Lecture
What, then, constitutes the subject matter of military political science? Some hold that military political science is "the science of the role of military force in external and internal political relations and of its use by political actors"; "of the place and role of military force in politics, of the regularities of its organisation and use by political actors in defending their vital interests". Yet the formation and employment of military force is subject to a wide range of regularities, including those of an economic, demographic, socio-psychological and similar character, which lie outside the sphere of military political science and which it does not investigate.
Others declare the subject matter of military political science to be the general scientific foundations (the general doctrine) of war and defence security. However, in coming to know such phenomena as the essence and sources of the origin of wars, the nature of non-military and military violence, and the economic and socio-political foundations of defence security, one has to deal not only with political but also with philosophical, economic and social problems that are studied by the corresponding sciences. On such an approach, military political science would have to include the military aspects of such branches of knowledge as the philosophy of politics, political economy, political history, political sociology and others. In this way military political science loses the specificity of its subject matter and is transformed from an independent scholarly discipline into a complex of sciences.
Still others hold that military political science investigates "the regularities of the interaction of policy and military affairs, and moreover in the broadest interpretation of these areas of social life and with reference to all stages of their historical development, or military policy, its sources and aims, the laws of its development, and the mechanisms of its formulation and implementation". But while agreeing that war is the continuation of policy, one must acknowledge that "the interaction of policy and military affairs" lacks substantive definiteness. Such an approach removes from military political science the regularities of the interaction of the various aspects of policy with regard to military affairs, and the political aspects of the interaction of the various aspects of military affairs.
In the light of what has been said, it is more accurate to define the subject matter of military political science as follows: military political science is a system of knowledge about the nature, essence and forms of military violence, about the possibilities and limits of its use for political ends, and about the ways of organising military force and its place and role in the system of power relations.
In its make-up, military political science is an internally differentiated yet integral system of knowledge. Its integrity is expressed in the fact that military political science:
is directed in its entire content towards a clearly delineated subject – military violence as a phenomenon of politics. It investigates various military-political realities, the elaboration and definition of which constitute its scientific and categorial apparatus (aggression, war, army, military-political situation, militarisation, disarmament, military regime, and so on);
elucidates the necessary, essential, stable and recurring connections and relations in society with regard to and in the course of military activity, and reveals the logical dependence of some elements upon others;
carries out the analysis of all military-political phenomena and processes according to unified logical and methodological principles and rules.
In other words, military political science represents not merely a sum of interconnected items of knowledge, but also contains a definite mechanism for constructing knowledge and for the internal unfolding of theoretical content, and embodies a certain programme of research. Thanks to this, military political science acquires relative autonomy and occupies a specific place in the system of sciences. This determines, in particular, its distinction both from the general political disciplines (the study of the state, the theory of international relations, geopolitics, ethnology and others) and from the military sciences (strategy, military history, the theory of military development and others)
The differentiation of military-political knowledge is bound up with the fact that it provides the classification and generalisation of an enormous body of empirical data. At each particular moment different military-political phenomena become the object of close public attention: in one case the military might of the state and the ways of building it up, or the problems of conversion; in another, the political role of the army in the life of society or the possibilities of its depoliticisation; in a third, the nature and essence of military dictatorship or questions of civilian control over the military sphere, and so on. In any event, the form and depth of the theoretical comprehension of the questions posed by life may vary greatly depending on which initial principles have been placed at the basis of the analysis of military-political phenomena.
Any theoretical construction, be it a scientific conception, a political programme or a military doctrine, has at its foundation a number of assumptions. Accepted as unproven, and often unprovable, truths, they act as the initial premises upon which, according to definite logical and methodological principles and rules, an internally coherent system of views is formed. The abandonment of the accepted assumptions, or the alteration of even some of them, may lead to different – even opposite – conclusions. The range of problems investigated and the ways in which the science is internally organised change accordingly. It is in this way that various currents within military political science are formed. This explains the existence in military political science of various schools which in one case complement one another and in another compete with one another.
Called upon to provide theoretical support for the needs of military practice, military political science has three levels of investigating and generalising military-political realities:
general military political science investigates the fundamental problems of theory: the essence of military-political phenomena, the regularities and principles of their functioning, the factors and features of their development, and so forth;
comparative military political science aims not at the investigation, or more precisely not at the comprehension, but at the description of military-political realities in various countries, regimes and epochs. It makes it possible to identify analogues and to take account of the experience of other countries in military development and in the accomplishment of military-political tasks;
applied military political science is oriented towards elaborating proposals on the most expedient tasks, paths and methods of military development and military-political activity.
The differentiation of military-political knowledge is also expressed in the fact that military political science contains several relatively autonomous blocks of knowledge: the history of the development of military-political knowledge; the science-studies and methodological problems of military political science; military ideology as part of political consciousness; military-political relations; military-political institutions and establishments; and military-political activity proper.
1. The history of the development of military-political knowledge.
Military political science, like any other science, is enriched not only (and not so much) by the power of abstract thought as by the study of real military-political phenomena and processes. It investigates the conditions under which particular views arose and died away, and which views these were, and thereby uncovers their objective determination. Turning to the history of the science provides answers to many of today's questions, sparing society the need to "reinvent the wheel" and protecting it from repeating illusions and errors whose perniciousness was revealed in the past.
2. The science-studies and methodological problems of military political science.
Within this block such questions are elaborated and expounded as the subject matter and method of military political science, its place in the system of sciences, the relationship within it between fundamental and applied elements, and similar questions. These are, of course, problems of interest to professionals. For many they are superfluous. But without specialists' attention to them, neither an academic discipline nor a taught subject can come into being.
3. Military ideology as part of political consciousness.
Military political science investigates the substantive characteristics of the various views and ideas that express the attitude of political actors towards war and other forms of military violence (militarism, defence consciousness, peacemaking, pacifism, and so on). Their functional analysis is directed at elucidating which social and political forces are the creators and bearers of military ideologies, which factors influence their formation and dissemination, and how they themselves affect the potentials of the state and its military policy. An important part of this block consists of the structural-functional analysis of the military-political precepts and norms contained in traditions, religion, morality, law, party programmes and statutes and the like, and above all the study of military-political strategies and military doctrines.
4. Military-political relations.
The starting point here is the military force (military might) of states and other political actors as a phenomenon of social life, as a socio-political phenomenon and as a scientific category. Special attention is devoted to military-political situations and the problems of their evolution, to uncovering the sources and "nodes of tension" of emerging wars and military conflicts, and to the essence of and the ways of ensuring the military security of states. Moreover, military political science does not investigate, still less evaluate, the military-political situation itself. It develops the scientific tools for doing so. Its attention is concentrated on identifying the components of the military-political situation, its types and kinds, the factors determining its character and dynamics, and so forth. Various forms of military interaction between political actors are also examined here: cooperation, confrontation and struggle.
5. Military-political institutions and establishments.
Military political science studies the military organisation of states and societies and its components, above all the armed forces and the defence-industrial complex, and the conditions and procedures of their formation and functioning. Among the various actors of military-political activity, particular attention is paid to the army, to its relations with society, and also to the potential that characterises the military might of the country. The military-political institutions of the state encompass a broad spectrum of heterogeneous phenomena and formations, including: military service and military transport obligations, mobilisation preparation and military registration, military-patriotic education, military rule (dictatorship), military law and military justice, the treasury and field banks, and so forth.
6. Military-political activity proper.
Military political science acts not only as the theory of military policy but also as a "technology" for solving concrete military-political problems. It reveals the motives and aims, forms and methods of the military-political activity of social groups, peoples, states and their coalitions.
Thus, military political science reveals:
the place and role of military violence in history, its driving forces, actors and forms;
the mechanisms, structures and institutions of the military policy of contemporary states;
the state and development trends of military-political relations in individual countries and in the world as a whole;
the socio-political problems of military development;
past and contemporary military ideologies and their role in the political life of individual peoples and of the world as a whole.
The elaboration and dissemination of military-political knowledge is not a purely academic task. Its practical significance is revealed by the functions of military political science. By functions is meant the role that a particular social institution (in our case, military political science) plays in the cognitive and practical activity of the individual, society and the state. Theory lights the path for practice. The sense of this aphorism is that science equips policy with a knowledge of the causal connections and dependencies that are invisible to common sense, and thereby suggests to it what should be taken into account and what should be attended to in devising realistic and effective forms and methods of activity. On such an approach, the following "set" of functions of military political science may be proposed as one of the possible variants: informational-cognitive (gnoseological), worldview-forming, methodological, evaluative (axiological), normative and predictive.
1. The informational-cognitive (gnoseological) function. The study of military political science makes it possible to understand and systematise the kaleidoscopically variegated mosaic of the military-political phenomena and processes of "all times and peoples". It elaborates special concepts that become the steps by which the military sphere is known, and in particular those of its aspects that cannot be disclosed by other scientific tools. Take, for example, such categories as nuclear missile war and "nuclear winter", peaceful coexistence and local war, peacemaking and peace enforcement by force, mercenary service and contract service, and so on. Mastering their military-political content broadens and enriches our conceptions of the military organisation and military activity of states.
Moreover, the matter is not confined merely to a description – however detailed – of new realities. What is at issue is the identification and comprehension of all the foundations and connections of the object under study, and the uncovering of the laws determining its development and functioning. In elaborating this knowledge, military political science gives society an understanding of the essence, character and thrust of military phenomena and processes.
2. The worldview-forming function. Military political science not only conveys understanding but also shapes people's conscious attitude towards military violence, military policy, the defence of the fatherland, military duty, and so on. Of course, this understanding and attitude may take shape at the everyday level, generated by the immediate conditions of life, and appear in the form of common sense. But military political science lends them a theoretically considered character. It works out and affirms definite convictions which, appearing in the form of ideological tenets, theoretical conceptions and other conceptual-categorial constructions, become the foundation of a person's outlook on life.
3. The methodological function. The categories, principles and laws elaborated by military political science become a means of the further development of military-political knowledge and of the solution of concrete problems of military development. Military political science is called upon to give answers to such questions as the aims and principles of the state's military policy, the historical necessity and purpose of the army, and the essence and forms of civilian control over the military organisation. Its generalisations, conclusions and assessments constitute one of the theoretical foundations of military development.
4. The evaluative (axiological) function. Like any social science, military political science analyses reality. This analysis does not stop at a more or less objective characterisation of what exists, but uncovers real problems and contradictions, criticises reality (with varying degrees of radicalism) and, on the basis of this criticism, creates an alternative model in which, it is assumed, the shortcomings uncovered are overcome. Accordingly, military political science renders its assessments and works out positive or negative characterisations of various military-political facts, phenomena and processes. Another side of this function is manifested in the fact that the scientific conclusions and recommendations of military political science are taken into account in assessing the military-political situation, the sources and degree of reality of military threats, in determining military plans and programmes, and so forth.
5. The normative function. Military political science, like any social science, strives to formulate its own vision of what can and should be done, and how, to ensure the military security of the state, strengthen the country's defence capability, and raise the standing of the armed forces and of military service in society. By its conclusions it shapes mentality and, in a certain sense, guides the efforts of political and military leaders. It is no accident that politicians turn to science. In the West numerous military-scientific centres flourish, such as the RAND Corporation, the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies and the like. Such organisations are being created in our country too.
6. The predictive function. Military political science discloses the future of the country and of the world, the possibility of military conflicts and wars, their probable character, consequences, and so forth. Naturally, science does not formulate predictions in the manner of astrologers, indicating what will happen, when and where, but elaborates various theoretically admissible scenarios of the development of events. Its forecasts have the character not of categorical but of disjunctive and hypothetical judgements. In other words, the probabilistic character of the military-political process presupposes a multi-variant forecast as well.
Constituting an important aspect of the political and military culture of society and of the individual, military-political knowledge helps people to make sense for themselves of the political contradictions of history and of the present day, to see the deep-lying causes of political development, and to understand their own opportunities for taking part in it. History offers no small amount of evidence warning of the danger of mythologising political and military-political dynamics. In the military sphere, any assessments and decisions built upon false conceptions or erroneous foundations threaten not only funds thrown to the winds and social disorder for the mass of people employed in the defence complex, but also the unlawful and unjust use of armed violence. This determines the topicality and importance of military-political knowledge, above all for those involved in the elaboration and implementation of the state's military policy.
Comments