Book Reviews : The Military in the Political Development of New Nations: An Essay in Compara tive Analysis. By MORRIS JANOWITZ. (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1964, Pp. vii, 134. $4.50.)
| Author | Josef Silverstein |
| Published date | 01 December 1964 |
| Date | 01 December 1964 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/106591296401700443 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
832
This
combination
was
an
effective
one,
but
there
were
problems.
One
such
problem
was
the
development
of
the
sort
of
thing
which
is
treated
in
Conspiracy at
Mukden.
Autonomous
groups
led
by
paternalistic
leaders
could
carry
out
action
programs
and
justify
their
actions
by
an
appeal
to
national
goals
and
ideals.
Stanford
University
NOBUTAKA
IKE
The
Military
in
the
Political
Development
of
New
Nations:
An
Essay
in
Compara-
tive
Analysis.
By
MORRIS
JANOWITZ.
(Chicago,
University
of
Chicago
Press,
1964,
Pp.
vii,
134.
$4.50.)
The
problem
of
the
military
in
politics
has
been
the
concern
of
a
large
number
of scholars
and
the
subject
of
several
books,
monographs,
and
articles.
Most
of
the
early
published
materials
are
limited
in
their
focus
to
a
particular
country
and
the
analysis
and
generalizations
are
related
to
the
history
and
politics
of
the
nation
under
study.
Recently,
the
approach
to
this
problem
has
changed.
Several
scholars
have
begun
to
examine
it
comparatively
on
a
regional
or
worldwide
basis.
Their
purpose
is
to
discover
similarities
and
differences
in
the
composition,
behavior,
values
and
goals
of
the
military
and
to
suggest
a
limited
number
of
tentative
generalizations
’
which
illuminate
the
data
and add
to
our
understanding
of
the
problem.
Professor
Janowitz’
essay
is
the
latest
addition
to
this
growing
body
of
comparative
studies
and
it
advances
our
thinking
a
long
way.
In
this
brief,
but
tightly
written
essay,
Janowitz
is
concerned
with
neither
how
the
military
comes
to
power
nor
how
it
exercises
it.
Rather,
his
chief
interest
centers
upon
such
questions
as
&dquo;why
are
military
officers
of
new
nations,
as
compared
with
those
in
western
industrialized
societies,
more
influential in
domestic
politics?&dquo;
and
&dquo;what
characteristics
of
the
military
profession
help
account
for
differences
in
civil-
military
relations
in
different
new
nations?&dquo;
He
attempts
to
answer
these
questions
on
the
basis
of
careful
study
of
existing
literature
and
not
upon
field
research
of
his
own.
The
areas
he
includes
are
South
and
Southeast
Asia,
Middle
East
and
North
Africa
and
Sub-Sahara
Africa.
Latin
America
is
excluded
because
its
&dquo;natural
his-
tory
of
militarism&dquo;
has
produced
political
institutions
different
from
those
found
in
the
other
areas.
For
purposes
of
comparative
analysis,
the
omission
is
unfortunate;
the
contrasting
social
origins,
ideologies,
and
views
of
modernization
held
by
the
military
in
Latin
America
and
elsewhere
would
provide
interesting
information
which
help
to
sharpen
his
focus
and
strengthen
his
generalizations.
The
most
useful
propositions
developed
by
the
author
are
those
which
result
from
his
study
of the
internal
organization
of
the
military.
These,
when
more
fully
tested,
may
provide
the
basis
for
a
general
theory
about
the
military
in
politics.
Before
this
can
take
place,
however,
other
areas
of
the
political
sociology
of
the
mili-
tary
must
be
examined.
What,
for
instance,
is
the
effect
of
holding
political
power
on
the
goals,
values,
tactics
and
composition
of
military
leadership?
If
developments
in
Burma
are
not
unique,
there
is
real
evidence
that
significant
changes
occur
in
the
leadership
and
their
approach
to
politics
and
modernization.
Also,
it
would
seem
that
more
attention
must
be
given
to
guerilla
military
forces.
The
author
takes
note
To continue reading
Request your trial