Globalization and Military Power in the Andes (PDF)

William Avilés Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Nebraska, USA.

"Avilés challenges institutionalist explanations of changes in civil-military relations in the Andean region, asserting that U.S. support for neoliberal policy coalitions and the war on drugs has led to reduction of military influence and prerogatives in Colombia, Peru, and, to lesser extent, Bolivia (until 2005) - despite significant internal security threats and insurgencies. In contrast, in Ecuador and Venezuela, repudiation of the neoliberal agenda by social movements and nationalist governments has allowed incorporation of the armed forces into national development agendas that have expanded military influence and prerogatives in the last two decades. Thus governments rejecting "the end of history" with liberal capitalist globalization offer new (and continued) opportunities for the military to participate in social and economic development in ways far beyond the limited role prescribed by traditional liberal democratic theory. Both Avilés' theoretical contributions and the empirical case studies will be valuable grist for the mill among researchers on civil-military relations in Latin America." - Brian Loveman, Author of No Higher Law: American Foreign Policy and the Western Hemisphere since 1776 (2010)

"In this absorbing, five nation Andean study, William Avilés reveals the unexpected: that governments in the midst of counter-insurgency wars will subordinate their militaries to civilian control while left wing populist governments will expand the powers and reach of their militaries. The difference is attributed to neoliberal policy coalitions that favor limited democracies, compliant armies and suppressed social movements, and whether they have influence inside a country or not. To my knowledge, this is the first book to analyze Latin American civil-military relations from the vantage point of global capitalist actors and their political allies. This is an important, timely and provocative study. Scholars may disagree with Avilés' thesis, but they