Member-only story

Politics, Security, and the Failure of Foreign Military Assistance: A Comprehensive Overview

Ethan Mitchell

·4.9k Followers· Follow

Published in Peacekeeping In Africa: Politics Security And The Failure Of Foreign Military Assistance (International Library Of African Studies)

5 min read

1k View Claps

79 Respond

Save

Listen

In the complex and ever-evolving realm of international relations, the provision of foreign military assistance (FMA) has long been a controversial and contested issue. While proponents argue that FMA can contribute to stability and security, critics maintain that it often exacerbates conflict and undermines local efforts to build sustainable peace. This article takes a comprehensive look at the politics of security and the failure of FMA, examining the historical context, underlying motivations, and unintended consequences of military aid. By delving into case studies and analyzing expert perspectives, we aim to shed light on the complexities of this issue and provide insights for policymakers and scholars alike.

Historical Roots of Foreign Military Assistance

The roots of FMA can be traced back to the Cold War era, when the United States and the Soviet Union engaged in a global arms race to maintain their spheres of influence. In order to secure allies and counter communist expansion, both superpowers provided significant military assistance to client states. This practice continued after the Cold War, as countries sought to maintain their military capabilities and secure their borders.

Peacekeeping in Africa: Politics, Security and the Failure of Foreign Military Assistance (International Library of African Studies)

by Todd Gitlin

4.6 out of 5

Language	:	English
File size	:	2648 KB
Text-to-Speech	:	Enabled
Screen Reader	:	Supported
Enhanced typesetting	:	Enabled
Word Wise	:	Enabled
Print length	:	290 pages

Motivations for Providing Foreign Military Assistance

There are a variety of reasons why countries provide FMA. These include:

Political motivations: FMA can be used as a tool of diplomacy and to build alliances with other countries. By providing military aid, donor countries can gain access to strategic locations, influence foreign policy decisions, and secure support for their own interests.
Security motivations: FMA can be used to enhance the military capabilities of recipient countries, thereby helping them to deter aggression and defend themselves against external threats. This can contribute to regional stability and reduce the likelihood of conflict.
Economic motivations: FMA can be a lucrative business for arms-producing countries. By selling weapons and military equipment, these countries can generate revenue and create jobs.

Unintended Consequences of Foreign Military Assistance

While FMA can have some positive effects, it can also lead to a number of unintended consequences. These include:

Increased conflict: FMA can fuel conflict by providing weapons to warring factions. This can lead to escalation of violence and make it more difficult to resolve disputes peacefully.
Military dependency: FMA can create a dependency on foreign aid, making recipient countries less likely to develop their own military capabilities. This can undermine their long-term security and make them vulnerable to external threats.
Corruption and abuse: FMA can contribute to corruption and abuse, as weapons and funds can be diverted to illegal or illegitimate purposes. This can undermine the rule of law and destabilize recipient countries.
Human rights abuses: FMA can be used to suppress dissent and commit human rights abuses. This can damage the reputation of donor countries and undermine their credibility.

Case Studies of Foreign Military Assistance Failures

There are numerous examples of FMA failures around the world. Some of the most notable include:

Vietnam War: The United States provided billions of dollars in FMA to South Vietnam during the Vietnam War. However, this aid failed to prevent the North Vietnamese from defeating the South Vietnamese and unifying the country under communist rule.
Afghanistan War: The United States spent more than $2 trillion on FMA in Afghanistan. However, the Afghan government collapsed in 2021, and the Taliban quickly regained control of the country.
Iraq War: The United States provided significant FMA to Iraq after the 2003 invasion. However, this aid failed to stabilize the country, and Iraq descended into a bloody civil war.

Expert Perspectives on the Failure of Foreign Military Assistance

There is a growing consensus among experts that FMA is often counterproductive and ineffective. Some of the most prominent critics include:

Andrew Bacevich: A retired Army colonel and professor of international relations, Bacevich argues that FMA is a "failed enterprise" that has created more problems than it has solved.
Stephen Walt: A professor of international relations at Harvard University, Walt argues that FMA is often motivated by domestic politics and special interests, rather than by genuine security concerns.
Emma Sky: A former British political adviser in Afghanistan, Sky argues that FMA can create a "culture of dependency" and undermine local efforts to build sustainable peace.

The provision of foreign military assistance is a complex and controversial issue with a long history and a mixed record of success. While FMA can have some positive effects, such as deterring aggression and enhancing military capabilities, it can also lead to unintended consequences, such as increased conflict, military dependency, corruption, and human rights abuses. In light of the evidence, it is clear that FMA should not be seen as a panacea for all security challenges. Instead, it should be used judiciously and as part of a broader strategy that includes diplomacy, economic development, and respect for human rights.

Peacekeeping in Africa: Politics, Security and the Failure of Foreign Military Assistance (International Library of African Studies)

by Todd Gitlin

4.6 out of 5