著者
工藤 仁子
出版者
ロシア・東欧学会
雑誌
ロシア・東欧研究 (ISSN:13486497)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.2008, no.37, pp.42-57, 2008

This paper attempts to analyze politico-military relations in Russia, providing a perspective on the Putin-Medvedev duumvirate. Political leaders from Boris Yeltsin to Vladimir Putin had needed support from the military for governing the state. The military had expanded its influence on politics, based on this politico-military cooperation. The political leadership had placed its foremost priority on military policy, which had coincided with the military's interests. However, the political leadership is currently seeking to put more emphasis on economic development than military policy, for stabilizing Russia's domestic and external environment. This policy shift may provoke dissatisfaction from the military, which regards the national security as Russia's top concern. Therefore, the political leadership will strengthen its control over the military, for the purpose of keeping political superiority on military. Nevertheless, strengthening control over the military contains a dilemma in which strong objection from the military would lead to secession of the military from the political leadership, losing military support for politics. When the duumvirate collapses, a problem on which leader the military chooses will emerge. Therefore, unless the dilemma is settled, the politics will have to give way to, or pay the price for pacifying the military in case of confrontation with the military.

1 0 0 0 IR 政軍関係

著者
赤木 完爾
出版者
慶應義塾大学法学研究会
雑誌
法學研究 : 法律・政治・社会 (ISSN:03890538)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.82, no.10, pp.130-131, 2009-10

神谷不二先生追悼記事
著者
赤木 完爾
出版者
慶應義塾大学法学研究会
雑誌
法学研究 (ISSN:03890538)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.83, no.3, pp.41-63, 2010-03

はじめに一 アメリカの政軍関係 : 大統領, 議会, 陸海軍, 国務省二 ローズヴェルト大統領と政軍関係の変容三 統合参謀会議の設置四 政軍関係の動態五 ソ連問題おわりに
著者
諸橋 英一
出版者
慶應義塾大学大学院法学研究科内『法学政治学論究』刊行会
雑誌
法学政治学論究 : 法律・政治・社会 (ISSN:0916278X)
巻号頁・発行日
no.96, pp.243-277, 2013

一 はじめに二 英国における総動員機関の設置と政軍関係三 総動員機関における英国からの影響と日本的展開四 おわりに挿表 陸軍将校海外派遣一覧
著者
尾上 正人
出版者
社会学研究会
雑誌
ソシオロジ (ISSN:05841380)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.57, no.1, pp.141-146, 2012-06-30 (Released:2015-05-13)
参考文献数
17
著者
小泉 直美
出版者
一般財団法人 日本国際政治学会
雑誌
国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.2011, no.164, pp.164_1-14, 2011

This article analyzes whether civilian control over the Russian military has been reestablished after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Civilian control had been firmly established under the communist regime by the Brezhnev era and functioned very well. It was a kind of division of labor based upon the common ideology, in which the Communist Party leadership decides the overall direction of foreign and security policy, while the General Staff with its exclusive military expertise provides option formation and implementation. The Party leadership gave the military everything they need and want, and the military in turn does not interfere into the politics.<br>With the collapse of the Soviet Union, however, this controlling system also ceased to function. The political leadership can no longer look after the military's interests, while the military got fully politicized in and outside the Duma. Then the former President Putin tried to reestablish the control system, although it was not a democratic one, but the control by the president. Putin wanted to transform the military into a small but highly efficient and usable one in the local and regional conflicts. Although Putin's plan did not frame well, in 2007 with the new defense minister Anatolii Serdyukov appointed the situation began to change.<br>This article examines the three aspects of Putin's (and Medvedev's) reform efforts, namely the reform of military bureaucracy, the fulfillment of the military's interests, and the change of the official threat perceptions. First, in terms of civilianization of the defense ministry and the subordination of the General Staff to the civilian defense ministry, much efforts has been made, but still not enough. Due to lack of civilian military experts, it will take some more time to overcome the General Staff's exclusive status and power inherited from the Soviet era. Second, the political leadership attaches a great emphasis to the modernization of military equipment and the improvement of material conditions for military service. Still, the lack of capital and an inefficient way of using it have impeded visible progress. Third, after long procrastination finally the new official strategic documents, the National Security Strategy and the Military Doctrine, have been approved. They revised the official threat perception from a large scale attack from the West to local and regional conflicts along the borders. Nevertheless, we should notice that a deep distrust against the West, especially the U.S. and NATO, is rooted in the newly attained consensus.<br>In sum, civilian control in Russia is working far better than in the 1990's, but is still incomplete. There is much room for the military's dissatisfaction or distrust against the U.S. to exert its influence to the political decisions.
著者
小泉 直美
出版者
一般財団法人 日本国際政治学会
雑誌
国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.1992, no.100, pp.104-125,L12, 1992

The East European countries waged the Cold War as members of the Eastern block. But they also waged the Cold War against the Soviet Union. The Purpose of this paper is to analyze the beginning and end of this Cold War of East Europe from the viewpoint of the Soviet perception.<br>The Soviet rule over East Europe was the result of the Soviet threat perception, as well as the vacuume of power and Soviet capability to fill it up. In other words, the Soviets felt strong threat from the West and came to a conclusion that East Europe is a special and vital area for the Soviet national security through the experience over the Second World War. Then the end of this Cold War must be based upon the overcome of this perception by the new Russian leadership and the society. The paper will address to these processes.<br>As for the beginning of the Cold War of East Europe, we are going to pay attention to the period from August 1939 to June 1941, namely from the conclusion the Soviet-German Non-Agression Pact to the start of the Soviet-German War. This is because we think that these years got a decisive meaning for the formation of the Soviet security perception after WWII.<br>Then after fifty years, the time for change came with the <i>Perestroika</i> started by Gorbachev. The Soviet Union (then Russia) no longer has the capability to hold the East European nations as her protege nor alliance. Her threat perception is also being mitigated under the new post-Cold War situation in Europe. For all of this the paper will still give a suggestion for uncertainty over whether Russia has finally overcome her perception of vulneravility and of East Europe as her special zone.
著者
白土 丈雄
出版者
陸戦学会
雑誌
陸戦研究
巻号頁・発行日
pp.41-56, 2012-09