Some countries perform the military doctrine and tactics very effectively,
but the others do not. Many researchers have tried to explain this variance of the
military effectiveness in the viewpoint of civil-military relation and especially coup-proofing
in the authoritarianism. In genera...
Some countries perform the military doctrine and tactics very effectively,
but the others do not. Many researchers have tried to explain this variance of the
military effectiveness in the viewpoint of civil-military relation and especially coup-proofing
in the authoritarianism. In general, coup-proofing is known to have a
negative impact on the military effectiveness because it is likely to undermine soldiers’
leadership qualities, initiative skills, and the ability to coordinate different military
units. Empirically, however, countries with communist legacy such as China,
Vietnam, North Korea, and countries in Eastern Europe both prevented a coup
successfully in domestic politics and deterred and defended the external threats
successfully as well as won battles and wars. Thus, the dissertation questions whether
some authoritarian regimes have developed a distinct coup-proofing mechanism
which is not likely to ruin the military effectiveness, and if so, how the peculiar coup-proofing
strategy does improve the military effectiveness as well as thwart a military
coup.
To figure out the coup-proofing strategies and their relationship with the
military effectiveness, the dissertation firstly hypotheses that the coup-proofing
strategy, constructed by the combination of coup-proofing tactics, is categorized into
three different coup-proofing types, Hostage Strategy, Counterbalance Strategy, and
Bargain Strategy. Some coup-proofing tactics are inherently exclusive, compatible,
or correlative with the others. Then, it also hypotheses that, owing to the impacts of
the composite coup-proofing tactics, Coup-Proofing Strategy of Hostage enhances
the military effectiveness, while those of Counterbalance and Bargain hamper the
military effectiveness.
To examine these hypotheses, this dissertation does process tracing firstly in
the comparison with coup-proofing strategies and military effectiveness of North and
South Vietnam during the Vietnam War and secondly examines Egyptian coup-proofing
strategy under the Sadat’s rule and its military effectiveness in the October
War, 1973. Also, it conducts the regression on the relationship between the coup-proofing
strategies and the military effectiveness, with the modified version of Pilster and
Böhmelt (2011)’s dataset.
In conclusion, against the conventional wisdom, the authoritarian regime
that adopts the Coup-Proofing Strategy of Hostage can improve the military
effectiveness, avoiding the risk of coups, simultaneously. Also, the authoritarian
regime that adopts the Coup-Proofing Strategy of Bargain can undermine the military
effectiveness even though it does not counterbalance its military organizations.
Some countries perform the military doctrine and tactics very effectively,
but the others do not. Many researchers have tried to explain this variance of the
military effectiveness in the viewpoint of civil-military relation and especially coup-proofing
in the authoritarianism. In general, coup-proofing is known to have a
negative impact on the military effectiveness because it is likely to undermine soldiers’
leadership qualities, initiative skills, and the ability to coordinate different military
units. Empirically, however, countries with communist legacy such as China,
Vietnam, North Korea, and countries in Eastern Europe both prevented a coup
successfully in domestic politics and deterred and defended the external threats
successfully as well as won battles and wars. Thus, the dissertation questions whether
some authoritarian regimes have developed a distinct coup-proofing mechanism
which is not likely to ruin the military effectiveness, and if so, how the peculiar coup-proofing
strategy does improve the military effectiveness as well as thwart a military
coup.
To figure out the coup-proofing strategies and their relationship with the
military effectiveness, the dissertation firstly hypotheses that the coup-proofing
strategy, constructed by the combination of coup-proofing tactics, is categorized into
three different coup-proofing types, Hostage Strategy, Counterbalance Strategy, and
Bargain Strategy. Some coup-proofing tactics are inherently exclusive, compatible,
or correlative with the others. Then, it also hypotheses that, owing to the impacts of
the composite coup-proofing tactics, Coup-Proofing Strategy of Hostage enhances
the military effectiveness, while those of Counterbalance and Bargain hamper the
military effectiveness.
To examine these hypotheses, this dissertation does process tracing firstly in
the comparison with coup-proofing strategies and military effectiveness of North and
South Vietnam during the Vietnam War and secondly examines Egyptian coup-proofing
strategy under the Sadat’s rule and its military effectiveness in the October
War, 1973. Also, it conducts the regression on the relationship between the coup-proofing
strategies and the military effectiveness, with the modified version of Pilster and
Böhmelt (2011)’s dataset.
In conclusion, against the conventional wisdom, the authoritarian regime
that adopts the Coup-Proofing Strategy of Hostage can improve the military
effectiveness, avoiding the risk of coups, simultaneously. Also, the authoritarian
regime that adopts the Coup-Proofing Strategy of Bargain can undermine the military
effectiveness even though it does not counterbalance its military organizations.
주제어
#군사효과성 베트남 전쟁 10월 전쟁 북베트남 남베트남 이집트 사다트 정권 쿠 프루핑
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.