Foreword

Military spending and defense spending are not synonymous. They do not necessarily increase security. The relationship of military spending and economic development has been researched for more than thirty years. No definitive conclusion has been reached. Due to the end of cold war and onset of globalization, the role of military has changed drastically. The world is in a post-interventionist era and sanctions and diplomacy are replacing military intervention. Technology has also changed traditional role of military. Economic conversion from military to civil production is a matter of great importance, particularly in Russia and Eastern Europe. Military contract and its multiplier impact are also becoming more crucial for the regional economy and employment.

During the cold war, a significant portion of economic resources used to be devoted to military spending. After the cold war is over, it was thought there will be some Peace Dividend. That did not take place. Military expenditure increased steadily in the beginning of this century primarily due to the global war on terrorism. Peace time spending was about the same to that of cold war times. Another characteristic of military spending is its spatial character, that is, how defense expenditure is spread over geographical space and is inter-regionally connected. Defense is also based on the cooperation of different countries like NATO. The nature of deployment of military units depends on this coalition. Dichotomy between defense and non-defense matters is fast disappearing. The cost of defense will increase substantially in the future due to the nature of the weapon system.

In sociological literature, there are a number of studies about military and civilian culture, including some cross-cultural research about the civil and military societies. Human resources involving such factors as gender have also changed this situation particularly due to the abolition of draft. Military is a top-down organization. It is more centralized and formalized. Sociologists predict a gap between organizational culture of military and civilian societies. The gap between US military and civilian society is growing very fast. The leadership in military is skeptical about the civilian leadership. Its hostility toward media, more trust, and confidence on civilians rather than government institutions is well known.

This volume includes all these aspects in the contributions from well-respected scholars mostly from Europe.

Manas Chatterji

Binghamton University, NY, US

Series Editor