the vulnerability ofthe United States was highlighted in a graphic and personal display. The destruction ofthe World Trade Center towers and attack on the Pentagon raised American awareness ofthe threat ofradical Is1amist terrorism. However, those attacks were only the most dramatic in a series ofassaults on American sovereignty and American citizens by the same radical movement. The October 2000 suicide attack on the USS Cole in the port ofAden in Yemen killed 17 sailors and wounded 39, causing $250 million in damage. The August 1998 bombing ofthe American Embassy in Kenya killed 213 and injured more than 5000, and the June 1996 bombing ofthe Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia killed 19 United States Airmen and wounded over 500. The first World Trade Center bombing, in February 1993, caused 6 deaths, injured 1041, and left $1 billion in damage. The earlier attacks did little to raise public consciousness ofthe threat posed to national security. In contrast, the 2001 attacks, in the center ofthe American homeland in the major 1 population centers ofWashington, DC and New York City, could not fail to alter American misconceptions ofthe nation's invulnerability and the way in which Americans view national security. As John Gearson argued, " ...the expressive violence that took thousands oflives represented such a strategic challenge to the United States it became inconceivable that thereafter the destruction ofal-Qaeda could be anything other than the central goal ofUS policy.,,1 The mobilization ofthe armed forces to Afghanistan and Iraq returned the country to a wartime frame ofmind. The unprecedented attacks on the United States (the first since the bombing ofPearl Harbor in 1941 and the first major incursion ofa foreign power into the American mainland since the War of 1812) have ushered a new era in American civil-military relations. This era gives no sign ofending soon - as Andrew Bacevich argued, the consequence of 11 September is to make war "an all but permanent and inescapable part oflife in the 21 st century.,,2 This thesis will explore the nature ofcivil-military relations in today's age ofterrorism in contrast to the earlier post Cold War decade. Civil-Military Relations The study ofcivil-military relations has interested thinkers in several disciplines, including political science, sociology, and history. Different writers have defined the problem of civil-military relations in different ways, but it ultimately boils down to what Peter Feaver called the civil-military problematique.3 The problematique is a trade-offbetween military effectiveness and military subordination. The military is a violent institution designed by society to protect it; the dilemma is that society needs a military strong enough to provide protection but not so strong that it will violate its trust and bring violence to the society it is supposed to protect. Deborah Avant has called this the balance between efficiency and accountability.4 2 Early civil-military relations literature was suspicious ofstate power,5 although the topic did not attract serious interest among political scientists until the early years ofthe Cold War. In that time period, there was significant concern over the tension between the necessities of massive military capability brought about by the nuclear stand-offwith the Soviets and preserving the values ofa liberal society. President Eisenhower's farewell address in 1961, in which he warned ofthe dangers' posed by the "military-industrial complex," indicates the misgivings with which Americans viewed a powerful military. Civil-military relations theorists tried to reconcile these conflicts,6 but it was Samuel Huntington's Soldier and the State that proved most enduring.7 Huntington developed a theory of"objective control" over the military, in which civilian and military spheres were clearly defined and the military officer corps' professionalism would allow the armed forces to serve effectively in the military sphere and also remain obedient to the civilian government. Such a system would leave the military strong militarily and weakened politically. Huntington also warned ofthe dangers ofliberalism, where "subjective control," the civilian authorities' undue meddling in military affairs, would weaken the military both politically and militarily. Huntington felt that the liberal society ofthe United States would undermine the military to such an extent that it would not be able to deal with the long term threat posed by the Soviet Union. Only the weakening ofthe security threat (which appeared unlikely in 1957) or the diminution ofliberalism would allow for American survival. Whether Huntington was correct, in that the implosion ofthe Soviet Union in 1989 constituted the former ofhis two conditions, or whether he was incorrect, in that the military strength ofthe United States prevailed and led to the Soviet collapse, is uncertain. Huntington argued a third alternative - that American society indeed became more conservative in the years after his 3 original predictions - but he did acknowledge in this argument (written in 1977) that the anti­ militarism ofthe Vietnam War might presage a return to liberalism.8 Morris Janowitz published the next milestone in the American civil-military relations dialogue in 1960.9 While the Janowitzean paradigm is similar in many ways to Huntington's, both focusing on professionalism and the officer corps, Janowitz did not draw the clear demarcation between the military and political realms that
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Officer at Work: Leadership
    CHAPTER FIVE The Officer at Work: Leadership . before it is an honor, leadership is trust; Before it is a call to glory, Leadership is a call to service; . before all else, forever and always, leadership is a willingness to serve. —Father Edson Wood, OSA, Cadet Catholic Chaplain Invocation at Assumption of Command by BG Curtis Scaparrotti, Commandant of Cadets, U.S. Military Academy August 11, 2004 Leadership—convincing others to collaborate effectively in a common endeavor—is the primary function of all Armed Forces officers. Only a few officers are commanders at any particular moment, but every officer is a leader. Indeed the Army and Marine Corps insist that lead- ership is the common responsibility of every Soldier and Marine.1 The Air Force says “Any Airman can be a leader and can positively influ- ence those around him or her to accomplish the mission.”2 A conse- quence is that almost every officer considers himself or herself good at leadership, but perspectives on method differ depending on individual circumstances and experiences. This chapter discusses leadership from four different but overlapping viewpoints: accomplishing the mission and taking care of the troops; three concepts of leadership; Service approaches; and “tribal wisdom,” views of leadership expressed by senior professionals. 57 Accomplishing the Mission and Taking Care of the Troops Leaders are expected to guide their followers to mission success at least possible cost. Lord Moran, who served as a medical officer on the Western Front in World War I, and was Churchill’s doctor and con- fidant in World War II, defined leadership as “the capacity to frame plans which will succeed and the faculty of persuading others to carry them out in the face of death.”3 Moran was skeptical of a requirement for fine character, the honorable virtues, in a leader, but found that a reputation for achieving success was the essential middle term between the ability to formulate a course of action and persuading others to implement it.
    [Show full text]
  • Army Manpower and the War on Terror
    Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy Working Paper Series Army Manpower and the War on Terror by Kevin Ryan Shorenstein Fellow, Fall 2005 Brigadier General, United States Army (ret.) #2006-2 © 2006 President and Fellows of Harvard College. All rights reserved. Army Manpower and the War on Terror by Kevin T. Ryani Abstract ___________________________________________________________________________ Army manpower is a key factor in the military’s ability to fight the War on Terror, which includes sustaining the combat missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet manpower is a subject that is often misunderstood and misreported. How does the status of Army manpower affect the nation’s War on Terror? What if the manpower demands of concurrent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have sapped the country’s ability to deploy to the next hotspot on the globe? What if recruiting shortfalls leave combat units only half filled? What if frequent deployments for long periods cause professional soldiers to leave the service? And what if the demands of mobilization on the Reserve and Guard mean that those forces are used up and unavailable for a new contingency not yet on the radar? Debating the pros and cons of intervening in Syria, Darfur, and Iran, or even a prolonged presence in Iraq is nothing more than an academic exercise if no troops are available for the operation. This paper provides background material on Army manpower that is meant to inform journalists who might cover the issue. _____________________________________________________________________________ Biographical Note: General Kevin T. Ryan has supervised U.S. government security programs with various foreign militaries and served in Germany, Russia, and Korea.
    [Show full text]
  • The Profession of Arms
    An Army White Paper THE PROFESSION OF ARMS I AM AN EXPERT AND I AM A PROFESSIONAL 9TH STANZA SOLDIER’S CREED CG TRADOC Approved 2 December 2010 Authority: This White Paper has been approved for distribution on 2 December 2010 by the Commanding General, Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC), under his authority granted by the Secretary of the Army and the Chief of Staff of the Army in the Terms of Reference dated 27 October 2010 for TRADOC to execute the ‗Review of the Army Profession in an Era of Persistent Conflict.‘ Purpose: This White Paper serves to facilitate an Army-wide dialog about our Profession of Arms. It is neither definitive nor authoritative, but a starting point with which to begin discussion. It will be refined throughout calendar year 2010 based on feedback from across our professional community. All members of the profession and those who support the profession are encouraged to engage in this dialog. Distribution: Distribution is unlimited. Yet, the material in this draft is under development. It is NOT approved for reference or citation. Feedback and Participation: Comments on this White Paper should be sent to the Center for the Army Profession and Ethic (CAPE), Combined Arms Center, TRADOC. To get engaged in this review of the Profession of Arms, visit the CAPE website at https://www.us.army.mil/suite/page/611545 and click on the Campaign link. The website will also provide links to professional forums and blogs on the Battle Command Knowledge System to partricipate in this discussion. Authorized for distribution 2 December 2010: Martin E.
    [Show full text]
  • Citizen-Civilians: Masculinity, Citizenship, and American Military Manpower Policy, 1945-1975
    ABSTRACT Title of Dissertation: CITIZEN-CIVILIANS: MASCULINITY, CITIZENSHIP, AND AMERICAN MILITARY MANPOWER POLICY, 1945-1975 Amy Jennifer Rutenberg, Doctor of Philosophy, 2013 Dissertation directed by: Professor Robyn Muncy Department of History “Citizen-Civilians” argues that military manpower policies between the end of World War II in 1945 and the shift to the All-Volunteer Force in 1973 separated military service from ideals of masculine citizenship in the United States. Manpower policies, especially those that governed deferments, widened the definition of service to the state and encouraged men to meet their responsibilities for national defense as civilians. They emphasized men’s breadwinner role and responsible fatherhood over military service and defined economic independence as a contribution to national defense. These policies, therefore, militarized the civilian sector, as fatherhood and certain civilian occupations were defined as national defense initiatives. But these policies also, ironically, weakened the citizen-soldier ideal by ensuring that fewer men would serve in the military and equating these civilian pursuits with military service. The Defense establishment unintentionally weakened its own manpower procurement system. These findings provide context for the anti-war and anti-draft protest of the late 1960s and early 1970s. Vietnam exacerbated points of friction that already existed. The war highlighted assumptions about masculinity and citizenship as well as inequities in the draft system that had existed for a generation. This dissertation, therefore, explains the growth of the mechanisms that allowed men to avoid military service, as such avoidance became relatively simple to accomplish and easy to justify. Thus, when draft calls rose in order to support a war that many Americans did not agree with, men used the channels that the Defense establishment had already created for them to avoid serving in the armed forces.
    [Show full text]
  • In the News Vey, in Close Consultation with Schoomaker, Will Also Serve As the Army Lead for All Major Changes to the Program
    mond Dubois, and the Army Vice Chief of Staff, General Richard Cody, will oversee this office. Harvey and Schoomaker will conduct an in-depth review of the program a minimum of three times a year. Har- In the News vey, in close consultation with Schoomaker, will also serve as the Army lead for all major changes to the program. ARMY NEWS SERVICE (APRIL 5, 2005) As an additional oversight measure, the Army Audit ARMY ANNOUNCES BUSINESS RESTRUC- Agency, the Army Science Board, and an outside panel TURING OF THE FCS PROGRAM of advisors will conduct periodic independent cost, sched- fter two months of review, Secretary of the Army ule, and technical viability assessments. Dr. Francis J. Harvey today announced a re- Astructuring of the business aspects of the Future AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE Combat Systems program. The changes are compre- (APRIL 25, 2005) hensive and include contractual, programmatic, and ARMY GENERAL: AIR FORCE HELPED managerial improvements. LOGISTICS SUCCESS IN IRAQ Gerry J. Gilmore The improvements will formally link the FCS program ASHINGTON (AFPN)—The U.S. military’s task to the Army Modular Force Initiative through a Future to supply troops serving in Iraq during the Combat Force Strategy that establishes a framework for Wpast year “was one of the most complex and the continuous progression of the current modular force challenging missions in our history,” a senior Army gen- into the future one. The Future Combat Force Strategy eral said April 20. provides for the spiraling of FCS-based technologies into the current modular force; integration of current com- Yet logisticians “proved successful in supporting a force bat lessons in areas of doctrine, organization, equipment, of (about) 165,000 soldiers, airmen, Marines, and civil- and other key elements, and into the force; and even- ians serving in a country the size of California,” Army Lt.
    [Show full text]
  • General Thoughts: Seventy-Five Years with the Army
    General Thoughts: L:� e, ....1 \ Seventv� ears with the Armv Writings of General Frederick J. Kroes en United States Army Retired Revised edition 2007 Institute of Land Warfare ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY Arlington, VA 22201-3385 Cover Design Randy Yasenchak Ka rin Varley Technical Support Southeastern Printing and Litho Unless otherwise indicated, photographs are from the Kroesen family's private collection. Originally published as General Thoughts: Seventy Ye ars with the Army, edited by Clayton R. Newell ©2003 by The Association of the United States Army. All rights reserved. Revised Edition General Thoughts: Seventy-five Ye ars with the Army ©2007by The Association of the United States Army. All rights reserved. Institute of Land Warfare ASSOCIATIONOF THEUNITED STATES ARMY 2425 Wilson Boulevard Arlington, Virginia 22201-3385 www.ausa.org Contents Foreword .............................................................................................................................................. v Acknowledgments .............................................................................................................................. W General Thoughts-Seventy-five Ye ars with the Army .................................................................... 1 TheAnny ........................................................................................................................................... 27 Rutgers ROTC Commissioning Ceremony ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Statement by Ltg Richard A. Cody Deputy Chief of Staff, G-3 United States Army
    STATEMENT BY LTG RICHARD A. CODY DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF, G-3 UNITED STATES ARMY BEFORE THE TACTICAL AIRLAND SUBCOMMITTEE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE UNITED STATES SENATE ON UNITED STATES ARMY AVIATION SECOND SESSION, 108TH CONGRESS MARCH 30, 2004 STATEMENT BY LTG RICHARD A. CODY DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF, G-3 UNITED STATES ARMY INTRODUCTION Chairman Sessions, Senator Lieberman, distinguished members of the committee, we appreciate the opportunity to appear here today to provide an update on the state of Army Aviation and how we intend to continue meeting current operational requirements while we also prepare for the future. We are witnessing historic times in our Army and our Aviation Force. As a former Division Commander for the 101st Air Assault Division and now as Deputy Chief of Staff, G-3, I can testify that our Army in general, and our aviation leaders and Soldiers are well-trained, ready, and committed. I thank this committee for your resolute support, concern, and faith in America’s sons and daughters, who serve our Army and our nation. I believe you all would agree that while aviation hardware and other systems are vital components of our nation’s defense, our most precious and irreplaceable assets are the great Americans operating and repairing them. GEN Peter Schoomaker, Chief of Staff, Army (CSA), directed a top-to- bottom review of Army Aviation in August of last year. The Chief’s guidance was to make Army Aviation a capabilities-based maneuver arm optimized for the joint fight with a shortened logistics tail. An Aviation Task Force was formed with a select group of aviation professionals under the leadership of MG James Thurman, Aviation Task Force Director; MG Joseph Bergantz, PEO-Aviation; and 2 BG Edward J.
    [Show full text]
  • THE ARMED FORCES OFFICER by Richard M
    THE ARMED FORCES OFFICER by Richard M. Swain and Albert C. Pierce The Armed Forces Officer THE ARMED FORCES OFFICER by Richard M. Swain and Albert C. Pierce National Defense University Press Washington, D.C. 2017 Published in the United States by National Defense University Press. Portions of this book may be quoted or reprinted without permission, provided that a standard source credit line is included. NDU Press would appreciate a courtesy copy of reprints or reviews. Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the contributors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Defense Department or any other agency of the Federal Government. Cleared for public release; distribution unlimited. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record of this publication may be found at the Library of Congress. Book design by Jessica Craney, U.S. Government Printing Office, Creative Services Division Published by National Defense University Press 260 Fifth Avenue (Building 64) Suite 2500 Fort Lesley J. McNair Washington, DC 20319 U.S. GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL EDITION NOTICE Use of ISBN This is the official U.S. Government edition of this publication and is herein identified to certify its authenticity. Use of 978-0-16-093758-3 is for the U.S. Government Publishing Office Edition only. The Superintendent of Documents of the U.S. Government Publishing Office requests that any reprinted edition clearly be labeled as a copy of the authentic work with a new ISBN. Contents FOREWORD by General Joseph F. Dunford, Jr., U.S. Marine Corps, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff ...............................................................................ix PREFACE by Major General Frederick M.
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief History of the Army Values (As Of: 1 Oct 18)
    A Brief History of the Army Values (as of: 1 Oct 18) [T]he most important constant of all-Army values. We must never be complacent about the role of values in our Army. That is why we have made a concerted effort to specify and define the Army values…. Army values are thoroughly consistent with the values of American society. General Dennis Reimer, 33rd Chief of Staff of the Army1 Background The US Army, as America’s land force, promotes national values while defending our national interest. Since its inception in 1775, the US Army has endeavored to instill values within the members of the Army Profession. Guidance from civil authority and military leaders, whether based upon general principle or in response to ethical failures, has attempted to influence both individual and collective values. Through the propagation of laws, codes, regulation, and doctrine they have shaped our shared identity as Army professionals. Beginning in 1981 and clarified in 2012, Army doctrine recognized that the Army Ethic is informed by law, Army Values, beliefs expressed in codes and creeds, and is embedded within our unique Army culture of trust. The moral principles of the Army Ethic and the Army Values inherent within it have always existed and been a point of discussion and honor among the members of the profession. Over the years the Army has repeatedly examined and articulated our individual and institutional values as Army professionals, and we have also continually reviewed and reconsidered our stated and operational values as a profession. This evolving effort continues today. For background on the Army’s past efforts and the evolution of values, our ethic, and character development, please see Information Paper – Analysis of Army’s Past Character Development Efforts – 17 Oct 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Diers at Walter Reed Hearing Committee On
    IS THIS ANY WAY TO TREAT OUR TROOPS? THE CARE AND CONDITIONS OF WOUNDED SOL- DIERS AT WALTER REED HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF THE COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION MARCH 5, 2007 Serial No. 110–40 Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html http://www.oversight.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 40–852 PDF WASHINGTON : 2008 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:03 Mar 20, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 C:\DOCS\40852.TXT HGOVREF1 PsN: HGOVREF1 COMMITTEE ON OVERSISGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM HENRY A. WAXMAN, California, Chairman TOM LANTOS, California TOM DAVIS, Virginia EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York DAN BURTON, Indiana PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York JOHN M. MCHUGH, New York ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland JOHN L. MICA, Florida DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts CHRIS CANNON, Utah WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee DIANE E. WATSON, California MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts DARRELL E. ISSA, California BRIAN HIGGINS, New York KENNY MARCHANT, Texas JOHN A.
    [Show full text]
  • A Clockwork War: Rhetorics of Time in a Time of Terror Roger Stahl
    Quarterly Journal of Speech Vol. 94, No. 1, February 2008, pp. 73Á99 A Clockwork War: Rhetorics of Time in a Time of Terror Roger Stahl Expressions of time have increasingly infused the rhetorical experience of post-industrial war, especially since 9/11. This essay demonstrates how these ‘‘signs of time’’ operate as one of three tropes: deadline/countdown, infinite/infinitesimal war, and the ticking clock. The persistence of such signs of time in public discourse can be seen as an expression of what Paul Virilio has called the ‘‘chronopolis,’’ a political universe textured by real-time communication technologies. The chronopolitical will exhibits certain autocratic traits at odds with democratic ideals, primarily the refashioning of citizen identity into that of the ‘‘contemporary.’’ The analysis here charts the autocratic rhetoric of the chronopolis as a critical democratic project. Keywords: Time; Television; War on Terror; Militarism; Chronopolitics A battle is brewing over the politics of time.1 Post-industrial war seems to be characterized by a certain obsession with the clock. We might mark the birth of this obsession on January 16, 1991, when George H.W. Bush initiated what William J. Small calls ‘‘a rarity, a war by appointment.’’2 Here, the U.S. so utterly dominated the field of conflict that the ability to schedule the war accompanied the ability to construct the war as a public relations event*that is, assuming that the annihilation of one army by another three hundred times its size can rightly be called a ‘‘war.’’3 The naming of this war by appointment offers us a vivid starting point.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Warfare in the Information Age
    THE LAND WARFARE PAPERS No. 47 SEPTEMBER 2004 Land Warfare in the Information Age Robert M. Toguchi and Richard J. Rinaldo A National Security Affairs Paper Published on Occasion by THE INSTITUTE OF LAND WARFARE ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY Arlington, Virginia Land Warfare in the Information Age by Robert M. Toguchi and Richard J. Rinaldo The Institute of Land Warfare ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY AN AUSA INSTITUTE OF LAND WARFARE PAPER The purpose of the Institute of Land Warfare is to extend the educational work of AUSA by sponsoring scholarly publications, to include books, monographs and essays on key defense is- sues, as well as workshops and symposia. A work selected for publication as a Land Warfare Paper represents research by the author which, in the opinion of the editorial board, will contribute to a better understanding of a particular defense or national security issue. Publication as an Institute of Land Warfare Paper does not indicate that the Association of the United States Army agrees with everything in the paper, but does suggest that the Association believes the paper will stimulate the thinking of AUSA members and others concerned about important defense issues. LAND WARFARE PAPER NO. 47, SEPTEMBER 2004 Landpower in the Information Age by Robert M. Toguchi and Richard J. Rinaldo Colonel Robert M. Toguchi is currently serving as Director, Strategic Plans, U.S. Army Train- ing and Doctrine Command. Prior to that assignment, he served first as a Professor of Military Strategy and then as Core Course Director (Nature of War) at the National War College.
    [Show full text]