Reflexive Governance as the Basis for Military Security in a Modern State

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to substantiate the determinants of contemporary changes in military security policy, which is reflexive management. Military security is considered as a function of political attitudes and strategic decisions, and its governmental potential is a changing mechanism designed to meet regional and global demands and tendencies of society development. The author substantiates the assumption that today, the system of ensuring military security requires radical governmental transformation, and the key mechanism of this transformation is reflexive governance. The theoretical research method is a conceptual transformation of the governmental aspect of the military security policy through the prism of the theory of reflexive governance. The concept of reflexive governance has not yet been properly developed in Russian academic investigations, but its relevance is determined by a substantial change in the existing prospects for the analysis, development, and implementation of the military security policy in times of peace: (1) shifting the attention of civil cervants to the mechanisms of transformation of military security institutions to global challenges; (2) activation of discussions about “open” and “closed” spaces in politics; (3) development of the potential of governance based on continuous education and network management; and (4) development of a network governance system. Within the framework of reflexive governance, cognitive and normative beliefs form the political-administrative hierarchy and economic incentives as mechanisms for coordinating military security. At the same time, the mechanism of ensuring military security consists of such components as (1) subjects and (2) objects of military security; (1) normative and regulatory, (2) theoretical and research, and (3) activity components of military security. Reflexive governance, while becoming the basis of the military security in a modern state, implies that in the arms race countries should not forget about deeper, fundamental goals of state management. Any action both within the framework of direct provision of military security and within the framework of diplomatic regulation of relations in the international arena should be devoted to collective and individual-administrative reflexing of decision makers. A key role in military security policy should be played not by the theory of warfare, but by the development of tools to help resolve emerging conflicts peacefully.