Rachel Tecott Metz
Summary
The U.S. Army struggles to persuade military leaders in weak states to professionalize their forces. But it is often to the advantage of foreign leaders to keep their militaries weak. Why does the army not try to coerce partners instead of persuading them? It serves the army’s bureaucratic interests to prioritize its role as a fighting force rather than an advisory group. Leaders have developed an ideology—the cult of the persuasive—to advance their interests even at the expense of U.S. foreign policy goals.
No comments:
Post a Comment