:: wikimiki.org ::

Armed Forces

Armed forces

The armed forces of a state are its government sponsored defense and fighting forces and organizations. They exist to further the foreign and domestic policies of their governing body. In some countries paramilitary forces are included in a nations armed forces. Armed force is the use of armed forces to achieve political objectives. The study of the use of Armed Forces is called military science. Broadly speaking, this involves considering offense and defense at three "levels": strategy, operational art, and tactics. All of these areas study the application of the use of force in order to achieve a desired objective.

Organization

Armed forces may be organized as standing forces (e.g. regular army), which describes a professional army that is engaged in no other profession than preparing for and engaging in warfare. In contrast, there is the citizen army. A citizen army (also known as a militia or reserve army) is only mobilised as needed. Its advantage lies in the fact that it is dramatically less expensive (in terms of wealth, manpower, and opportunity cost) for the organizing society to support. The disadvantage is that such a "citizen's army" is less well trained and organized. Historically, professional armies often triumph over much larger citizen armies when engaged in combat. A compromise between the two has a small cadre of professional NCOs (non-commissioned officers) and officers who act as a skeleton for a much larger force. When war comes, this skeleton is filled out with conscripts or reservists (former full-time soldiers who volunteer for a small stipend to occasionally train with the cadre to keep their military skills intact), who form the wartime unit. This balances the pros and cons of each basic organization, and allows the formation of huge armies (in terms of millions of combatants), necessary in modern large scale warfare. The armed forces in many larger countries are divided into an army, an air force, and usually a navy (unless geography dictates otherwise). These divisions may be solely for the purposes of training and support, or may be completely independent branches responsible for conducting operations independently of other services. Most smaller countries have a single organization that encompasses all armed forces employed by the country in question. In larger armed forces the culture between the different branches of a countries armed forces can be quite different. It has been said that "a navy and an air force man equipment" whereas "an army equips men". The state of readiness of a military organisation may be indicated by its DEFCON state (US) or BIKINI state (UK).

Benefits and costs

BIKINI state The obvious benefit to a country in maintaining armed forces is in providing protection from foreign threats, and from internal conflict. In recent decades armed forces personnel have also been used as emergency civil support roles in post-disaster situations. On the other hand they may also harm a society by engaging in counter-productive (or merely unsuccessful) warfare. Expenditure on science and technology to develop weapons and systems sometimes produces side benefits, although some claim that greater benefits could come from targeting the money directly. Excessive expenditure on armed forces can drain a society of needed manpower and material, significantly reducing civilian living standards. If continued over a significant period of time, this results in reduced civilian research and development, degrading the society's ability to improve its infrastructure. This lack of development in turn can affect armed forces in a vicious cycle. See North Korea for a typical modern example of this problem. Transarmament is a recent movement to replace armed forces with nonviolence training and infrastructure.

Armed forces of the world

See :Category:Militaries.

External links

- [http://www.defencetalk.com/ DefenceTalk]
- [http://www.janes.com/defence/ Janes Defence]
- [http://www.HavenWorks.com/military Military News]
- [http://www.militaryindexes.com/ Directory of Online Military Indexes & Records - USA]
- [http://www.DefenseLINK.mil US Military News DefenseLINK.mil]
- [http://www.bdcol.ee/ Baltic Defence College] ja:軍隊 simple:Military zh-cn:武装力量

State

:This article discusses states as sovereign political entities; for other meanings, see state (disambiguation). A state is an organized political community occupying a definite territory, having an organized government, and possessing internal and external sovereignty. Recognition of the state's claim to independence by other states, enabling it to enter into international agreements, is often important to the establishment of its statehood, although some theories do not make this a requirement - for instance, the Montevideo Convention. The "state" can also be defined in terms of domestic conditions, specifically, as conceptualized by Max Weber, "a state is a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory." [http://www.mdx.ac.uk/www/study/xweb.htm] The exact meaning of this definition depends on what is understood by "legitimate". For more information see government.

Introduction

The word "state" in contemporary parlance often means the "Westphalian state", in reference to the Peace of Westphalia of 1648. In this sense, the modern state is an entity that enjoys extensive autonomy in its domestic economic and social policy, largely free from interference from other states and powers. A number of modern commentators have claimed that we are experiencing the decline of the Westphalian state as the principal actor of the international system, pointing to economic, cultural, political, and technological changes in the world, such as globalization and the emergence of regional and supernational groupings such as the European Union. The term "state" is also used to describe subnational territorial divisions within a federal system, as in the case of the United States of America. See state (law) and state (non-sovereign). In common speech, the terms country, nation and state are casually used as synonyms, but in a more strict usage they are distinguished:
- country is the geographical area.
- nation designates a people (however, national and international both confusingly refer as well to matters pertaining to what are strictly states, as in "national capital", "international law").
- state refers to the government, and an entity in international law. Currently, the entire land surface of the Earth is divided among the territories of the roughly two hundred states now existing, with the special case of Antarctica, a variety of disputed territories, and a number of areas where state power exists in theory, but not in practice (the most significant of these being Somalia and Iraq).

Etymology

The word "state" originates from the medieval state or throne upon which the head of state (usually a monarch) would sit. By process of metonymy, the word state became used to refer to both the head of state and the power entity he represented (though the former meaning has fallen out of use). A similar association of terms can today be seen in the practice of referring to government buildings as having authority, for example "The White House today released a press statement..."

Formation of the state

The birth of the state, in the broadest sense of the word, coincides with the rise of civilization. For most of the existence of the human species, people lived as nomadic hunter-gatherers. That lifestyle began to change with the invention of agriculture around the 9th millennium BC. The practice of agriculture made it necessary for human beings to build permanent settlements and spend most of their lives in close proximity to the land they cultivated. Thus, control over land became an issue for the first time. To express that control, various forms of property rights developed, with people claiming different kinds of rights over various areas of land. Disagreements over the nature and extent of such claims of ownership degenerated into violence and the first "wars". In some parts of the world, notably Mesopotamia and the Nile valley, natural conditions favoured the concentration of land ownership in few hands. Eventually, a small group of people found themselves owning the land on which many other people worked for a living. This control over the land meant control over the people whose livelihoods depended on the land; thus, the first primitive states arose. These states were usually despotic and unstable, with the ruler(s) holding absolute power over their subjects until some other ruler(s) displaced them. Since there were no laws and no infrastructure, and since power was exercised arbitrarily, some political theorists and historians do not consider such early forms of despotic rule to have been states in the proper sense of the word; they are sometimes called proto-states. One of the earliest known sets of laws, the Code of Hammurabi, has been dated to ca. 1700 BC. It was around this time that the concept of law - one of the foundations of the modern state - began to appear. But the rulers of the Ancient Near East had a long tradition of holding absolute power and claiming the status of god-kings (see hydraulic despotism). Thus, laws limiting the power of monarchs did not develop very far in that region. The city-states of Ancient Greece were the first to establish states whose powers were clearly defined in laws (even if the laws themselves could usually be changed quite easily). Also, notably, the idea of democracy was born in ancient Athens (see Athenian democracy). Many institutions of the modern state (especially in Western Europe and areas once dominated by Western-European empires) can trace their origins back to Ancient Rome, which inherited the political traditions of the Greeks and developed them further (particularly the rule of law, albeit in incomplete form). However, the Roman Republic gave way to the Roman Empire - which, in turn, created the concept of universal empire: the idea that the entire world was (or should be) under the authority of one single legitimate state. The fall of the Roman Empire and the Great Migrations changed the character of European politics. The "barbarian" (i.e., non-Roman) kingdoms and chieftains that followed the Roman Empire were ephemeral and transitory and bore little resemblance to the modern state. Even the kingdom of Charlemagne was fleeting; without the tradition of primogeniture, it dissolved into three smaller kingdoms with the Treaty of Verdun in 843. These kingdoms were treated more as land holdings by the royalty that ruled them. Once again, the state became little more than an expression of the ruler's private ownership of a certain area of land. The lack of a real successor to the Roman Empire in Western Europe created a power vacuum. The kingdoms of Western Europe were besieged by invaders on the frontiers - first, the Muslim invasions from the south, then a series of new migrations from the east and finally the Viking invasions from the north. At the same time, the various kingdoms (and smaller political units) were often involved in wars with each other over territory and succession. The solution that evolved out of these affairs was decidedly opposed to the system of independent states and temporary alliances that dominate the modern international system. Religion, which had rarely been a factor in the power calculations of Ancient Greece and the Roman Empire, became the cornerstone of an extremely loose pan-European defensive bloc under the aegis of the Catholic Church. This system produced an extensive framework of institutions - sometimes called "feudalism" - that regulated internal conflict and enabled Western Europe to confront exterior threats, even while no individual secular entity was truly independent in the sense of the modern state. This system asserted itself abroad in the form of the Crusades as the Middle Ages progressed. In 1302, Pope Boniface VIII stated that the political powers of Christendom exercised their prerogatives "at the command and sufferance of the priest." This limited the power of kings, who were obliged to pledge their ultimate allegiance to the Pope. The Holy Roman Empire, one of the strongest medieval authorities, emerged as a competitor to Papal power under Holy Roman Emperor Frederick Barbarossa, who invaded Italy to press his claims to secular authority in the mid-12th century. The weakening of the papacy was a major theme of the Middle Ages; the Western Schism in the later 14th century, a dispute over papal succession, was exploited by secular authorities and contributed to their growing power. The emergence of large, stable land holdings by single dynasties - for instance, France and Castile - enabled them to take a more active and independent role than their traditionally subsidiary role in the earlier middle ages. This shift to more independent, more secular actors would become a major point of controversy in Early Modern Europe. The great dynasties of Europe dramatically consolidated power by the beginning of the 16th century; additionally, the external threats to Europe had considerably lessened. The Reformation was to have a powerful impact on the structure of European politics; the dispute was not only theological, but also threatened the very fabric of the ancient political institutions of feudalism. The bloody conflicts that followed, blending the religious and political, pitted those who asserted the authority of the Pope (and in Germany, the Holy Roman Emperor) against those who asserted the authority of secular authorities and their sovereign ability to make internal policy, particularly when that policy reflected religious affiliation, Roman Catholic or Protestant. These conflicts culminated in the Thirty Years' War of the 17th century. In 1648, the powers of Europe signed the Treaty of Westphalia which ended the religious violence for purely political motives and the Church was stripped of temporal power - even though religion continued to play a political role as the foundation of the divine right of kings. The principle of "cuius regio, eius religio" established at Westphalia and previously in the Peace of Augsburg set a precedent of noninterference in other states' internal affairs that was key in the evolution of the modern state. In Germany, the office of the Holy Roman Emperor, the most prominent symbol of lingering institutions of feudalism, was emasculated as a secular authority in favor of the constituent elements of the Holy Roman Empire. The modern state was born. The state continued to develop as monarchs brought nobles and free towns into line and amassed spectacular resources and prestige. The growing numbers of civil servants eventually became known as the bureaucracy after the elevation of the Republican ideal. Nearly a century and a half after the Peace of Westphalia, the state became fully modern through the French Revolution. Claiming 'national will' as its justification, Napoleon and the Grande Armee of France swept over Europe. In response, conquered and neighboring principalities discarded their old systems and adopted the new model of the nation state. The nation state has remained the dominant political entity all over the world ever since, even though the many ideologies of the 19th and 20th century have created numerous different ways of running the affairs of nation states, as well as numerous different forms of internal and external organization (see political system and economic system).

International point of view

The legal criteria for statehood are not obvious. A document that is often quoted on the matter is the Montevideo Convention from 1933, the first article of which states: :The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states. Also, in article 3 it very clearly states that statehood is independent of recognition by other states. This is the declarative theory of statehood. While the Montevideo is a regional American convention and has no legal effect outside the Americas, some have nonetheless seen it as an accurate statement of customary international law. On the other hand, article 3 of the convention is attacked by the advocates of the constitutive theory of statehood, where a state exists only insofar as it is recognized by other states. Which theory is correct is a controversial issue in international law. An example in practice was the collapse of central government in Somalia in the early 1990s: the Montevideo convention would imply that the state of Somalia no longer existed, and the subsequently declared republic of Somaliland (comprising part of the so-called "former" Somalia) may meet the criteria for statehood. However the self-declared republic has not achieved recognition by other states. Article 1 of the convention is also attacked by those who claim that it fails to take into account the complicated situations of military occupation, territorial cession, and governments in exile. Richard W. Hartzell is a leading proponent of this view, and stresses that the four criteria of article 1 need to be expanded to nine. See [http://www.taiwanadvice.com/conventions/montconv.htm The Montevideo Convention and Military Occupation].

The domestic point of view

Looked at from the point of view of an individual nation, the state is a centralized organization of the whole country. Those studying this dimension emphasize the relationship between the state and its people. The English political philosopher Thomas Hobbes argued that in order to avoid a multi-sided civil war, in which life was "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short", individuals must necessarily surrender many of their "natural rights" -- including that of attacking each other -- to the "Leviathan", a unified and centralized state. In this tradition, Max Weber and Norbert Elias defined the state as an organization of people that has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force in a particular geographic area. Also in this tradition, the state differs from the "government": the latter refers to the group of people who make decisions for the state. For Weber, this was an "ideal type", or model, or pure case of the state. Many institutions that have been called "states" do not live up to this definition. For example, in countries such as Afghanistan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the central state has so far not succeeded in monopolizing the legitimate use of force, and must compete with various local warlords. These cases are sometimes called "failed states". One of the most basic characteristics of a modern state is regulation of property rights, investment, trade and the commodity markets (in food, fuel, etc.) typically using its own currency. Although many states (by their own decision) increasingly cede these powers to trade bloc entities, e.g. North American Free Trade Agreement, European Union, it is always controversial to do so, and opens the question of whether these blocs are in fact simply larger states. The study of political economy, which evolved into the modern study of economics, deals with these specific questions in more detail. However, although states are often influenced in their decisions and no longer hold an absolute jurisdiction over their internal affairs, they are nonetheless much stronger in relation to international organizations or to other states than lower (substate) political subdivisions normally are. But the trend at the moment is for the power of superstate levels of governance to increase, and there is no sign of this increase abating. Many (especially those who favour constitutional theories of international law) therefore reject as outdated the idea of sovereignty, and view the state as just the chief political subdivision of the planet.

Philosophies of the state

Different political philosophies have distinct opinions concerning the state as a domestic organization. In the modern era, these philosophies emerged with the rise of capitalism, which coincided with the (re)emergence of the state as a separate and centralized sector of society. Philosophers such as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau pondered issues concerning the ideal and actual roles of the state. Recent philosophers like John Rawls and Robert Nozick were more concerned with distributive justice and the morality of exercising political power. There are four theories about the origin (and indirectly the justification) of the state. They are:
- Supernatural or natural authority - In this view, the state is either ordained by a higher power (such as God for the "Divine right of kings") or arises naturally out of a presumed human need for order and authority.
- Natural rights - According to this theory, human beings have certain rights that are "natural" (the implications of this word may vary), and establish states for the protection of those rights.
- Social contract - This idea holds that the state is established by the people (i.e. through the consent of the governed) in order to provide for various collective needs that cannot be satisfied through individual efforts, such as national defense, public roads, education, "the general welfare", etc.
- Conflict - Perhaps the simplest of the theories, it holds that the state did not arise out of any conscious decision, but merely as the result of violent conflict. Various groups of people fought each other for control over land or other resources, and the winning side imposed its domination on the losing side. These four theories can accommodate the full spectrum of political views. In practice, most people (and most political philosophies) subscribe to a combination of two or more of the above theories - arguing, for example, that different states have different origins. The conflict theory, in particular, is often combined with one of the other three in order to separate the illegitimate states (those created through conflict and subjugation) from the legitimate ones. There are at least five major philosophies of the state today, the last four of which correspond to specific political ideologies: contractarianism, liberalism, Marxism, conservatism, and anarchism. Contractarianism, as the name implies, is based on the social contract theory. It is also the only major philosophy of the state that does not fall within any single political ideology - perhaps because several different ideologies have adopted it as their own. Contractarianism is the foundation of modern democracy, as well as most forms of socialism and some types of liberalism. In contractarian thinking, the state should express the public interest, the interests of the whole society, and reconcile it with the separate interests of individuals. The state provides public goods and other kinds of collective consumption, while preventing individuals from free-riding (taking advantage of collective consumption without paying) by forcing them to pay taxes. Liberalism, in the classical sense, is based mainly on the natural rights theory. In this view, some or even all "rights" exist naturally and are not created by the state. For example, John Locke believed that individual property rights existed prior to the creation of the state, while the state's main job should be to preserve those rights. Historically, liberals have been less concerned with determining what the state should do and far more interested in stipulating what the state shouldn't do. The liberal philosophy of the state holds that the powers of any state are restricted by natural rights that exist independently of the human mind and overrule any social contract. However, there has been considerable debate among liberals as to what these natural rights actually are. Critics argue that they do not exist at all, since they are not evident from any observations of nature. On the other hand, there are also liberals who subscribe to the contractarian theory. In most cases, they fall on the left wing of liberalism, being social liberals ("New Deal" liberals; see American liberalism) and arguing for a welfare state. They stand in opposition to adherents of the natural rights theory, who tend to be libertarians, falling on the right wing of liberalism and arguing for a "minimal" state. The Marxist philosophy of the state is based on the conflict theory - specifically, on the idea of class conflict. In this view, the primary role of the state in practice is to enforce the existing system of unequal property and personal rights, class domination, and exploitation. The state also mediates in all types of social conflicts, and supplies necessary social-infrastructural conditions for society as a whole. Under such systems as feudalism, the lords used their own military force to exploit their vassals. Under capitalism, on the other hand, the use of force is centralized in a specialized organization which protects the capitalists' class monopoly of ownership of the means of production, allowing the exploitation of those without such ownership. In modern Marxian theory, such class domination can coincide with other forms of domination (such as patriarchy and ethnic hierarchies). Further, in Marxist theory, classes and other forms of exploitation should be abolished by establishing a socialist system, to be followed later by a communist one. Communism, the final goal, is a classless, propertyless and stateless society; however, socialism still preserves personal property and a (democratic) state. Thus, Marxism is opposed to the state (which it views as illegitimate, in accordance with the conflict theory), but does not wish to abolish the state immediately. As such, there is some overlap between Marxism and contractarianism: the socialist state that Marxists wish to establish as their short-term goal is to be based on a form of social contract. This state ought subsequently to slowly "wither away" as the representative democracy of socialism gradually transforms into the direct democracy of communism. Once the process is complete, the communist social order has been achieved and the state no longer exists as an entity separate from the people. In conservative thinking, which is based on the theory of (super)natural authority, the existing structure of traditions and hierarchies (of class, patriarchy, ethnic dominance, etc.) is seen as benefiting society overall. Thus, in a way, conservatives accept some ideas from both the Marxist and the liberal schools of thought, but view them in a different light: the state forces people to accept class and other kinds of domination, but this is seen as being for their own good. This perspective posits that, in general, current traditions only exist because they have been demonstrably successful in the past. Further, as with the liberals, the state is seen as always existing and/or "natural". Many conservatives, especially in recent decades, have come out in favor of the liberal theory of natural rights. Finally, in anarchist thinking, the state is nothing but an unnecessary and exploitative segment of society. Totally rejecting the Hobbesian notion that only a state can prevent chaos, anarchists argue that the state's monopoly of violence creates chaos. They believe that if the state and its restrictions on individual freedom were abolished, people could figure out how to work together peacefully and individual creativity would be unleashed. Contrary to the Marxist perspective, the anarchists see the state as an unnecessary evil, rather than a tool to be used in the class struggle.

References

-
-
-

External links

- Franz Oppenheimer; [http://www.opp.uni-wuppertal.de/oppenheimer/st/state0.htm The State. (1914/1922)]
- Franz Oppenheimer; [http://www.opp.uni-wuppertal.de/oppenheimer/fo27a.htm The Idolatry of the State. (1927)] Category:International law Category:International relations Category:Social sciences Category:Political geography ja:国家 simple:State th:รัฐ

Paramilitary

A paramilitary organization is a group of civilians trained and organized in a military fashion. Paramilitary, like paramedic and paralegal, comes from Greek para ("beside"). Paramilitary means auxiliary military, that is, something not quite military performing military duties. There are political connotations to "paramilitary" which often override the original meaning. Those political connotations, however, are localized and contradictory. There are paramilitary units that are an official legislated arm of the government, anti-government armed units that claim military status, and civilian paramilitary units that are neither, and other groups that are something in between. Paramilitary groups can serve many different functions. Some are created by governments as paramilitary police (Gendarmerie) or other internal security forces. Some are revolutionary groups using traditional or guerilla warfare to oppose the government. Others are private militias intended to enforce order without the niceties of the rule of law. Some are commando units created by a state and intended for non-traditional combat missions, operating outside the official military. Other paramilitary groups adopt military organization and aspects of military culture and discipline, but are not intended to fight at all.

Paramilitary Police

In military terms, paramilitary security forces are typically light infantry. Effectively led, they can stand in defense, especially in urban or unfenced border areas, but are less capable of offensive action or sustained combat operations due to a lack of heavy weapons, professional military training, and effective logistics support. Examples of this kind of paramilitary force include the People's Armed Police in the People's Republic of China which was split off from the People's Liberation Army in 1983 precisely to remove paramilitary duties from the PLA, and the East German Kampfgruppen der Arbeiterklasse. Over a million strong, India's Border Security Force is the largest and one of the most formidable paramilitary units in the world. One may also consider that United States SWAT units, or similar units in other countries, are paramilitary. The Los Angeles Police Department, for example, identifies itself as a paramilitary force. Like many other American police organisations it uses military-style ranks and insigniae. This is in contrast with the Metropolitan Police tradition (adopted in numerous British Commonwealth countries) where while insigniae tend to be modified but recognisable versions of military insigniae, ranks such as Inspector (Lieutenant/Captain), Chief Inspector (Captain/Major) and Superintendent (Major/Lieutenant Colonel) are used. British police to date are not routinely issued firearms. Many of the world's military forces, particularly in developing countries, could be considered paramilitary police; they are oriented towards controlling their own country's population rather than toward the role of a professional military. Certain countries, following the French model, have a Gendarmerie – a national police force with military status, responsible for law enforcement in rural areas and military installations. In the case of countries with a rule of law, such forces, however, are not referred to as paramilitary except in polemical fashion. The largest part of the gendarmeries is made of "normal" officers who perform duties in a way similar to what a Sheriff would do in the United States.

Paramilitary groups as extra-judicial "security" forces

These groups are neither a police agency nor a military organization, having elements of both but also lacking elements of both. These elements act outside the law and, in functional democracies, are both illegal and considered part of the problem rather than part of the solution. This sort of paramilitary force exists ostensibly to assure the internal control of a country and to suppress anarchy, civil war, but more often simply to suppress change. They are typically armed with small arms and wear military uniforms. They are also often equipped with tear gas and other non-lethal weapons. Such paramilitaries may be controlled by the ruling political party or by the head of state personally rather than by the legal government. In some situations, where the state or military apparatus is particularly weak or absent, they can act with a large degree of practical independence, having their own command structures and benefitting from private sponsors (instead of, or in addition to, any institutional ones), such as landowners, regional authorities, local interest groups, former victims of revolutionary paramilitary forces, warlords, drug lords or foreign interests. These sponsors may then be able to further extend their influence or control over the paramilitary forces, or even organize paramilitary groups of their own. These forces ostensibly operate to enforce the law but may act with disregard of the rule of law or at cross-purposes to the existing civilian or military authorities, which may or may not lead to confrontation if the resulting discrepancies are significant enough. Depending on their degree of political and financial autonomy, the relationship between the independent paramilitary forces and official institutions can vary from one of tolerance or incidental alliances (rather than of direct oversight and cooperation) to outright illegality. These groups may then act according to their own subset of tactical, economical and even political objectives, which may or may not be in opposition to those of the central government or established military command as a whole. Paramilitary forces have been responsible for some violations of the laws of war and for several atrocities. Examples of this kind of paramilitary force include the Colombian right wing paramilitary groups such as the AUC and loyalist paramilitaries in Northern Ireland, such as the Ulster Volunteer Force, UFF or UDA. (For their opponents, see next).

Revolutionary and guerilla paramilitary groups

Some paramilitaries are formed to fight the current government of a country or region. This includes rebellions against recognized governments and attacks on occupying forces. While some insurrections are carried out by rebellious units of a country's military, many are staged by paramilitary groups. When a group is acting locally against a military occupation, its members may be referred to as partisans, guerrillas, or as resistance fighters by supporters. The military occupation forces will generally refer to them as terrorists, insurgents, or rebels. Unlike state security paramilitaries, these groups are typically engaged in asymmetric warfare against an established and stronger force. In fact, they may be fighting both against the government and against other paramilitaries that support or are controlled by the government. Examples include FARC and ELN in Colombia, EZLN in Mexico and Hamas, Huzbollah, Islamic Jihad, Fatah and other armed insurgent groups in the Middle East, the Lord's Resistance Army of Uganda, the IRA in Ireland and ETA in Spain. In some instances, paramilitary groups have worked to destabilize and overthrow (supposedly) democratic governments, generally to create a fascist regime or, alternatively, to support a Communist revolution. As a consequence, many jurisdictions have laws prohibiting private paramilitary groups. Examples include the Sturmabteilung (helped install Nazi Germany), the Blackshirts (helped install Fascism in Italy).

Paramilitary commandos

In some cases, paramilitary groups are formed to perform commando functions. Unlike internal security forces and revolutionaries, commando paramilitary groups are generally small and highly trained. The paramilitary operations of the CIA and Mossad (as distinct from their intelligence-gathering function) are one example. Police SWAT teams and Black Cats are another.

Paramilitary groups as mercenaries

Paramilitary groups may also be formed to serve as mercenaries or private armies. Among the best-known of such groups is Executive Outcomes, a mercenary corporation that operated in Africa in the 1990s. Such groups are often made up of former military personnel, especially former special forces soldiers. Private firms have recently gained a major role in the operation of Western militaries, especially that of the United States. Such private military companies played key roles in the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the subsequent occupation, doing jobs like logistics and security. See the SourceWatch article: [http://www.sourcewatch.org/wiki.phtml?title=PMC Private Military Corporations]

Non-combat paramilitary organizations

Because "paramilitary" refers to the organization, not the purpose, of a group, some groups could be called paramilitary whose purpose is not to fight. These groups adopt some aspects of military culture and military discipline, such as military courtesy or a strict hierarchy. In wartime, groups like these may be pressed into combat because they have the necessary discipline and organization. Many of these are youth organizations, especially cadet corps or military auxiliaries. Examples include the Scouting movement, the Boys' Brigade, the Hitler Youth, the US Civil Air Patrol, the United States Coast Guard Auxiliary, the United States Naval Sea Cadet Corps and the American Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps.

External links

- [http://www.hrw.org/reports/2000/colombia/ Human Rights Watch, Colombia and Military-Paramilitary Links]
- [http://www.paramilitarynews.com/ Paramilitary News] Category:Types of military Category:Irregular military Category:Paramilitary organizations

Military science

Military science concerns itself with the study of the diverse technical, psychological, and practical phenomena that encompass the events that make up warfare, especially armed combat. It strives to be an all-encompassing scientific system that if properly employed, will greatly enhance the practitioner's ability to prevail in an armed conflict with any adversary. To this end, it is unconcerned whether that adversary is an opposing military force, guerrillas or other irregulars, or even knows of or utilizes military science in return. Military (land battle) science encompasses six major branches, as follows:

Military organization

Develops optimal methods for the administration and organization of military units, as well as the military as a whole. In addition, this area studies other associated aspects as mobilization/demobilization, and military government for areas recently conquered (or liberated) from enemy control. See also military unit.

Military education and training

Studies the methodology and practices involved in training soldiers, NCOs (non-commissioned officers, i.e. sergeants), and officers. It also extends this to training small and large units, both individually and in concert with one another for both the regular and reserve organizations. Military training, especially for officers, also concerns itself with general education and political indoctrination of the armed forces.

Military history

Military activity has been a constant process over thousands of years, and the essential tactics, strategy, and goals of military operations have been unchanging throughout history. As an example one notable maneuver is the double envelopment, considered to be the consummate military maneuver, first executed by Hannibal in the Battle of Cannae in 216 BC – over 2,200 years ago. By the study of history, the military seeks to not repeat past mistakes, and improve upon its current performance by instilling an ability in commanders to perceive historical parallels during battle, so as to capitalize on the lessons learned. The main areas military history includes are the history of wars, battles, and combats, history of the military art, and history of each specific military service.

Military geography

Military geography encompasses much more than simple protestations to take the high ground. Military geography studies the obvious, the geography of theatres of war, but also the additional characteristics of politics, economics, and other natural features of locations of likely conflict (the political "landscape", for example). As an example, the Soviet war in Afghanistan was predicated on the ability of the Soviet Union to not only successfully invade Afghanistan, but also to militarily and politically flank the Iranian republic simultaneously.

Military technology

Military technology is not just the study of various technologies and applicable physical sciences used to increase military power. It may also extend to the study of production methods of military equipment, and ways to improve performance and reduce material and/or technological requirements for its production. An example is the effort expended by Nazi Germany to produce artificial rubbers and fuels to reduce or eliminate their dependence on imported POL (petroleum, oil, and lubricants) and rubber supplies. Military technology is unique only in its application, not in its use of basic scientific and technological achievements. Because of the uniqueness of use, military technological studies strive to incorporate evolutionary, as well as the rare revolutionary technologies into their proper place of military application.

Military art

Military art is in many ways the centerpiece of military science. It studies the specifics of combat, and attempts to reduce the many factors to a set of principles that govern all interactions of the field of battle. As such, it directs the planning and execution of battles, operations, and wars as a whole. Two major systems prevail on the planet today. Broadly speaking, these may be described as the "Western" system, and the "Russian" system. Each system reflects and supports strengths and weakness in the underlying society. Generally, "Western" societies have higher levels of education and technology. In contrast, third-world (based on the Russian system) societies have lower levels of education and technology, but have much more raw manpower in their military than Western societies are willing (or able) to devote. Modern Western military art is composed primarily of an amalgam of French, German, British, and United States systems. The Russian system borrows from these systems as well, either through study, or personal observation in the form of invasion ( Napoleon's War of 1812, and The Great Patriotic War), and form a unique product suited for the conditions practitioners of this system will encounter. The system that is produced by the analysis provided by Military Art is known as doctrine. For more information, see operational art.

Military doctrine

Western military doctrine relies heavily on technology, the use of a well-trained and empowered NCO cadre, and superior information processing and dissemination to provide a level of battlefield awareness that opponents cannot match. Its advantages are extreme flexibility, extreme lethality, and a focus on removing an opponents C3I (command, communications, control, and intelligence) to paralyze and incapacitate rather than destroying their combat power directly (hopefully saving lives in the process). Its drawbacks are high expense, a reliance on difficult to replace personnel, an enormous logistic train, and a difficulty in operating without high technology assets if depleted or destroyed. Soviet military doctrine (and its descendants, in CIS countries) relies heavily on masses of machinery and troops, a highly educated (albeit very small) officer corps, and pre-planned missions. Its advantages are that it does not require well educated troops, does not require a large logistic train, is under tight central control, and does not rely on a sophisticated C3I system after the initiation of a course of action. Its disadvantages are inflexibility, a reliance on the shock effect of mass (with a resulting high cost in lives and material), and overall inability to exploit unexpected success or respond to unexpected loss. Chinese military doctrine is currently in a state of flux as the People's Liberation Army is evaluating military trends of relevance to China. Chinese military doctrine is influenced by a number of sources including an indigenous classical military tradition characterized by strategists such as Sun Tzu, Western and Soviet influences, as well as indigenous modern strategists such as Mao Zedong. One distinctive characteristic of Chinese military science is that it places emphasis on the relationship between the military and society as well as views military force as merely one part of an overarching grand strategy. Each system trains its officer corps in its philosophy regarding military art. The differences in content and emphasis are illustrative.

Western

The Western principles of military art as follows (derived from U.S. Army Field Manual FM 100-5):
- Objective – Direct every military operation toward a clearly defined, decisive and attainable objective. The ultimate military purpose of war is the destruction of the enemy's ability to fight and will to fight
- Offensive – Seize, retain, and exploit the initiative. Offensive action is the most effective and decisive way to attain a clearly defined common objective. Offensive operations are the means by which a military force seizes and holds the initiative while maintaining freedom of action and achieving decisive results. This is fundamentally true across all levels of war.
- Mass – Mass the effects of overwhelming combat power at the decisive place and time. Synchronizing all the elements of combat power where they will have decisive effect on an enemy force in a short period of time is to achieve mass. Massing effects, rather than concentrating forces, can enable numerically inferior forces to achieve decisive results, while limiting exposure to enemy fire.
- Economy of Force – Employ all combat power available in the most effective way possible; allocate minimum essential combat power to secondary efforts. Economy of force is the judicious employment and distribution of forces. No part of the force should ever be left without purpose. The allocation of available combat power to such tasks as limited attacks, defense, delays, deception, or even retrograde operations is measured in order to achieve mass elsewhere at the decisive point and time on the battlefield. ...
- Maneuver – Place the enemy in a position of disadvantage through the flexible application of combat power. Maneuver is the movement of forces in relation to the enemy to gain positional advantage. Effective maneuver keeps the enemy off balance and protects the force. It is used to exploit successes, to preserve freedom of action, and to reduce vulnerability. It continually poses new problems for the enemy by rendering his actions ineffective, eventually leading to defeat. ...
- Unity of Command – For every objective, seek unity of command and unity of effort. At all levels of war, employment of military forces in a manner that masses combat power toward a common objective requires unity of command and unity of effort. Unity of command means that all the forces are under one responsible commander. It requires a single commander with the requisite authority to direct all forces in pursuit of a unified purpose. ...
- Security – Never permit the enemy to acquire unexpected advantage. Security enhances freedom of action by reducing vulnerability to hostile acts, influence, or surprise. Security results from the measures taken by a commander to protect his forces. Knowledge and understanding of enemy strategy, tactics, doctrine, and staff planning improve the detailed planning of adequate security measures.
- Surprise – Strike the enemy at a time or place or in a manner for which he is unprepared. Surprise can decisively shift the balance of combat power. By seeking surprise, forces can achieve success well out of proportion to the effort expended. Surprise can be in tempo, size of force, direction or location of main effort, and timing. Deception can aid the probability of achieving surprise. ...
- Simplicity – Prepare clear, uncomplicated plans and concise orders to ensure thorough understanding. Everything in war is very simple, but the simple thing is difficult. To the uninitiated, military operations are not difficult. Simplicity contributes to successful operations. Simple plans and clear, concise orders minimize misunderstanding and confusion. Other factors being equal, the simplest plan is preferable. (Occam's Razor)

Soviet

The Soviet principles of military art, from Soviet AirLand Battle Tactics ISBN 0-89141-160-7. Similar principles continue to be followed in CIS countries.
- Preparedness – The ability to fulfill missions under any conditions for starting or the conduct of war.
- Initiative – Utilizing surprise, decisiveness, and aggressiveness to continuously strive to achieve and retain the initiative. Initiative, in this sense describes efforts to fulfill the plan in spite of difficulties. This is in contrast to the western usage of the term which implies problem-solving and improvisation in order to deal with changed circumstances.
- Capability – Full use of the various means and capabilities of battle to achieve victory.
- Cooperation – Coordinated application of and close cooperation between major units of the armed forces.
- Concentration – Decisive concentration of the essential force at the needed moment and in the most important direction to achieve the main mission.
- Depth – Destruction of the enemy throughout the entire depth of their deployment.
- Morale – Use of political and psychological factors to demoralize opponents and break their will to resist.
- Obedience – Strict and uninterrupted obedience. Orders are to be followed exactly and without question. Commanders are expected to directly supervise subordinates in a detailed manner in order to ensure compliance.
- Steadfastness – Subordinate commanders are to carry out the spirit and the letter of the plan.
- Security – Security complements surprise. All aspects of security, from deception and secrecy, to severe discipline of subordinates who through action or inaction allow information to fall into the hands of the enemy are to be vigorously carried out.
- Logistics – Restoration of reserves and restoration of combat capability is of paramount concern of the modern, fast paced battlefield. Thus it can be seen that in Military art, the Soviet and Western systems are similar, but place their emphasis in wildly differing places. Western systems allow more control and decision-making at lower levels of command, and with this empowerment comes a consistent emphasis. Offensive, mass, and maneuver principles for the western commander all place a sense of personal responsibility and authority to ensure these principles are followed by appropriate action. In contrast the Soviet system stresses preparedness, initiative, and obedience. This places more responsibility at the better prepared and informed centers of command, and provide more overall control of the battle.

Chinese

Because the military doctrines of the People's Liberation Army are in a state of flux, it is difficult to give a capsule summary of a single doctrine which is expounded with the PLA. Rather the PLA is currently influenced by three doctrinal schools which both conflict and complement each other. These three schools are
- People's war – which is derived from the Maoist notion of warfare as a war in which the entire society is mobilized
- Regional war – which envisions future wars to be limited in scope and confined to the Chinese border
- Revolution in military affairs – which is a school of thought which believes that technology is transforming the basis of warfare and that these technological changes present both extreme dangers and possibilities for the Chinese military. ---- The differences in the specifics of Military art notwithstanding, Military science strives to provide an integrated picture of the chaos of battle, and illuminate basic insights that apply to all combatants, not just those who agree with your formulation of the principles.

External link

- [http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/call/index.html Collection of military handbooks, etc.]
- [http://www.army-technology.com Military Equipment] Category:Military science zh-min-nan:Kun-sū ja:軍事学

Strategy

A strategy is a long term plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal, as differentiated from tactics or immediate actions with resources at hand. Originally confined to military matters, the word has become commonly used in many disparate fields, such as:
- Business strategy
- Chess strategy
- Economic strategy
- American football strategy
- Military strategy
- Marketing strategies
- Game theoretical strategy
- Strategic management
- Technology strategy
- Tennis strategy
- Trading strategy

Origins of the word

The word finds its roots in the French stratégie, which is ultimately derived from the Greek stratēgos, which referred to a 'military commander' during the age of Athenian Democracy.

Casual and Formal Interpretations of the concept

A strategy is typically an idea that distinguishes a course of action by its hypothesis that a certain future position offers an advantage for acquiring some designated gain. The description of the idea is generally prepared in prescriptive documentation.

Historic Texts On Strategy

The nature of historic texts differs greatly from area to area, and, while there are some potential parallels between various forms of strategy (noting, for example, the popularity of the Art of War as a business book), each domain generally has its own foundational texts, a brief mention of some of these follows:
- Political strategy
- The Prince published in 1532 by Niccolò Machiavelli
- Military strategy:
- The Art of War written in the 6th century BC by Sun-tzu
- On War by Carl von Clausewitz
- The Influence of Sea Power upon History by Alfred Thayer Mahan
- Economic strategy
- General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money published in 1936 by John Maynard Keynes
- Business strategy
- Competitive Strategy by Michael Porter
- "Strategy Concept I: Five Ps for Strategy" and "Strategy Concept II: Another Look at Why Organizations Need Strategies" by Henry Mintzberg

Tactics

Tactics is the collective name for methods of winning a small-scale conflict, performing an optimization, etc. This applies specifically to warfare, but also to economics, trade, games and a host of other fields such as negotiation. Tactics and strategy are often confused:
- Tactics are the actual means used to gain a goal.
- Strategy is the overall plan. An example of the difference:
- The overall goal is to win a war against another country.
- The strategy is to undermine the other nation's ability to wage war by annihilating their military.
- The tactics (told to the combatants) are to do very specific things in a specific place. Michel de Certeau writes of the differences in The Practice of Everyday Life. Like strategy, tactics operate in space. However, unlike a strategy which creates its own autonomous space, “a tactic is a calculated action determined by the absence of a proper locus. … The space of a tactic is the space of the other” (ibid., 36-37). A tactic is deployed “on and with a terrain imposed on it and organized by the law of a foreign power.” One who deploys a tactic “must vigilantly make use of the cracks that particular conjunctions open in the surveillance of the proprietary powers. It poaches in them. It creates surprises in them” (ibid. 37). Tactics, then, are isolated actions or events that take advantage of opportunities offered by the gaps within a given strategic system yet the tactician never holds onto these advantages. Tactics cut across a strategic field, exploiting gaps in it to generate novel and inventive outcomes. Frequently, in military science fiction, "tactical" is the name given over to the shipboard department responsible for the operation of a warship's weaponry and defense. The commissioned officers and non-commissioned personnel assigned to tactical duties are called tactical officers and gunner's mates respectively, and are trained to do everything from sensor sweeps to weapons control to coordination of fleet activities. In the Honorverse, the "tactical officer" career track is seen as the "fast track" to command rank.

External links

- [http://how-to-negotiate.com/t.htm Negotiating Tactics]
- [http://web2.airmail.net/napoleon/index.html Napoleon, His Armies and Tactics] Category:War ja:戦術

Regular army

Army (from French armée) can, in some countries, refer to any armed force. More commonly, however, it is only used specifically to refer to a land force of the military. Within a national army, an army can also refer to a large formation, usually comprising one or more corps. Army is also often used in the description or title of military or paramilitary organisations which are not part of a country's official armed forces (and may well be illegal), such as the Irish Republican Army, and also in some non-military organisations organised on a quasi-military basis, such as the Salvation Army and the Church Army.

National land forces

A national army is usually the arm of the military service which conducts land-based warfare (for example, the United States Army, or the French Armée de Terre). Most armed forces make considerable distinction between the army or land forces, the navy, and the air force, often maintaining three independent organizations. Many air forces were formerly part of an army; historically, the United States Air Force originated as part of the United States Army, for example. Modern armies comprise several branches (also called services, or administrative corps). These may include the combat branches: infantry, armoured, artillery, and combat engineers, as well as the support branches: communications, intelligence, medics, supply, and army aviation (as opposed to a national air force).

Formations

An army can also be a large military organization (formation) comprising one or more corps. A particular army is named or numbered to distinguish it from military land forces in general—for example, the U.S. First Army and the Army of Northern Virginia. In the British Army it is normal to spell out the ordinal number of an army (e.g. First Army), whereas lower formations use figures (e.g. 1st Division). Armies (as well as army groups and theaters) are large formations which vary significantly between armed forces in size, composition, and scope of responsibility. In the Soviet Red Army, "armies" were actually corps-sized formations, subordinate to an army-sized "front" in wartime. In peacetime, a Soviet army was usually subordinate to a military district. For the hierarchy of land force organizations, see military organization. .

Militia

A militia is a group of citizens organized to provide paramilitary service. The word can have four slightly different meanings:
- An official reserve army, composed of non-professional soldiers
- The national police forces in Russia, and other CIS countries, and the Soviet Union: Militsiya
- The entire able-bodied population of a state, which can be called to arms against an invading enemy
- A private, non-government force, not necessarily directly supported or sanctioned by the government In any of these cases, a militia is distinct from a national regular army. It can serve to supplement the regular military, or it can oppose it, for example to resist a military coup. In some circumstances, the "enemies" against which a militia is mobilized are domestic political opponents of the government, such as strikers. In many cases the role, or even the existence of a militia, is controversial. For these reasons legal restrictions may be placed on the mobilization or use of militia.

Germany

See Freikorps

Switzerland

One of the most famous and ancient militia are the Swiss militia. It is not widely recognized, but Switzerland maintains, proportionally, the largest military force in the world, with more than twice as many active-duty soldiers per capita as the next-proportionally-largest force, in Israel, having a trained reserve militia of 36% of the total population. However, it should be noted that Switzerland has a long tradition of political and military neutrality.

United Kingdom

For much of the history of England, the military was controlled by Parliament, which had access to the resources to maintain a standing army. At various times, The Crown and Parliament were in strong disagreement, but Parliament's economic ability to use the army was counterbalanced by the Crown's traditional ability to call out the militia. As long as the army's weapons were not radically more powerful than the militia's, this balance of power was effective. The English Bill of Rights (1689) declared, amongst other rights: :"That the raising or keeping a standing army within the kingdom in time of peace, unless it be with consent of Parliament, is against law;" and :"That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defense suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law;" Following the creation of large standing army, the word militia fell into disuse in the UK, though many units retained the distinction of being designated "militia" units as extra battalions of regular regiments and "Irish" militia were heavily relied upon to suppress rebellion in Ireland. The militia was formally disbanded in 1908 with the creation of a reserve force, known as the Territorial Force, later the Territorial Army, and the units of the militia were transferred to the Special Reserve. The Special Reserve were renamed the Militia in 1921, its units being placed in 'suspended animation', and the militia was disbanded in 1953. A number of old Militia units remain in existence, two in the Territorial Army: the Royal Monmouthshire Royal Engineers -- which was first formed in 1539 -- and the Jersey Field Squadron (The Royal Militia Island of Jersey), 73rd Regiment, Royal Engineers (formerly the Royal Militia of the Island of Jersey and first formed in 1337). Also, the Royal Alderney Militia -- created in the 13th Century and reformed in 1984 -- is part of the Army Cadet Force, thus ensuring the continuation of the name. Additionally, the Atholl Highlanders are a (ceremonial) private army maintained by the Duke of Atholl - they are the only legal private army in the United Kingdom. In modern usage, the term Paramilitary is more widely used of (illegal) private armies such as the UVF, UDA and Provisional IRA in Northern Ireland.

United States

The early Puritan colonists of America considered the militia an important social structure, necessary to defend their colonies from Indian attacks. All able-bodied males were expected to be members of the town militia. During the French and Indian Wars the town militias formed a recruiting pool for the Provincial Forces. The legislature of the colony would authorize a certain force level for the season's campaign, and based on that set recruitment quotas for each town militia. In theory militia members could be drafted by lot if there were not volunteers enough to meet the quota, however this was rarely resorted to as Provincial soldiers were highly paid (more highly paid then their regular British Army counterparts) and rarely engaged in combat. In the American Revolutionary War, colonial militiamen or armed citizens agreed to turn out for service at a minute's notice. The term minutemen is used especially for the men who were enrolled (1774) for such service by the Massachusetts provincial congress. These were also known as the "valiant farmers" who fought against the British at the battles of Lexington and Concord. The delegates of the Constitutional Convention, (the founding fathers/framers of the United States Constitution) under Article 1; section 8, paragraphs 15 and 16 of the federal constitution, granted Congress the power to "provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining (regulating/training) the Militia," as well as, and in distinction to, the power to raise an army and a navy. The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution was intended to formalize this balance between the "well-regulated" militia and organized military forces. The [http://www.palmetto.org/eh-8.htm militia act of 1792] clarified whom the militia consists of; " I. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years" In contrast the United States National Guard, created by the Militia Act of 1903, was a federalized portion of the State militias which were converted into regular troops kept in reserve for the United States Army. The [http://www.arng.army.mil/history/Constitution/default.asp?ID=14National Defense Act of 1916] placed all state militia units under the National Guard. This act was later amended in 1933 under the [http://www.arng.army.mil/history/Constitution/default.asp?ID=16 National Guard Mobilization Act], to place all National Guard units under the control of the United States Army effectively ending their status as "militia" under Article 1, section 8, paragraphs 15,16, of the Federal Constitution and the second amendment of the Federal Constitution. The current United States Code, Title 10 (Armed forces), section 311 (Militia: Composition and Classes), paragraph (a) states "The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard." Section 313 of Title 32 refers to persons with prior military experience who could serve as officers. These persons remain members of the militia until age 65. Paragraph (b) further states, "The classes of the militia are: (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia."[http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+10USC311]. The National Guard is the largest of the organized federal reserve military forces in the United States. The National Guard is classified (under title 10, see above) as the organized federal militia as it is under both federal and state control, and both the President of the United States and state governors can call upon it. Since the 2003 Invasion of Iraq many National Guard units have served overseas (under the [http://www.arng.army.mil/history/Constitution/default.asp?ID=17 Total Force Policy of 1973] which effectively combined the National Guard with the armed forces making them regular troops.) This can lead to problems for states that also face internal emergencies while the Guard is deployed overseas. To address such issues, many of the states, such as New York and Maryland also have organized state "militia" forces or State Guards which are under the control of the governor of a state, however many of these "militia" also act as a reserve for the National Guard and are thus a part of it (varies from state to state depending on individual state statutory laws). New York and Ohio also have active naval militias, and a few other states have on-call or proposed ones. In 1990, the United States Supreme Court ruled in the case of Perpich v. Department of Defense that the Federal government has plenary power over the National Guard, and greatly reduced (to the point of nonexistence) the state government's ability to withhold consent to Federal deployments and training missions of the National Guard.[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=496&invol=334] During some wars, both the suitability and effectiveness of the National Guard have been questioned, because of perceptions that personnel are often hastily, or not fully, trained for the roles they are asked to perform. For many decades, there were persistent allegations of nepotism, favoritism and/or the use of influence in the commissioning and assignment of officers. (See, for example, George W. Bush military service controversy.) Numerous states have their own Guard units separate from the National Guard; some authorized by the states themselves, like the Alabama State Defense Force, others simply are acknowledged by the state as their official State Guard. These units have no affiliation with the National Guard. (For information on organized private citizen militias not authorized by the Federal or state governments, see US private militias, below.)

Canada

In Canada the word militia refers to the part-time army reserve component of the Canadian Armed Forces. Militia troops usually train one night a week and every weekend of the month, except in the summer. Summertime training generally consists of a course and/or a "call out", as well as a longer exercise, usually 8-15 days. A call out can involve any job a soldier might be expected to do: staff member on a course, ceremonial guard duty, etc. In addition, primary reserve members may volunteer for service with the regular force overseas - usually NATO or UN missions. Reserve courses are often shortened versions of the same regular force course, but can use regular force staff members. Most Canadian cities have one or more militia units. Often these 'regiments' perpetuate famous Canadian regiments that are no longer required as part of the regular forces.

Australia

Militia was an alternate name for the Citizens Military Forces (CMF), the reserve units of the Australian Army between 1901 and 1980. After Australian federation, the six former colonial militias were merged to form the CMF. Initially the CMF infantry forces formed the vast bulk of the Australian Army, along with standing artillery and engineer units. The Defense Act of (1903) granted the Australian federal government the powers to conscript men of military age for home defense. However, these powers were unpopular and were used only for short periods at a time. The government was also forbidden by law from deploying the CMF outside Australian territories, or using it in strikes and other industrial disputes. As a result of the ban on foreign service, during World War I and World War II, all-volunteer Australian Imperial Forces were formed for overseas deployment. CMF units were sometimes scorned by AIF soldiers as "chocolate soldiers" or "chockos", because "they would melt under the pressure" of military operations. Nevertheless, some Militia units distinguished themselves in action against the Empire of Japan during the Pacific War, and suffered extremely high casualties. In mid-1942 Militia units fought in two significant battles, both in New Guinea, which was then an Australian territory. The exploits of the young and poorly trained soldiers of the 39th (Militia) Battalion during the rearguard action on the Kokoda Track remain celebrated to this day, as is the contribution of the 7th Militia Brigade at the Battle of Milne Bay. Later in the war, the law was changed to allow the transfer of Militia units to the 2nd AIF, if 65% of the personnel had volunteered for overseas service. Another change allowed Militia units to serve anywhere south of the Equator in South East Asia. Consequently they also saw action against Japanese forces in the Dutch East Indies. After the war, CMF units continued to form the bulk of the peacetime army, although with the creation of standing infantry units — such as the Royal Australian Regiment — from 1947, the regular army grew in importance. By 1980, when the name of the CMF was changed to the Army Reserve, the Regular Army was the more significant force.

U.S. organized private "citizens militias"

There are United States right wing political movements that calls themselves "citizens' militias", which supporters claim are based on the common law concept of an armed citizenry and various paragraphs in the United States Constitution and United States Code. These militias are not formally linked to a state or Federal government paramilitary organization or self defense force. They often speak out against the political actions of the Federal government because of what they consider oppressive policies and unconstitutional laws. The private "citizen militias" drew ideas and recruits from the independent survivalist movement, tax-protestor movement and others in the "Patriot" subculture in the United States. A few small private militia groups developed within the United States during the 1970s and 1980s, but the movement experienced a wave of growth in the 1990s for various reasons including the Gordon Kahl, Ruby Ridge, and Waco incidents and the passage of the Brady law, and 1994 "Assault Weapons Ban" . The private-militias continued to grow for a few years after the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, on April 19, 1995. The movement declined after the election of Republican George W. Bush to the Presidency in 2000 and by 2002 had largely vanished. Indeed, in early 2001, prominent Michigan militia leader Norm Olson stated that the militia movement had collapsed due to the departure of the Clintons Administration leaving members no longer scared enough of Washington to participate in their militias. The FBI has published its report on the militia movement and has determined that the movement is not a threat to the national security of the United States. Most private-militias engage in a variety of far-right political conspiracy theory, and claim that the current federal statutory laws, policies, treaties with foreign powers, and many federal agencies, are to varying degrees un-constitutional, and are engaged in unlawful practices. Private-militia activities range from organized lawful protesting of government policies to criminal activities including the illegal modification and manufacture of firearms and explosives. However, the majority of private-militia groups are non-violent and only a small segment of the private-militias actually commit acts of violence to advance their political goals and beliefs. A number of leaders of these groups, such as Lynn Van Huizen of the Michigan Militia Corps-Wolverines, have gone to some effort to actively rid their ranks of radical members who are inclined to carry out acts of violence and/or terrorism. Officials at the FBI Academy classify private "citizen militia" groups within four categories, ranging from moderate groups who do not engage in criminal activity to radical cells which commit violent acts of terrorism. Private "citizen militia" anxiety, paranoia of Globalism, and millenarianism relating to the year 2000 were based mainly on a political ideology, as opposed to religious beliefs. Many private-militia members believed that the year 2000 would lead to political and personal repression enforced by the United Nations and countenanced by a compliant U.S. government. This belief is known as the New World Order (NWO) conspiracy theory. Other issues which have served as motivating factors for the private-militia movement include gun control, the incidents at Ruby Ridge (1992) and Waco (1993), the Montana Freemen standoff (1996) and the restriction of land use by federal agencies, as well as the current Supreme Court decision regarding eminent domain. One can find numerous references in private-militia literature to military bases to be used as concentration camps in the NWO and visiting foreign military personnel conspiring to attack Americans. In response to the attack of September 11, congress passed the Patriot Act, a law that supposedly helps fight terrorism, without debate. The Patriot Act contains federal legislation similar to that which the New world order conspiracy theorists predicted. Many feel this act has eroded many American constitutionally guaranteed freedoms, and may encourage growth in the survivalist and private "citizen militia" subcultures.

Left wing militia

The left wing militias generally consider themselves to be freedom fighters and run the gamut of leftist causes, from the national liberation movements under foreign occupation, to the various terrorist groups such as the Red Brigades, and communist guerillas in Central America. As their funding and armament in the 20th century came almost entirely from the Soviet Union, Maoist China (1949-1976) and other Marxist-Leninist states, many of these organizations declined in their activities during the 1990s, as these governments fell or changed their nature. Within the United States, the Black Panthers and Young Lords claimed an association with such armed 'national liberation' groups. Both groups used guerilla-style uniforms, although they otherwise adopted the culture of a Marxist political party; for example their leaders were the 'Chairman' and 'Minister of Information' rather than using quasi-military titles. The Panthers carried weapons, although both groups' activity was basically political rather than military/terrorist. Contemporary groups such as the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front could be argued to be militias, although they do not use the term themselves. An important difference is that they are unarmed and do not kill people as a matter of policy.

Efficacy of militias against modern armies

As noted above, there is much disagreement about the ability of even the best organized militia to resist a modern regular army. However irregular forces do have several points in their favor, including familiarity with local terrain, dedication (assuming one's home is being threatened), entrenchment, and no obligation to fight "by the rules". The famed successes of Boer and American snipers against British volley fire during their respective wars for independence immediately come to mind. In more modern times, during the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising a handful of untrained and poorly armed Polish Jews held off an entire Wehrmacht division for roughly six weeks during the liquidation of that city's Ghetto. Although the uprising was eventually ended by artillery fire, the German Ninth Army was able to accomplish very little throughout most of 1943 as a direct result of this action. Many modern observers have pointed out that the invasion of Poland took only three weeks, and speculate that such resistance early in the war could have stopped the Blitzkrieg in its mechanized tracks. Indeed, the USA is facing a similar situation in Iraq, i.e. a swift victory over conventional military opponent followed by an intractable insurgency. Also, in WWII the French Resistance, armed mainly with captured German weapons and supplied by Allied air drops, were able to cause many disruptions to the Nazis which aided greatly during and after the Allied invasion of 1944. In the United States there were widespread fears of a Japanese invasion of the largely undefended West Coast. Some military experts at the time suggested entrenchment at the Mississippi River in case of such an invasion, on the assumption anything west of that point would be impossible to defend. Such an invasion never materialized, and there are rumors of uncertain authenticity suggesting that the Japanese feared "a rifle behind every blade of grass" -- a reference to the ubiquity of skill-at-arms in the American West at that time, although this theory completely disregards the impossible logistics of such an operation Furthermore, when an Allied invasion of Japan appeared to be imminent later in the war, the Japanese government began arming its populace with bamboo spears. Even to the well-armed and mechanized Allied forces, the prospect of facing such a foe was daunting, and millions of Allied and Japanese casualties were expected. This was a major factor in the decision to use nuclear weapons at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Another case of the effectiveness of irregular forces is that of the anti-government forces in Iraq although the regular forces and Republican Guard were quickly crushed in the open by the invading Coalition, the insurgency is estimated to continue perhaps another 12 years. Switzerland's continued neutrality during World War II is often seen to be due to the well-armed and well-trained citizenry. Even when militarily insignificant, irregular action can be highly effective as a demoralizing factor, as famously seen in Vietnam, Iraq, Somalia, and Algeria.

List of militias

Some famous militia organizations:

External links

- [http://www.fortliberty.org/militia/militia-faq.shtml The Militia FAQ]

References

- Mack Tanner ARMED-CITIZEN SOLUTION TO CRIME IN THE STREETS: So Many Criminals, So Few Bullets. ISBN 0873648064
- Gary Allen, Larry Abraham, Senator John G. Schmitz, 1976 None Dare Call it Conspiracy Concord Press
- John A. Stormer 1968 The Death of a Nation Liberty Bell Press
- John A Stormer 1964 None Dare Call it Treason Liberty Bell Press
- G. Edward Griffith July 1964The Fearful Master: A second look at the United Nations Western Islands Publishing
- Holly Sklar 1980 Trilateralism Boston: South End Press
- David M. Kirkham 1993 The New World Order: In Historical Perspective Wyoming: High Plains Publishing Company
- Jim Keith 1994 Black Helicopters Over America: Strike Force for the New World Order. Illuminet Press
- Leonard C. Lewin 1967 Report From Iron Mountain: On the Possibility and Desirability of Peace Dial Press
- Samuel J. Newland The Pennsylvania militia: Defending the Commonwealth and the nation, 1669-1870 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Dept. of Military and Veterans Affairs (2002)
- Larry Pratt Safeguarding Liberty: The Constitution and Citizens Militias Legacy Communications (May, 1995)
- Stern, Kenneth S. 1996. A Force Upon the Plain: The American Militia Movement and the Politics of Hate. New York: Simon & Schuster.
- Gibson, James William. 1994. Warrior Dreams: Paramilitary Culture in Post-Viet Nam America. New York: Hill and Wang.
- Gibson, James William. 1997. "Is the Apocalypse Coming? Paramilitary Culture after the Cold War." The Year 2000: Essays on the End, ed. Charles B. Strozier and Michael Flynn. New York: New York University Press.
- Levitas, Daniel. 2002. The Terrorist Next Door: The Militia Movement and the Radical Right. New York: St. Martin's.
- [http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm#2c US Department of Justice Memorandum on the meaning of the 2nd Amendment. August 24th, 2004]
- Militia Act of 1792
- Militia Act of 1903
- National Defense Act of 1916
- National Guard Mobilization Act of 1933
- Total Force Policy of 1973 Category:Types of forces Category:Gun politics

Armed forces

Organization

Benefits and costs

Armed forces of the world

See also

External links

State

Introduction

Etymology

Formation of the state

International point of view

The domestic point of view

Philosophies of the state

See also

References

External links

Paramilitary

Paramilitary Police

Paramilitary groups as extra-judicial "security" forces

Revolutionary and guerilla paramilitary groups

Paramilitary commandos

Paramilitary groups as mercenaries

Non-combat paramilitary organizations

See also

External links

Military science

Military organization

Military education and training

Military history

Military geography

Military technology

Military art

Military doctrine

Western

Soviet

Chinese

See also

External link

Strategy

Origins of the word

Casual and Formal Interpretations of the concept

Historic Texts On Strategy

See also

Tactics

See also

External links

Regular army

National land forces

Formations

See also

Militia

Germany

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States

Canada

Australia

U.S. organized private "citizens militias"

Left wing militia

Efficacy of militias against modern armies

List of militias

Official army units

State sponsored militias

Private militias

See also

External links

References