Note: The Content of Military Professionalism Changes Over Time

In early modern Europe, the rank of a soldier, particularly that of an officer, was open only to noblemen, and positions were sometimes bought and sold for money. The French Revolutionary Wars and the Napoleonic Wars, which occurred from the late 18th to the early 19th century, served as the catalyst for the decline of these personnel practices, as the French military began to employ individuals without noble origins as officers.

Building on the success of this system, the great powers modernized their military education systems in the 19th century, allowing commoners to become soldiers based on their abilities. It is significant for the history of the military that during this period, the soldier was separated from social status and transformed into a professional occupation.

The American political scientist Samuel Huntington is known for calling the norms of professional soldiers established during this period "military professionalism" (military professionalism). In his book "The soldier and the state" (1957), he argued that at the heart of military professionalism is the competence of the military expert, and that the military, like the medical or legal professions, is a community where participation is granted based on possessing a certain level of competence. Furthermore, Huntington defined the essence of a professional soldier's competence as the management of violence, believing that commanding units in combat and fighting the enemy were the core, essential capabilities of a soldier. From this perspective, since the efficiency of the military depends on the competence of its professional soldiers, a mechanism of civilian control that maximizes this without hindering it was considered effective.military professionalismwith. In his "The soldier and the state" (1957), he argued that at the heart of military professionalism is the competence of the military expert, and that the military, like the medical or legal professions, is a community where participation is granted based on possessing a certain level of competence. Furthermore, Huntington defined the essence of a professional soldier's competence as the management of violence, believing that commanding units in combat and fighting the enemy were the core, essential capabilities of a soldier. From this perspective, since the efficiency of the military depends on the competence of its professional soldiers, a mechanism of civilian control that maximizes this without hindering it was considered effective.

Sociologist Morris Janowitz was a researcher who questioned this view of Huntington's. In "The professional soldier" (1960; new edition 1971), Janowitz took the position that the nature of the soldier changes according to social conditions, and criticized Huntington's approach for assuming that the military is a closed, self-contained organization. Janowitz originally assumed that the military was an open, situation-dependent organization, and assessed that it had changed from a labor-intensive organization to a capital-intensive one due to the development of military technology since the Cold War. In fact, many military duties had become increasingly related to administrative management and industrial technology. In other words, there were more soldiers performing tasks that did not fall under the management of violence that Huntington emphasized.

The debate between Huntington and Janowitz has been repeatedly referenced by researchers in subsequent military sociology studies, as it demonstrated that significant differences in conclusions arise depending on which aspects of the military are emphasized when analyzing it. Huntington's theory on military professionalism captures the characteristics of the classical military. It reflects the experience of the period from when the military was freed from the class system in the 19th century until the end of World War II. Janowitz focuses on the changes in the military since the Cold War. The character of the military as a group of technicians operating equipment based on advanced science and technology has become stronger.

The missions that the military must carry out changed significantly before and after World War II. The one-sided perception that the military is merely a tool for waging war is already a thing of the past, and its scope of capability has now greatly expanded from peacekeeping to crisis management. While military professionalism is generally evaluated positively as a foundation for professional competence, if its content cannot be updated in line with the changes of the times, it risks becoming a bad tradition that hinders innovation. The review of military professionalism has also been raised as an issue in recent surveys of the U.S. military, suggesting that implementation is not easy (Roennfeldt 2019; Brook 2020).

References

Janowitz, M. (1971). The professional soldier: A social and political portrait. Glencoe: Free Press.

Huntington, S. P. (1957). The soldier and the state: The theory and practice of civil-military relations. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. (Japanese translation: "Gun-jin to Kokka" [The Soldier and the State], Vols. 1-2, translated by Ryoichi Ichikawa, Hara Shobo, 2008)

Roennfeldt, C. F. (2019). Wider officer competence: The importance of politics and practical wisdom. Armed Forces & Society, 45(1), 59-77.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X17737498

Brooks, R. (2020). Paradoxes of professionalism: Rethinking civil-military relations in the United States. International Security, 44(4), 7-44.
https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00374

Related Articles