This 10 page paper discusses the relationship between autocratic regimes and their military forces, and how the military can keep these governments in power. Bibliography lists 12 sources.
to back them up, keep order and keep the population in line. This paper explores the way in which the use of military force keeps autocrats in power. Discussion The
statement that "military force helps autocrats remain in power" seems like a glimpse of the obvious, but its much more complex than it sounds. In researching this paper, the phrase
"military force AND autocratic regime" was used, and the returns that came back-there were thousands-were surprising. They almost always connected powerful autocratic regimes to the military of the United States.
This is an uncomfortable finding for Americans who want to believe in the myth that the U.S. is always noble, honorable and committed to doing the right thing. Checking some
of these sources revealed that in many cases, the autocratic regime, though it is in another country, is indirectly "propped up" by the United States. While its not entirely fair
to beat the U.S. endlessly for its constant interventions overseas, neither can this finding be ignored. Lets begin with an overview of how autocrats use the military, and the problems
it presents. The problem with using the military is obvious: if it is to be effective in keeping the regime in power, the military has to be relatively powerful in
comparison to the non-military agencies in the country. That is, "[N]ondemocratic regimes need the use of force in order to remain in power, but this creates a political moral hazard
problem; a strong military may not simply work as an agent of the elite but may turn against them in order to create a regime more in line with their
own objectives."1 In order to keep the military loyal to the regime, its often necessary for that regime to make concessions to the military; if these concessions are inadequate, "the