The relationship between domestic civil–military relations and the use of foreign military force has been long debated. The two primary perspectives on the issue, civilian conservatism and military conservatism, are antithetical. The former maintains that military authorities are more likely to advocate for the use of military force than civilian counterparts, while the latter advances the opposite argument. Empirical research to date has added little clarity to the relationship. We shed new light on this long running controversy through analyses of a different, and arguably more appropriate, set of measures for the key variables of concern: civilian control, civil–military conflict, and the use of foreign military force. In zero-inflated negative binomial estimates of 165 countries from 1946 to 2010, we find consistent support for civilian conservatism. More specifically, when civilian control erodes or civil–military conflict reaches particularly high levels, the likelihood that a state will launch a foreign military intervention increases.
AsgharR. (2024). Nuclear weapons and interstate conflict behavior: The moderating influence of civil–military relations. Conflict Management and Peace Science. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/07388942241238649
2.
BanksA. S. (1976). Cross-national time series, 1815–1973 (Vol. 7412). Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.
3.
BellS. R.ClayK.KiyaniG.MurdieA. (2022). Civil–military relations and human rights. Armed Forces & Society, 48(3), 701–722.
4.
BerejikianJ. D.ZwaldZ. (2024). Does military experience really matter? An empirical examination of decision framing. Journal of Global Security Studies, 9(3), Article ogae015.
5.
BettsR. K. (1991). Soldiers, statesmen, and cold war crises. Harvard University Press.
6.
BondD.BondJ.OhC.JenkinsJ. C.TaylorC. L. (2003). Integrated Data for Events Analysis (IDEA): An event typology. Journal of Peace Research, 40(6), 733–745.
7.
GelpiC.FeaverP. 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(4), 779–793.
8.
CharbonneauB. (2016). France and the new imperialism: Security policy in Sub-Saharan Africa. Routledge. (Original work published 2008)
ChoiS.JamesP. (2003). No professional soldiers, no militarized interstate disputes?Journal of Conflict Resolution, 47(6), 796–816.
11.
ChoiS.JamesP. (2008). Civil–military structure, political communication, and the democratic peace. Journal of Peace Research, 45(1), 37–53.
12.
DeschM. (2001). Civilian control of the military. JHU Press.
13.
DeVoreM. (2019). Strategic satisficing: Civil-military relations and French intervention in Africa. European Journal of International Security, 4(2), 163–189.
14.
FeaverP. D. (1999). Civil-military relations. Annual Review of Political Science, 2(1), 211–241.
15.
FeaverP. D. (2003). Armed servants: Agency, oversight, and civil-military relations. Harvard University Press.
16.
FeaverP. D.GelpiC. (2005). Choosing your battles: American civil-military relations and the use of force. Princeton University Press.
17.
FordhamB. O.SarverC. (2001). Militarized interstate disputes and United States uses of force. International Studies Quarterly, 45(3), 455–466.
18.
GannonJ. A.ChávezK. (2023). A Wiki-based dataset of military operations with novel strategic technologies. International Interactions, 49(4), 639–668.
19.
Gill-TineyP. (2022). A liberal peace? The growth of liberal norms and the decline of interstate violence. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 66(3), 413–442.
20.
GoldsteinJ. S. (1992). A conflict-cooperation scale for WEIS events data. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 36(2), 369–385.
21.
GonzalezE. (2024). Adjudicating competing theories: Does civilian control over the military decrease conflict?Armed Forces & Society, 50(1), 149–176.
22.
HaynesK. (2021). Votes and violence: Electoral vote share and international conflict. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 23(4), 717–735.
23.
HerspringD. R. (2011). Creating shared responsibility through respect for military culture. Public Administration Review, 71(4), 519–529.
24.
HuntingtonS. P. (1957). The soldier and the state: The theory and politics of civil–military relations. Harvard University Press.
JonesD. M.BremerS. A.SingerJ. D. (1996). Militarized interstate disputes, 1816–1992. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 15(2), 163–213.
27.
KenwickM. R. (2020). Self-reinforcing civilian control: A measurement-based analysis of civil-military relations. International Studies Quarterly, 64(1), 71–84.
28.
KisanganiE. F.PickeringJ. (2022). African interventions: State militaries, foreign powers, and rebel forces. Cambridge University Press.
29.
KiyaniG.PickeringJ.RazaM.WebbC. (2024). Civil-military relations and domestic terrorism. Journal of Conflict Resolution. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027231224022
30.
KushiS.ToftM. (2023). Introducing the military intervention project: A new dataset on US military interventions. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 67(4), 752–779.
31.
LinnS.WebbC. (Forthcoming). The exogeneity question(s). In DarmofalD. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of methodological pluralism. Oxford University Press.
32.
LounsberyM. O. (2016). Foreign military intervention, power dynamics, and rebel group cohesion. Journal of Global Security Studies, 1(2), 127–141.
MurdieA. (2013). The bad, the good, and the ugly: The curvilinear effects of civil–military conflict on international crisis outcome. Armed Forces & Society, 39(2), 233–254.
35.
NielsenS. C. (2005). Civil-military relations theory and military effectiveness. Policy & Management Review, 10(2), 61–84.
36.
PearsonF. S.BaumannR. A. (1988). International military interventions: Identification and classification. International Interactions, 14(2), 173–180.
PickeringJ. (2011). Dangerous drafts? A time-series, cross-national analysis of conscription and the use of military force. Armed Forces & Society, 37(1), 119–140.
39.
PickeringJ.KisanganiE. F. (2009). The international military intervention dataset: An updated resource for conflict scholars. Journal of Peace Research, 46(4), 589–599.
40.
SechserT. S. (2004). Are soldiers less war-prone than statesmen?Journal of Conflict Resolution, 48(5), 746–774.
41.
SullivanP. L.KochM. T. (2009). Military intervention by powerful states, 1945—2003. Journal of Peace Research, 46(5), 707–718.
42.
ThompsonW. R.DreyerD. R. (2012). Handbook of international rivalries, 1494–2010. CQ Press.
43.
TorontoN. (2007). Why war is not enough: Military defeat, the division of labor, and military professionalization [PhD]. Ohio State University.
44.
World Bank. (2018). World development indicators.
45.
YoungR. (2021). Who’s in Charge? Military-political conflict within France during the Franco-Algerian war. Saber and Scroll Journal, 10(1).
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
