In 2020, David Pion-Berlin and Andrew Ivey wrote “Civil-Military Lessons from Latin America,” which argued that militaries can publicly dissent from orders that endanger military professionalism and human rights while protecting professional standards and preventing democratic backsliding. In the wake of additional cases of civil-military strain in Latin America over the last four years, we asked David and Andrew to revisit their article.Read more below:Image: Flickr (Photo by Dennis Jarvis)In your 2020 article “Civil-Military Lessons from Latin America,” you argue that military officers can dissent from presidential orders when “military professionalism and the lives of fellow citizens are threatened.” Are these the only two instances when military dissent should be allowed, and should it ever be explicitly encouraged? We would hesitate to say military dissent should be explicitly encouraged, but there is a role for dissent when executives threaten democracy. That occurs when presidents pull the armed forces into partisan politics, using them to advance objectives to undermine democratic institutions, flout the rule of law, or trample on citizen rights. In these instances, the military does have a responsibility to act because they are directly implicated in efforts to weaken the democratic system. For example, should direct illegal orders be given to military commanders to interfere with elections, impede the functioning of other branches of government, stifle the free press, or coercively subdue legitimate non-violent protest, these are occasions when defiance is warranted. The military can do so by issuing public declarations that it will remain non-partisan and loyal to the constitution, taking direct issue with executives who have abused their right to be wrong. Such actions can be critical not only in cases in Latin America, such as Brazil, when former President Jair Bolsonaro tried to court military participation in a self-coup, but also across the world in developing or developed
Members-Only Content
This article is reserved for War on the Rocks members. Join our community to unlock exclusive insights and analysis.
In 2020, David Pion-Berlin and Andrew Ivey wrote “Civil-Military Lessons from Latin America,” which argued that militaries can publicly dissent from orders that endanger military professionalism and human rights while protecting professional standards and preventing democratic backsliding. In the wake of additional cases of civil-military strain in Latin America over the last four years, we asked David and Andrew to revisit their article.Read more below:Image: Flickr (Photo by Dennis Jarvis)In your 2020 article “Civil-Military Lessons from Latin America,” you argue that military officers can dissent from presidential orders when “military professionalism and the lives of fellow citizens are threatened.” Are
