IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v109y2015i02p297-313_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Guardianship Dilemma: Regime Security through and from the Armed Forces

Author

Listed:
  • MCMAHON, R. BLAKE
  • SLANTCHEV, BRANISLAV L.

Abstract

Armed forces strong enough to protect the state also pose a threat to the state. We develop a model that distills this “Guardianship Dilemma” to its barest essentials, and show that the seemingly ironclad logic underlying our existing understanding of civil-military relations is flawed. Militaries contemplating disloyalty must worry about both successfully overthrowing the government and defeating the state’s opponent. This twin challenge induces loyalty as the state faces increasingly strong external threats, and can be managed effectively by rulers using a number of policy levers. Disloyalty can still occur when political and military elites hold divergent beliefs about the threat environment facing the state, since militaries will sometimes have less incentive to remain loyal than the ruler suspects. Consequently, it is not the need to respond to external threats that raises the risk of disloyalty—as conventional wisdom suggests—but rather uncertainty about the severity of these threats.

Suggested Citation

  • Mcmahon, R. Blake & Slantchev, Branislav L., 2015. "The Guardianship Dilemma: Regime Security through and from the Armed Forces," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 109(2), pages 297-313, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:109:y:2015:i:02:p:297-313_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055415000131/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Camarena, Kara Ross, 2022. "Repatriation during conflict: A signaling analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    2. Sheng, Yumin, 2023. "Patronage and authoritarian co-optation of the military: Theory with evidence from post-Mao China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    3. Roya Izadi, 2022. "State Security or Exploitation: A Theory of Military Involvement in the Economy," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 66(4-5), pages 729-754, May.
    4. Cullen S. Hendrix & Idean Salehyan, 2017. "A House Divided," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(8), pages 1653-1681, September.
    5. Abel Escribà -Folch & Tobias Böhmelt & Ulrich Pilster, 2020. "Authoritarian regimes and civil–military relations: Explaining counterbalancing in autocracies," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(5), pages 559-579, September.
    6. Paul Lorenzo Johnson & Ches Thurber, 2020. "The Security-Force Ethnicity (SFE) Project: Introducing a new dataset," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(1), pages 106-129, January.
    7. Jun Koga Sudduth, 2021. "Who Punishes the Leader? Leader Culpability and Coups during Civil War," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 65(2-3), pages 427-452, February.
    8. Mattingly, Daniel, 2024. "Response to Jetter and Swasito (2024)," I4R Discussion Paper Series 179, The Institute for Replication (I4R).
    9. Jacque Gao, 2021. "Solving the guardianship dilemma by war," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 33(4), pages 455-474, October.
    10. Adam Scharpf & Christian Gläßel, 2020. "Why Underachievers Dominate Secret Police Organizations: Evidence from Autocratic Argentina," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(4), pages 791-806, October.
    11. Camarena, Kara Ross, 2024. "The geopolitical strategy of refugee camps," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    12. Charles Crabtree & Holger L Kern & David A Siegel, 2020. "Cults of personality, preference falsification, and the dictator’s dilemma," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(3), pages 409-434, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:109:y:2015:i:02:p:297-313_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.