Custom essay writing service

Buy college essays on The impact of the military on the situation in fragile states

The major condition of the success of Saddam Hussein’s regime was the military. In fact, Saddam Hussein heavily relied on the military and he was the commander in chief of the Iraqi army. In such a way, the military power practically paved him the way to the unlimited political power in the country. At the same time, it should be said that the military power contributed consistently to the stabilization of the situation in Iraq. It is not a secret that Saddam Hussein had managed to establish the total control over the entire country and was the only ruler of Iraq. In fact, it was a dictatorship which was not limited by any democratic principles. Even though civil rights and liberties of people were severely oppressed in Iraq, Saddam Hussein remained in power because of his control over the military forces of the country.
On the other hand, it is obvious that he could hardly keep the entire country in the total obedience, even if he had the military support and total power in the country. In order to secure his position and his power, he amply used the military, but not to oppress his people. Instead, he focused on the militarization of the country and, in actuality, he created the external threat to the national interest of Iraq, which made people united. In this respect, it should be said that the militarization of Iraq and its conflict with Iran was very beneficial for Saddam Hussein, because the militarization of the country improved the economic situation in Iraq and, in addition, the existence of the external threat made him the national leader who was perceived by Iraqi people as the only person that can protect the nation from the aggression of foreign countries, especially Iran. In such a way, it is obvious that Saddam Hussein used the military not only as a physical power but also for the ideological purposes (Snyder and Diesing, 165).
The same trends may be observed in other fragile states, where the political situation is unstable, while democratic principles and the public control over the military is weak. In this respect, it is possible to refer to the situation in Afghanistan both the current situation and prior to the US military intervention. To put it more precisely, the situation in Afghanistan was even more unstable, while the political power was even weaker than in Iraq, because unlike Iraq, which had a dictator, Afghanistan was controlled by the Taliban movement, which developed a radical religious ideology that regulated all spheres of life of the Afghani people. However, it should be said that the country was highly militarized especially after the war with the Soviet Union which Taliban had actually won. In such a situation, in spite of the lack of the organization, the military were the most powerful force in the country because in the situation when traditional state institutions did not work, the military force was the only power that mattered in the country. In fact, the country was constituted several clans which actually controlled different regions, while there was no strong political power that could either unite or control the country. As a result, the military defined the life of Afghanistan and even in the current situation the military play the determinant role in the life of the country. buy college essays
However, the role of the military is very significant even in less fragile countries, where the official authorities attempt to maintain the illusion of democracy. For instance, Yugoslavia under Slobodan Milosevic may be viewed as an example of such a state. In fact, in the 1990s Yugoslavia started to fall apart and the country became the region of ethnic conflicts and civil wars. In such a situation, the order was basically maintained by the military forces. In this respect, it is worth mentioning the fact that it was not only national military forces, but also the UN peacekeeping forces as well as military forces of the NATO (Allcock, 257).
Basically, speaking about Yugoslavia, it should be said that its former leader, Slobodan Milosevic had taken power in the country which was on the edge of the total ruin. At the same time, it should be said that his political successes were illusory, while it was the military power that actually led him to the political Olympus in the country. He used the military power to establish an authoritarian regime, but, what is even more important, this regime was supported by a considerable part of Serbs, who constituted the majority of the population of Yugoslavia. In actuality, Slobodan Milosevic used the similar strategy of the protection of national interests that were used by Saddam Hussein in Iraq. In the situation of the total chaos and ruin of the country, he, being supported by the military, played the role of the national leader who attempts to protect the nation from the total decline and external aggression, especially in the period of the conflict in Kosovo.
In such a way, the role of the military in fragile and failing states increases dramatically, but, unlike democratic, strong and stable states, the military in fragile and failing states become the major power in the country and it is the political power or a person that has the support can gain the political power in the country. In other words, the role of the military in fragile countries may be defined as follows: who controls the military controls the entire country.