In Videos: The calamitous political and military decisions taken by short-sighted governments in multiple Capitals, to rapidly end the Afghan theatre of war in the overall and ongoing Global War on Terror, and the resulting and hugely consequential developments and events that followed on the ground for the country and the people of Afghanistan, that has shocked, changed, and threatened the entire world. Important videos.
#36 The Art of Government: Military Servants, Political Masters, ‘The People’ & the Purpose of the Military
What is the main purpose of the military? To deter, fight and win war both at home and abroad. As I have already outlined in the previous two blogs, Rules of Engagement (ROE) are the critical lynchpin, or key interconnecting devices, between the two separate and different political and security spheres of a nation during any armed conflict. ROE are binding political-military-legal orders given to national military forces by civilian national government officials, which clearly limit or restrict what the military can do on behalf of the nation, and in the name of the government, while actively deployed in a theatre of armed conflict. In most countries of the world, national armed forces are the military servants of the civilian masters in government. As such, and because of the changing nature and short-term tenure of governments of various and often rival political parties and ideologies, especially in liberal democratic countries, national armed forces are strictly apolitical and non-partisan. This blog will examine both the primary and secondary purposes of the military in every State, and the three kinds of wars national militaries usually engage in historically and today.
#34 Crucial Questions on Rules Of Engagement (ROE): (Q1/3) Are ROE Legally-Binding “Military Orders” or Merely Guidelines?
After more than 13 years of research on ROE instructions issued by governments to national military contingents deployed to operate as part of multinational security endeavours around the world, and especially the continuing existence and consistently negative effects of national caveat limitations and bans within these ROE, I will now attempt in the following to shine more light on this hazy and poorly-understood subject. In particular, I will try to assist general understanding on this vital issue in military operations by answering, to the best of my knowledge, three basic and crucial questions as to the normative status and practices of nations with regard to ROE. This blog addresses the first question: Are ROE Legally-Binding “Military Orders” or Merely Guidelines?
#16 The Practical Value of National Rules of Engagement: An Assessment
#16 The Practical Value of National Rules of Engagement: An Assessment – Dr Regeena Kingsley In previous blogs, I have discussed what Rules of Engagement (ROE) are, what kinds of instructions they contain, how ROE are formed for military operations, and how they are enforced and breaches punished (see blogs “#9 What are “Rules of Engagement”? Military Mandates & Instructions for the Use of Force”, “#10 Rules of Engagement & National Caveats: “Self-Defence” & “Mission Accomplishment” Instructions”, “#11 How are Rules of Engagement Formed for Military Operations?”, and “#12 The Binding Power of Rules of Engagement: Enforcement &