Book Review: The Soldier and the State in India: Nuclear Weapons, Counterinsurgency, and the Transformation of Indian Civil-Military Relations

• Date: 01 April 2015
• Published date: 01 April 2015
• Author: Sunil Dasgupta
• DOI: 10.1177/0095327X14525575
• Subject Matter: Book Reviews

Book Reviews
389
contradictory categories are joined together in practice to form a component of mascu-
linity. The strength of the book’s first section is its focus on how contradictory practices
can conform to the same logic of masculinity. However, the contradiction in the
‘‘Filthy’’ chapter seems to be one of rhetoric and practice—while the military apparatus
claimed to be a purveyor of cleanliness, in practice it was the opposite. This conclusion
is less incisive than the first and contributes less to the book’s thesis. The book’s first
half is largely devoted to investigating the contradictions of American military mascu-
linity, and studying socialization in military academies is well suited to the task. How-
ever, the goal of the book’s second half is to bind these same contradictions to
American imperialism. It is difficult for a reader to follow the necessary inference that
a single case study, even if probative, succeeds in making that theoretical connection.
It is worthwhile to consider the text’s contribution to the literature as a whole. For
his part, Belkin positions the text as divergent from traditional studies of masculinity
generally and military masculinity more specifically. The degree to which Belkin’s
contribution departs from extant literature is however debatable. Belkin’s method,
elucidating the contradictions embodied in supposedly stable identities, has a long
history in gender studies. The discipline of masculinity studies has often been sen-
sitive to this tradition, making concerted efforts to reveal the fissures beneath the
veneer of monolithic masculinity. Indeed, previous studies have undermined the
mythical qualities of military masculinity through a variety of methodologies,
illustrating the existing literature on masculinity is less uniform than Belkin’s review
of the material suggests.1 But this is by no means a disparagement of the text’s many
contributions. Scholars of masculinity, gender studies, and the history of the
American military will...