Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

The Civil-Military Gap Debates in Military Sociology

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 42 Sayı: 1, 91 - 127, 29.03.2022

Mustafa Yücehan Akal , Adem Başpınar

Öz

This article draws attention to the dimensions of gap alongside the sources upon which the issue of civil-military gap is based, the theorizing dynamics following World War II, and the discussions that have come to the agenda within the scope of the subject. Civil-military gap emerged as a subject of civil-military relations in the United States during the Cold War, with the idea that a large and permanent standing army poses a threat to social values. This issue emerged in the search for the most appropriate military control model in favor of democracy and has been the focus of academic attention due to the changes in military service and the increase in tensions in civil-military relations.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Military Sociology Civil-Military Relations Civil-Military Gap Armed Forces and Society Cultural Gap

Kaynakça

  • Abrahamsson, B. (1972). Military professionalization and political power. SAGE Publications.
  • Akşit, B., Kalaycıoğlu, S., Varoğlu, K., & Çakar, M. (2007). A comparison of civil–military attitudes: The case of Turkey. In G. Caforio (Ed.). Cultural differences between the military and parent society in democratic countries (Contributions to Conflict Management, Peace Economics and Development) (pp. 319–325). https://doi.org/10.1016/s1572-8323(2007)4
  • Akyürek, S., Serap, K. F., Atalay, E., & Bıçaksız, A. (2014). Sivil-asker ilişkileri ve ordu-toplum mesafesi. Bilgesam.
  • Astiz, C. A. (1969). Pressure groups and power elites in Peruvian politics. Cornell University Press.
  • Avant, D. (1998). Conflicting indicators of “crisis” in American civil-military relations. Armed Forces & Society, 24(3), 381.
  • Bacevich, A. J. (1997). The paradox of professionalism: Eisenhower, ridgway, and the challenge to civilian control, 1953-1955. The Journal of Military History, 61(2), 17.
  • Bacevich, A. J., & Kohn, R. H. (1997). Grand army of the republicans: Has the us military become a partisan force? The New Republic, 217(23–8), 22–25
  • Baskir, L. M., & Strauss, W. A. (1978). Chance and circumstance: The draft. The war and the Vietnam generation. Vintage.
  • Başpınar, A. (2012a). Sosyolojinin konusu olarak ordu ve asker: Askeri sosyoloji. İstanbul University Journal of Sociology, 3(24), 279–314.
  • Başpınar, A. (2012b). Askeri sosyoloji: Tarih ve kaynaklar (Yüksek lisans tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul).
  • Başpınar, A. (2018). Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nde sivil-asker ilişkileri (Doktora tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul).
  • Bateman, R. L. (2008). The army and academic culture. Academic Questions, 21(1), 62–78.
  • Betros, L. (2001). Political partisanship and the military ethic in America. Armed Forces & Society, 27(4), 501–523.
  • Bianco W., & Markham, J. (2001). “Vanishing Veterans: The Decline of Military Experience in the U.S. Congress”. In P. D. Feaver & R. H. Kohn (Eds.), Soldiers and civilians: The civil-military gap and American national security (pp. 275–289). MIT Press.
  • Binkin, M. (1993). Who will fight the next war? Brookings Institution.
  • Bland, D. L. (1999). A unified theory of civil-military relations. Armed Forces & Society, 26(1), 7–25.
  • Bland, D. L. (2001). Patterns in liberal democratic civil-military relations. Armed Forces & Society, 27(4), 525–540.
  • Boëne, B. (1990). How “unique” should the military be? A review of representative literature and outline of a synthetic formulation. European Journal of Sociology, 31(1), 3–59.
  • Born, H. (2003). Democratic control of armed forces: Relevance, issues, and research agenda. G. Caforio (Ed.), Handbook of the sociology of the military (pp. 151–165). Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  • Brooks, R. A., & Brooks, R. (2008). Shaping strategy: The civil-military politics of strategic assessment. Oxfordshire: Princeton University Press.
  • Brotz, H., & Wilson, E. (1946). Characteristics of military society. American Journal of Sociology, 51(5), 371–375.
  • Burk, J. (2001). The Military’s presence in American society, 1950-2000. In P. D. Feaver & R. H. Kohn (Eds.), Soldiers and civilians: The civil-military gap and American national security (pp. 247–275). MIT Press.
  • Caforio, G., & Chatterji, M. (Eds.). (2007). Cultural differences between the military and parent society in democratic countries (Vol. 4). Elsevier.
  • Christopher Gelpi, C., & Feaver, P. D. (2002). Speak softly and carry a big stick? Veterans in the political elite and the American use of force. American Political Science Review, 96, 779–793.
  • Cohen, E. A. (2002). Supreme command: Soldiers, statesmen and leadership in wartime. Free Press.
  • Cohn, L. (1999). The evolution of the civil-military ‘gap’ debate” (Paper, Triangle Institute for security studies project on the gap between the military and civilian society, 1999). http://tiss-nc.org/
  • Collins, J. J. (1998). The complex context of American military culture: A practitioner’s view. Washington Quarterly, 21(4), 213-228.
  • Dahl, R. A. (1998). On democracy. Yale University Press. Dandeker, C. (2000). The military in democratic societies: New times and new patterns of civilmilitary relations. In J. Kuhlmann & J. Callaghan (Eds.), Military and society in 21st century Europe: A comparative analysis (pp. 27–44). Lit Verlag and Transaction.
  • Dandeker, C. (2001). On the need to be different: Military uniqueness and civil-military relations in modern society. RUSI Journal, 146(3), 4–9.
  • de Tocqueville, A. (2016). Amerika’da demokrasi (S. Sertdemir Özdemir, Çev.). İletişim Yayınevi.
  • Desch, M. C. (1999). Civilian, control of the military: The changing security environment. Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Desch, M.C. (1996). “Threat Environments and Military Missions” In Diamond, L., & Plattner, M. F. (Eds.), Civil-military relations and democracy (pp. 12–29). Johns Hopkins University Press
  • Dowd, J. J. (2001). Connected to society: The political beliefs of U.S. army generals. Armed Forces & Society, 27(3), 343–372.
  • Dunlap Jr, C. J. (1994). Welcome to the junta: the erosion of civilian control of the US military. Wake Forest Law Review., 29(2), 341–392
  • Eisman, A. (2003). The media of manipulation: Patriotism and propaganda—mainstream News in the United States in the weeks following September 11. Critical Quarterly, 45(1–2), 55–72.
  • Ekirch, A. A. (1956). Civilian and the military: A history of the American anti-militarist tradition. Oxford University Press.
  • Eliot A. Cohen, E. A. (2000). Why the gap matters. The National Interest, 61, 38–48.
  • Feaver, P. D. (1996a). An American crisis in civilian control and civil-military relations? The Tocqueville Review, 17(1), 159–182.
  • Feaver, P. D. (1996b). The civil-military problematique: Huntington, Janowitz, and the question of civilian control. Armed Forces & Society, 23(2), 149–178.
  • Feaver P. D. (2003a). Armed servants: Agency, oversight, and civil–military relations. Harvard University Press.
  • Feaver, P. (2003b). The civil–military gap in comparative perspective. Journal of Strategic Studies, 26(2), 1–5.
  • Feaver, P. D., & Kohn, R. H. (Eds.). (2001). Soldiers and civilians: The civil-military gap and American national security. MIT Press.
  • Feaver, P. D. (1992) Guarding the Guardians: Civilian control of nuclear weapons in the United States. Cornell University Press.
  • Feaver, P. D. (1999). Civil-military relations. Annual Review of Political Science, 2, 211–241. Feit, E. (1973) The armed bureaucrats. Houghton Mifflin.
  • Finer, S. E. (1976). The man on horseback: The role of military in politics. Penguin Books.
  • Fordham, B. O. (2001). Military ınterests and civilian politics: The ınfluence of civil-military “gap” on peacetime politics. In P. D. Feaver & R. H. Kohn (Eds.), Soldiers and civilians: The civilmilitary gap and American national security (pp. 327–360). MIT Press.
  • Foster, G. (1997). Confronting the crisis in civil-military relations. Washington Quarterly, 20(4), 15–33.
  • Fox, W. T. (1961). Representativeness and efficiency dual problem of civil-military relations. Political Science Quarterly, 354–366.
  • Ginsburgh, R. N. (1964). The challenge to military professionalism. Foreign Affairs, 42(2), 255–268.
  • Gronke, P., & Feaver, P. (2001). Uncertain confidence: Civilian and military attitudes about civilmilitary relations. In P. D. Feaver & R. H. Kohn (Eds.), Soldiers and civilians: The civil-military gap and American national security (pp. 121–169). MIT Press.
  • Hans, B. (2006). Democratic control of armed forces. In G. Caforio (Ed.), Handbook of the sociology of the military (pp. 151–166). Springer.
  • Holsti, O. R. (1998/1999). A widening gap between the U.S. military and civilian society? Some evidence. International Security, 23(3), 5–42.
  • Holsti, O. R. (2001). Of Chasms and Convergences: Attitudes and Beliefs of Civilians and Military Elites at the Start of New Millenium, In P. D. Feaver & R. H. Kohn (Eds.), Soldiers and civilians: The civil-military gap and American national security (pp. 15–101). MIT Press.
  • Howard, B., & Everett W. (1946). Characteristics of military society. American Journal of Sociology, 51(5), 371-375. Howard, M. (1957) Soldiers and governments: Nine studies in civil-military relations. Eyre & Spottiswoode.
  • Huntington, S. P. (1956). Civilian control and the constitution. American Political Science Review, 50(3), 676–699.
  • Huntington, S. P. (1957). The soldier and the state: The theory and politics of civil- military relations. Harvard University Press.
  • Huntington, S. P., & Sheehan, J. J. (2008). Where have all the soldiers gone? The transformation of modern Europe. Houghton Mifflin.
  • Janowitz, M. (1971). The professional soldier: A social and political portrait. The Free Press.
  • Kemp, K., & Hudlin, C. (1992). Civil supremacy over the military: Its nature and limits. Armed Forces & Society, 19(1), 7–26.
  • Kerwin, J. G. (1948). Civil-military relationships in American life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Kier, E. (1997). Imagining war: French and British military doctrine between the wars. Princeton University Press.
  • Kier, E. (1999). Rights and fights: Sexual orientation and military effectiveness. International Security, 24(1), 194–201.
  • Kohn, R. H. (1974). The All-Volunteer Army: Too High a Price? Proceedings of the U. S. Naval Institute, 100(3/853), 35-42.
  • Kohn, R. H. (1994). Out of control: The crisis in civil-military relations. National Interest, 35(Spring), 3–17.
  • Kohn, R. H. (1997). How democracies control the military. Journal of Democracy, 8(October), 140–153.
  • Kohn, R. H. (2002). The erosion of civilian control of the military in the United States today. Naval War College Review, 55(Summer), 8–59.
  • Kohr, H.-U. (1989). Public opinion surveys on security policy and the armed forces: Policy polling or scientific research? SOWI-working paper no. 25, München, Sozialwissenschaftliches Institut der Bundeswehr.
  • Kourvetaris, G. A., & Dobratz, B. A. (1976). The present state and development of sociology of the military. Journal of Political & Military Sociology, 4(1), 67–105.
  • Kuhlman, J., & Callaghan, J. (Eds.). (2000). Military and society in 21st century Europe: A comparative analysis. Transaction.
  • Kümmel, G. (2002). The military and its civilian environment: Reflections on a theory of civil-military relations. Connections: The Quarterly Journal, 1(4), 63–82.
  • Kümmel, G. (2003). The winds of change: the transition from armed forces for peace to new missions for the Bundeswehr and its impact on civil–military relations. Journal of Strategic Studies, 26(2), 7–28.
  • Lang, K. (1972). Military institutions and the sociology of war: A review of the literature with annotated bibliography. Sage.
  • Lasswell, H. D. (1950). National security and individual freedom. McGrawHill
  • Luttwak, E. N. (1999). From Vietnam to desert fox: Civil-military relations in modem democracies. Survival, 41(1), 99–112.
  • Manigart, P. (1992). The future of security in Europe: A comparative analysis of European public ppinion. Brussels: Royal Military Academy.
  • Marina, N. (2006). Model and explanations for military organization: An updated reconsideration. In G. Caforio & M. Nuciari (Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of the military (pp. 61–86). Springer
  • Martin, M. L. (1994). National security and democracy: The dilemma from a French perspective. Armed Forces & Society, 20(3), 395–421.
  • Maynes, C. W. (1998). The perils of (and for) an ımperial America. Foreign Policy, 111(Summer), 36–48.
  • Miller, L., & Williams, J. A. (2001). Do military policies on gender and sexuality undermine combat effectiveness? In P. D. Feaver & R. H. Kohn (Eds.), Soldiers and civilians: The civil-military gap and American national security (pp. 361–403). MIT Press.
  • Mills, C. W. (1974). İktidar seçkinleri (Ü. Oskay, Çev.). Bilgi Yayınevi.
  • Moskos Jr., C. C. (1970). The American enlisted man: The rank and file in today’s military. Russell Sage Foundation.
  • Moskos Jr., C. C. (1973). The emergent military: Civil, traditional, or plural? Sociological Perspectives, 16(2), 255–280.
  • Nordlinger, E. A. (1977). Soldiers in politics military coups and goverments. Prentice-Hall.
  • Owens, M. (2008). “Understanding civil-military relations during the Clinton-Bush Era. In D. S. Reveron & J. H. Stiehm (Eds.), Inside defense understanding the U.S. military in the 21st century (pp. 191–204). Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
  • Patricia M. Shields, P. M. (2006). Civil-military relations: Changing frontiers. Public Administration Review, 66, 924–928.
  • Perlmutter, A. (1969). The praetorian state and the praetorian army. Comparative Politics, 1(3), 382.
  • Perlmutter, A. (1977). The military and politics in modern times: On professionals, praetorians, and revolutionary soldiers. Yale University Press.
  • Perlmutter, A. (1977). The military and politics in modern times: on professionals, praetorians, and revolutionary soldiers. Yale University Press.
  • Pion-Berlin, D. (1992). Military autonomy and emerging democracies in South America. Comparative Politics, 25(1), 85–87.
  • Pion-Berlin, D. (2011). Turkish civil-military relations: A Latin American comparison. Turkish studies, 12(2), 293–304.
  • Rahbek-Clemmensen, J., Archer, E. M., Barr, J., Belkin, A., Guerrero, M., Hall, C., & Swain, K. E. (2012). Conceptualizing the civil–military gap: A research note. Armed Forces & Society, 38(4), 669–678.
  • Ricks, T. E. (1997). The widening gap between the military and society. Atlantic Monthly, 280(1), 67–78.
  • Roman, P. J., & Tarr, D. W. (1998). The joint chiefs of staff: From service parochialism to jointness. Political Science Quarterly, 113(1), 91–111.
  • Rukavishnikov, V. O., & Pugh, M. (2006). Civil-military ralations. G. Caforio & M. Nuciari (Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of the military (p. 131). Springer.
  • Sarkesian, S. C., Williams, J. A., & Cimbala, S. J. (1995). US national security: Policymakers, processes and politics. Lynne Rienner.
  • Schiff, R. L. (1995). Civil-military recomsidered: A theory of concordance. Armed Forces and Society, 22(1), 7-24
  • Schiff, R. L. (2008). The military and domestic politics: A concordance theory of civil-military relations. Oxon: Routledge.
  • Schiff, R. L. (2012). Concordance theory, targeted partnership, and counterinsurgency strategy. Armed Forces & Society, 38(2), 318–339.
  • Segal, D. R. (1975a). Civil-military relations in the mass public. Armed Forces & Society, 1(2), 215–229.
  • Segal, D. R. (1975b). Communication about the military: People and media in the flow of information. Communication Research, 2(1), 68–78.
  • Segal, D. R., Senter, M. S., & Segal, M. W. (1978). The Civil-Military İnterface in a Metropolitan Community. Armed Forces & Society, 4(3), 423–448.
  • Snider, D. M., & Carlton-Carew, M. A. (Eds.). (1995). US Civil-Military Relations: In Crisis or Transition? (Vol. 27). CSIS.
  • Snider, D. M., Priest, R. F., & Lewis, F. (2001). The civilian-military gap and professional education at the precommissioning level. Armed Forces & Society, 27(2), 249–272.
  • Snider, D., & Carlton-Carew, M. A. (1995). US civil- military relations: In crisis or transition? The Center for Strategic & International Studies.
  • Stanislav, A. (1968). Military organization and society. University of California Press.
  • Steinbrecher, M., & Biehl, H. (2020). The other civil-military gap: Researching public opinion on security and defence policy. In Research Methods in Defence Studies (pp. 189–209). Routledge.
  • Stepan A. (1988). Rethinking military politics: Brazil and the southern cone. Princeton University Press.
  • Stephan, A. C. (1988). Rethinking military politics: Brazil and Southern Cone. Princeton University Press.
  • Stiehm, J. H. (2001). Civil-military relations in war college Curricula. Armed Forces & Society, 27(2), 273–294.
  • Strachan, H. (2003). The civil-military ‘gap’in Britain. Journal of Strategic Studies, 26(2), 43–63.
  • Szayna, T. S., McCarthy, K. F., Marquis, J. P., Sollinger, J. M., & Demaine, L. J. (2007). The civilmilitary gap in the United States: Does it exist, why, and does it matter? (Vol. 379). Rand Corporation.
  • Szayna, T. S., McCarthy, K. F., Sollinger, J. M., Demaine, L. J., Marquis, J. P., & Steel, B. (2007). The civil military gap in the United States. The RAND Corporation
  • Turner, B. S. (1999). Classical sociology. Sage. Uluçakar, M. (2018). Türkiye’de sivil-asker ilişkileri: Eleştirel bir değerlendirme. Güvenlik Stratejileri Dergisi, 14(28), 187–227.
  • Vagts, A. A. (1967). History of militarism: Civilian and military. Free Press. Vennesson, P. (2003). Civil–military relations in France: is there a gap? Journal of Strategic Studies, 26(2), 29–42.
  • Vogt, W. R. (1986). Militär als Gegenkultur. Streitkräfte im Wandel der Gesellschaft (I). Opladen.
  • Vogt, W. R. (1988). Militär als Lebenswelt. Streitkräfte im Wandel der Gesellschaft (II). Opladen.
  • Vogt, W. R. (Ed.). (1983). Sicherheitspolitik und Streitkräfte in der Legitimitätskrise: Analysen zum Prozess der Delegitimierung des Militärischen im Kernwaffenzeitalter (Vol. 21). Nomos.
  • Von Bredow, W., & Kümmel, G. (2000). New roles for the armed forces and the concept of democratic control. In Kümmel G. & von Bredow W, (Eds.), Civil-military relations in an age of turbulence: Armed forces and the problem of democratic control (No. 21, pp. 109–131). SOWI.
  • Weber, M. (2006). Meslek olarak siyaset (A. Timuçin & M. Sert, Çev.). Çivi Yazıları.
  • Weigley, R. F. (1993). The American military and the principle of civilian control from McClellan to Powell. The Journal of Military History, 57(5), 27–58.
  • Welch, C. E. (1993). Changing civil-military relations. Global Transformation and the Third World, 71–90.

Askerî Sosyolojide Sivil-Asker Mesafesi Tartışmaları

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 42 Sayı: 1, 91 - 127, 29.03.2022

Mustafa Yücehan Akal , Adem Başpınar

Öz

Bu makalede sivil-asker mesafesi konusunun dayandığı kaynaklar, İkinci Dünya Savaşı’nı müteakip kuramsallaşma dinamikleri ve konu kapsamında gündeme gelen tartışmalarla birlikte mesafe boyutlarına dikkat çekilmiştir. Sivil-asker mesafesi, Soğuk Savaş döneminde Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nde daimî ve büyük bir ordunun toplum değerlerine tehdit oluşturduğu düşüncesiyle birlikte, sivil-asker ilişkilerinin bir konusu olarak ortaya çıkmıştır. Demokrasi lehine en uygun ordu denetim modeli arayışlarında ortaya çıkan bu konu, askerlik hizmetindeki değişimler ve sivil-asker ilişkilerindeki gerilimlerin artmasına bağlı olarak akademik ilginin odağında olmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Askeri Sosyoloji Sivil-Asker İlişkileri Sivil-Asker Mesafesi Silahlı Kuvvetler ve Toplum Kültürel Mesafe

Kaynakça

  • Abrahamsson, B. (1972). Military professionalization and political power. SAGE Publications.
  • Akşit, B., Kalaycıoğlu, S., Varoğlu, K., & Çakar, M. (2007). A comparison of civil–military attitudes: The case of Turkey. In G. Caforio (Ed.). Cultural differences between the military and parent society in democratic countries (Contributions to Conflict Management, Peace Economics and Development) (pp. 319–325). https://doi.org/10.1016/s1572-8323(2007)4
  • Akyürek, S., Serap, K. F., Atalay, E., & Bıçaksız, A. (2014). Sivil-asker ilişkileri ve ordu-toplum mesafesi. Bilgesam.
  • Astiz, C. A. (1969). Pressure groups and power elites in Peruvian politics. Cornell University Press.
  • Avant, D. (1998). Conflicting indicators of “crisis” in American civil-military relations. Armed Forces & Society, 24(3), 381.
  • Bacevich, A. J. (1997). The paradox of professionalism: Eisenhower, ridgway, and the challenge to civilian control, 1953-1955. The Journal of Military History, 61(2), 17.
  • Bacevich, A. J., & Kohn, R. H. (1997). Grand army of the republicans: Has the us military become a partisan force? The New Republic, 217(23–8), 22–25
  • Baskir, L. M., & Strauss, W. A. (1978). Chance and circumstance: The draft. The war and the Vietnam generation. Vintage.
  • Başpınar, A. (2012a). Sosyolojinin konusu olarak ordu ve asker: Askeri sosyoloji. İstanbul University Journal of Sociology, 3(24), 279–314.
  • Başpınar, A. (2012b). Askeri sosyoloji: Tarih ve kaynaklar (Yüksek lisans tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul).
  • Başpınar, A. (2018). Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nde sivil-asker ilişkileri (Doktora tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul).
  • Bateman, R. L. (2008). The army and academic culture. Academic Questions, 21(1), 62–78.
  • Betros, L. (2001). Political partisanship and the military ethic in America. Armed Forces & Society, 27(4), 501–523.
  • Bianco W., & Markham, J. (2001). “Vanishing Veterans: The Decline of Military Experience in the U.S. Congress”. In P. D. Feaver & R. H. Kohn (Eds.), Soldiers and civilians: The civil-military gap and American national security (pp. 275–289). MIT Press.
  • Binkin, M. (1993). Who will fight the next war? Brookings Institution.
  • Bland, D. L. (1999). A unified theory of civil-military relations. Armed Forces & Society, 26(1), 7–25.
  • Bland, D. L. (2001). Patterns in liberal democratic civil-military relations. Armed Forces & Society, 27(4), 525–540.
  • Boëne, B. (1990). How “unique” should the military be? A review of representative literature and outline of a synthetic formulation. European Journal of Sociology, 31(1), 3–59.
  • Born, H. (2003). Democratic control of armed forces: Relevance, issues, and research agenda. G. Caforio (Ed.), Handbook of the sociology of the military (pp. 151–165). Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  • Brooks, R. A., & Brooks, R. (2008). Shaping strategy: The civil-military politics of strategic assessment. Oxfordshire: Princeton University Press.
  • Brotz, H., & Wilson, E. (1946). Characteristics of military society. American Journal of Sociology, 51(5), 371–375.
  • Burk, J. (2001). The Military’s presence in American society, 1950-2000. In P. D. Feaver & R. H. Kohn (Eds.), Soldiers and civilians: The civil-military gap and American national security (pp. 247–275). MIT Press.
  • Caforio, G., & Chatterji, M. (Eds.). (2007). Cultural differences between the military and parent society in democratic countries (Vol. 4). Elsevier.
  • Christopher Gelpi, C., & Feaver, P. D. (2002). Speak softly and carry a big stick? Veterans in the political elite and the American use of force. American Political Science Review, 96, 779–793.
  • Cohen, E. A. (2002). Supreme command: Soldiers, statesmen and leadership in wartime. Free Press.
  • Cohn, L. (1999). The evolution of the civil-military ‘gap’ debate” (Paper, Triangle Institute for security studies project on the gap between the military and civilian society, 1999). http://tiss-nc.org/
  • Collins, J. J. (1998). The complex context of American military culture: A practitioner’s view. Washington Quarterly, 21(4), 213-228.
  • Dahl, R. A. (1998). On democracy. Yale University Press. Dandeker, C. (2000). The military in democratic societies: New times and new patterns of civilmilitary relations. In J. Kuhlmann & J. Callaghan (Eds.), Military and society in 21st century Europe: A comparative analysis (pp. 27–44). Lit Verlag and Transaction.
  • Dandeker, C. (2001). On the need to be different: Military uniqueness and civil-military relations in modern society. RUSI Journal, 146(3), 4–9.
  • de Tocqueville, A. (2016). Amerika’da demokrasi (S. Sertdemir Özdemir, Çev.). İletişim Yayınevi.
  • Desch, M. C. (1999). Civilian, control of the military: The changing security environment. Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Desch, M.C. (1996). “Threat Environments and Military Missions” In Diamond, L., & Plattner, M. F. (Eds.), Civil-military relations and democracy (pp. 12–29). Johns Hopkins University Press
  • Dowd, J. J. (2001). Connected to society: The political beliefs of U.S. army generals. Armed Forces & Society, 27(3), 343–372.
  • Dunlap Jr, C. J. (1994). Welcome to the junta: the erosion of civilian control of the US military. Wake Forest Law Review., 29(2), 341–392
  • Eisman, A. (2003). The media of manipulation: Patriotism and propaganda—mainstream News in the United States in the weeks following September 11. Critical Quarterly, 45(1–2), 55–72.
  • Ekirch, A. A. (1956). Civilian and the military: A history of the American anti-militarist tradition. Oxford University Press.
  • Eliot A. Cohen, E. A. (2000). Why the gap matters. The National Interest, 61, 38–48.
  • Feaver, P. D. (1996a). An American crisis in civilian control and civil-military relations? The Tocqueville Review, 17(1), 159–182.
  • Feaver, P. D. (1996b). The civil-military problematique: Huntington, Janowitz, and the question of civilian control. Armed Forces & Society, 23(2), 149–178.
  • Feaver P. D. (2003a). Armed servants: Agency, oversight, and civil–military relations. Harvard University Press.
  • Feaver, P. (2003b). The civil–military gap in comparative perspective. Journal of Strategic Studies, 26(2), 1–5.
  • Feaver, P. D., & Kohn, R. H. (Eds.). (2001). Soldiers and civilians: The civil-military gap and American national security. MIT Press.
  • Feaver, P. D. (1992) Guarding the Guardians: Civilian control of nuclear weapons in the United States. Cornell University Press.
  • Feaver, P. D. (1999). Civil-military relations. Annual Review of Political Science, 2, 211–241. Feit, E. (1973) The armed bureaucrats. Houghton Mifflin.
  • Finer, S. E. (1976). The man on horseback: The role of military in politics. Penguin Books.
  • Fordham, B. O. (2001). Military ınterests and civilian politics: The ınfluence of civil-military “gap” on peacetime politics. In P. D. Feaver & R. H. Kohn (Eds.), Soldiers and civilians: The civilmilitary gap and American national security (pp. 327–360). MIT Press.
  • Foster, G. (1997). Confronting the crisis in civil-military relations. Washington Quarterly, 20(4), 15–33.
  • Fox, W. T. (1961). Representativeness and efficiency dual problem of civil-military relations. Political Science Quarterly, 354–366.
  • Ginsburgh, R. N. (1964). The challenge to military professionalism. Foreign Affairs, 42(2), 255–268.
  • Gronke, P., & Feaver, P. (2001). Uncertain confidence: Civilian and military attitudes about civilmilitary relations. In P. D. Feaver & R. H. Kohn (Eds.), Soldiers and civilians: The civil-military gap and American national security (pp. 121–169). MIT Press.
  • Hans, B. (2006). Democratic control of armed forces. In G. Caforio (Ed.), Handbook of the sociology of the military (pp. 151–166). Springer.
  • Holsti, O. R. (1998/1999). A widening gap between the U.S. military and civilian society? Some evidence. International Security, 23(3), 5–42.
  • Holsti, O. R. (2001). Of Chasms and Convergences: Attitudes and Beliefs of Civilians and Military Elites at the Start of New Millenium, In P. D. Feaver & R. H. Kohn (Eds.), Soldiers and civilians: The civil-military gap and American national security (pp. 15–101). MIT Press.
  • Howard, B., & Everett W. (1946). Characteristics of military society. American Journal of Sociology, 51(5), 371-375. Howard, M. (1957) Soldiers and governments: Nine studies in civil-military relations. Eyre & Spottiswoode.
  • Huntington, S. P. (1956). Civilian control and the constitution. American Political Science Review, 50(3), 676–699.
  • Huntington, S. P. (1957). The soldier and the state: The theory and politics of civil- military relations. Harvard University Press.
  • Huntington, S. P., & Sheehan, J. J. (2008). Where have all the soldiers gone? The transformation of modern Europe. Houghton Mifflin.
  • Janowitz, M. (1971). The professional soldier: A social and political portrait. The Free Press.
  • Kemp, K., & Hudlin, C. (1992). Civil supremacy over the military: Its nature and limits. Armed Forces & Society, 19(1), 7–26.
  • Kerwin, J. G. (1948). Civil-military relationships in American life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Kier, E. (1997). Imagining war: French and British military doctrine between the wars. Princeton University Press.
  • Kier, E. (1999). Rights and fights: Sexual orientation and military effectiveness. International Security, 24(1), 194–201.
  • Kohn, R. H. (1974). The All-Volunteer Army: Too High a Price? Proceedings of the U. S. Naval Institute, 100(3/853), 35-42.
  • Kohn, R. H. (1994). Out of control: The crisis in civil-military relations. National Interest, 35(Spring), 3–17.
  • Kohn, R. H. (1997). How democracies control the military. Journal of Democracy, 8(October), 140–153.
  • Kohn, R. H. (2002). The erosion of civilian control of the military in the United States today. Naval War College Review, 55(Summer), 8–59.
  • Kohr, H.-U. (1989). Public opinion surveys on security policy and the armed forces: Policy polling or scientific research? SOWI-working paper no. 25, München, Sozialwissenschaftliches Institut der Bundeswehr.
  • Kourvetaris, G. A., & Dobratz, B. A. (1976). The present state and development of sociology of the military. Journal of Political & Military Sociology, 4(1), 67–105.
  • Kuhlman, J., & Callaghan, J. (Eds.). (2000). Military and society in 21st century Europe: A comparative analysis. Transaction.
  • Kümmel, G. (2002). The military and its civilian environment: Reflections on a theory of civil-military relations. Connections: The Quarterly Journal, 1(4), 63–82.
  • Kümmel, G. (2003). The winds of change: the transition from armed forces for peace to new missions for the Bundeswehr and its impact on civil–military relations. Journal of Strategic Studies, 26(2), 7–28.
  • Lang, K. (1972). Military institutions and the sociology of war: A review of the literature with annotated bibliography. Sage.
  • Lasswell, H. D. (1950). National security and individual freedom. McGrawHill
  • Luttwak, E. N. (1999). From Vietnam to desert fox: Civil-military relations in modem democracies. Survival, 41(1), 99–112.
  • Manigart, P. (1992). The future of security in Europe: A comparative analysis of European public ppinion. Brussels: Royal Military Academy.
  • Marina, N. (2006). Model and explanations for military organization: An updated reconsideration. In G. Caforio & M. Nuciari (Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of the military (pp. 61–86). Springer
  • Martin, M. L. (1994). National security and democracy: The dilemma from a French perspective. Armed Forces & Society, 20(3), 395–421.
  • Maynes, C. W. (1998). The perils of (and for) an ımperial America. Foreign Policy, 111(Summer), 36–48.
  • Miller, L., & Williams, J. A. (2001). Do military policies on gender and sexuality undermine combat effectiveness? In P. D. Feaver & R. H. Kohn (Eds.), Soldiers and civilians: The civil-military gap and American national security (pp. 361–403). MIT Press.
  • Mills, C. W. (1974). İktidar seçkinleri (Ü. Oskay, Çev.). Bilgi Yayınevi.
  • Moskos Jr., C. C. (1970). The American enlisted man: The rank and file in today’s military. Russell Sage Foundation.
  • Moskos Jr., C. C. (1973). The emergent military: Civil, traditional, or plural? Sociological Perspectives, 16(2), 255–280.
  • Nordlinger, E. A. (1977). Soldiers in politics military coups and goverments. Prentice-Hall.
  • Owens, M. (2008). “Understanding civil-military relations during the Clinton-Bush Era. In D. S. Reveron & J. H. Stiehm (Eds.), Inside defense understanding the U.S. military in the 21st century (pp. 191–204). Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
  • Patricia M. Shields, P. M. (2006). Civil-military relations: Changing frontiers. Public Administration Review, 66, 924–928.
  • Perlmutter, A. (1969). The praetorian state and the praetorian army. Comparative Politics, 1(3), 382.
  • Perlmutter, A. (1977). The military and politics in modern times: On professionals, praetorians, and revolutionary soldiers. Yale University Press.
  • Perlmutter, A. (1977). The military and politics in modern times: on professionals, praetorians, and revolutionary soldiers. Yale University Press.
  • Pion-Berlin, D. (1992). Military autonomy and emerging democracies in South America. Comparative Politics, 25(1), 85–87.
  • Pion-Berlin, D. (2011). Turkish civil-military relations: A Latin American comparison. Turkish studies, 12(2), 293–304.
  • Rahbek-Clemmensen, J., Archer, E. M., Barr, J., Belkin, A., Guerrero, M., Hall, C., & Swain, K. E. (2012). Conceptualizing the civil–military gap: A research note. Armed Forces & Society, 38(4), 669–678.
  • Ricks, T. E. (1997). The widening gap between the military and society. Atlantic Monthly, 280(1), 67–78.
  • Roman, P. J., & Tarr, D. W. (1998). The joint chiefs of staff: From service parochialism to jointness. Political Science Quarterly, 113(1), 91–111.
  • Rukavishnikov, V. O., & Pugh, M. (2006). Civil-military ralations. G. Caforio & M. Nuciari (Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of the military (p. 131). Springer.
  • Sarkesian, S. C., Williams, J. A., & Cimbala, S. J. (1995). US national security: Policymakers, processes and politics. Lynne Rienner.
  • Schiff, R. L. (1995). Civil-military recomsidered: A theory of concordance. Armed Forces and Society, 22(1), 7-24
  • Schiff, R. L. (2008). The military and domestic politics: A concordance theory of civil-military relations. Oxon: Routledge.
  • Schiff, R. L. (2012). Concordance theory, targeted partnership, and counterinsurgency strategy. Armed Forces & Society, 38(2), 318–339.
  • Segal, D. R. (1975a). Civil-military relations in the mass public. Armed Forces & Society, 1(2), 215–229.
  • Segal, D. R. (1975b). Communication about the military: People and media in the flow of information. Communication Research, 2(1), 68–78.
  • Segal, D. R., Senter, M. S., & Segal, M. W. (1978). The Civil-Military İnterface in a Metropolitan Community. Armed Forces & Society, 4(3), 423–448.
  • Snider, D. M., & Carlton-Carew, M. A. (Eds.). (1995). US Civil-Military Relations: In Crisis or Transition? (Vol. 27). CSIS.
  • Snider, D. M., Priest, R. F., & Lewis, F. (2001). The civilian-military gap and professional education at the precommissioning level. Armed Forces & Society, 27(2), 249–272.
  • Snider, D., & Carlton-Carew, M. A. (1995). US civil- military relations: In crisis or transition? The Center for Strategic & International Studies.
  • Stanislav, A. (1968). Military organization and society. University of California Press.
  • Steinbrecher, M., & Biehl, H. (2020). The other civil-military gap: Researching public opinion on security and defence policy. In Research Methods in Defence Studies (pp. 189–209). Routledge.
  • Stepan A. (1988). Rethinking military politics: Brazil and the southern cone. Princeton University Press.
  • Stephan, A. C. (1988). Rethinking military politics: Brazil and Southern Cone. Princeton University Press.
  • Stiehm, J. H. (2001). Civil-military relations in war college Curricula. Armed Forces & Society, 27(2), 273–294.
  • Strachan, H. (2003). The civil-military ‘gap’in Britain. Journal of Strategic Studies, 26(2), 43–63.
  • Szayna, T. S., McCarthy, K. F., Marquis, J. P., Sollinger, J. M., & Demaine, L. J. (2007). The civilmilitary gap in the United States: Does it exist, why, and does it matter? (Vol. 379). Rand Corporation.
  • Szayna, T. S., McCarthy, K. F., Sollinger, J. M., Demaine, L. J., Marquis, J. P., & Steel, B. (2007). The civil military gap in the United States. The RAND Corporation
  • Turner, B. S. (1999). Classical sociology. Sage. Uluçakar, M. (2018). Türkiye’de sivil-asker ilişkileri: Eleştirel bir değerlendirme. Güvenlik Stratejileri Dergisi, 14(28), 187–227.
  • Vagts, A. A. (1967). History of militarism: Civilian and military. Free Press. Vennesson, P. (2003). Civil–military relations in France: is there a gap? Journal of Strategic Studies, 26(2), 29–42.
  • Vogt, W. R. (1986). Militär als Gegenkultur. Streitkräfte im Wandel der Gesellschaft (I). Opladen.
  • Vogt, W. R. (1988). Militär als Lebenswelt. Streitkräfte im Wandel der Gesellschaft (II). Opladen.
  • Vogt, W. R. (Ed.). (1983). Sicherheitspolitik und Streitkräfte in der Legitimitätskrise: Analysen zum Prozess der Delegitimierung des Militärischen im Kernwaffenzeitalter (Vol. 21). Nomos.
  • Von Bredow, W., & Kümmel, G. (2000). New roles for the armed forces and the concept of democratic control. In Kümmel G. & von Bredow W, (Eds.), Civil-military relations in an age of turbulence: Armed forces and the problem of democratic control (No. 21, pp. 109–131). SOWI.
  • Weber, M. (2006). Meslek olarak siyaset (A. Timuçin & M. Sert, Çev.). Çivi Yazıları.
  • Weigley, R. F. (1993). The American military and the principle of civilian control from McClellan to Powell. The Journal of Military History, 57(5), 27–58.
  • Welch, C. E. (1993). Changing civil-military relations. Global Transformation and the Third World, 71–90.
Toplam 121 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Sosyoloji
Bölüm ARAŞTIRMA MAKALELERİ
Yazarlar

Mustafa Yücehan Akal 0000-0001-7853-4684

Adem Başpınar Bu kişi benim 0000-0002-2125-1832

Yayımlanma Tarihi 29 Mart 2022
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2022 Cilt: 42 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Akal, M. Y., & Başpınar, A. (2022). Askerî Sosyolojide Sivil-Asker Mesafesi Tartışmaları. İstanbul University Journal of Sociology, 42(1), 91-127.
AMA Akal MY, Başpınar A. Askerî Sosyolojide Sivil-Asker Mesafesi Tartışmaları. İstanbul University Journal of Sociology. Mart 2022;42(1):91-127.
Chicago Akal, Mustafa Yücehan, ve Adem Başpınar. “Askerî Sosyolojide Sivil-Asker Mesafesi Tartışmaları”. İstanbul University Journal of Sociology 42, sy. 1 (Mart 2022): 91-127.
EndNote Akal MY, Başpınar A (01 Mart 2022) Askerî Sosyolojide Sivil-Asker Mesafesi Tartışmaları. İstanbul University Journal of Sociology 42 1 91–127.
IEEE M. Y. Akal ve A. Başpınar, “Askerî Sosyolojide Sivil-Asker Mesafesi Tartışmaları”, İstanbul University Journal of Sociology, c. 42, sy. 1, ss. 91–127, 2022.
ISNAD Akal, Mustafa Yücehan - Başpınar, Adem. “Askerî Sosyolojide Sivil-Asker Mesafesi Tartışmaları”. İstanbul University Journal of Sociology 42/1 (Mart 2022), 91-127.
JAMA Akal MY, Başpınar A. Askerî Sosyolojide Sivil-Asker Mesafesi Tartışmaları. İstanbul University Journal of Sociology. 2022;42:91–127.
MLA Akal, Mustafa Yücehan ve Adem Başpınar. “Askerî Sosyolojide Sivil-Asker Mesafesi Tartışmaları”. İstanbul University Journal of Sociology, c. 42, sy. 1, 2022, ss. 91-127.
Vancouver Akal MY, Başpınar A. Askerî Sosyolojide Sivil-Asker Mesafesi Tartışmaları. İstanbul University Journal of Sociology. 2022;42(1):91-127.
 Kapak Resmi İndir