Research On The Reasons Of Success And Failure Of The "Robust Strategies" In The Civilian Control Of The Military In The Context Of Military Authoritarian Regime's Transition

Achieving institutionalized Civilian Control of the Military is an important challenge the democratic government face after the transition of Military authoritarian regime,and its success or failure are directly related to the strategies civil government take against the military.In general,"strong strategies" have a deeper and lasting effect on the civilian control of the military,but they are also more likely to lead the military Respond with a coup d'etat,and if it succeed,Civilian Control of the Military will failed.So,there rise a question of in what conditions the government's "strong strategy" will succeed and in what conditions it will fail?This thesis tries to explain the question by using three major factors,including:"the degree of disagreement over other political issues","the power advantage of the government",and "the opposition-military alliance" as explanatory variables.The main hypotheses of the thesis are as followed:when "the disagreement over political issues" is high as well as "the power advantage of the government" is significant,it become easier to form an "opposition-military alliance" in political struggles of a country,which,eventually lead the "strong strategies" are more likely to fail.But on the other hand,when "the degree of disagreement over political issues" is low,or although it is high,"the power advantage of the government" is not significant,the formation of such an alliance become difficult,so the strong strategies are more likely to succeed.Then,using the "comparative historical analysis" as the basic research method,this thesis took a preliminary test on the theoretical hypotheses above through four major research cases:Civilian Control of the Military of the Thaksin government in Thailand;Civilian Control of the Military of the Alfonsin government in Argentina;Civilian Control of the Military of the Collor government in Brazil and Civilian Control of the Military of the Kim Yong-san government in south Korea.In these four cases,all governments have implemented "robust strategies," but the situations they faced were completely different.In Thailand,"the degree of disagreement over political issues" is high and the "government's power advantage" is significant in the same time.Therefore,Thaksin government made the political issues changed towards the direction of their own preferences,and the opposition can not preclude it through institutional ways.In such a context,an "oppositions-military alliance" formed,so,the military was able to successfully launch a coup d'etat,which finally forced Thaksin government's military civilian control ended in failure.In Argentina and Brazil,although"the degree of disagreement over political issues" is high on one hand,"the government's power advantage" is not significant on the other hand.so it is impossible for the government to push the issues changed towards the direction of their own preferences like Thaksin government.So there were an absence of an "oppositions-military alliance"in this two country,and it allowed the Alfonsin government and the Collor government successfully implemented their"robust strategies".In South Korea,in the entire process of the implementation of the "robust strategies" of the Kim Yong-san government,"the degree of disagreement over political issues" is low,so there was also an absence of an"oppositions-military alliance",and in this convenient situation,they can be implemented smoothly.So it is the difference in "the degree of disagreement over political issues","the government's power advantages"and "the opposition-military alliance" among four cases,that ultimately make a significant difference in the outcomes of the "robust strategies" of four governments.thus,we can make a conclusion that the hypotheses of this thesis are supported by this four cases.