This chapter explores the evolution and impact of Brazil’s Ministry of Defense (MoD) from its establishment in 1999–2021. Our analysis focuses on the critical role of civilian-led defense ministries in democratic control over the military, emphasizing the importance of expertise and political incentives for effective oversight. The chapter traces MoD’s fluctuating civilian and military influence, noting significant milestones and setbacks in civilian control. Key findings suggest that increased military input correlates with more internally oriented missions and less jointness in operations. The chapter also examines MoD’s low policymaking capacity, using the procurement and decommissioning of naval flagships as a case study. Ultimately, we argue that Brazilian political elites must prioritize and be knowledgeable of defense affairs to strengthen democracy and ensure that the interests of military officers do not solely dominate defense policymaking.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

The Retrograde: The Ministry of Defense and Defense Policy in Brazil (1999–2021)

  • Octavio Amorim Neto,
  • Igor Acácio

摘要

This chapter explores the evolution and impact of Brazil’s Ministry of Defense (MoD) from its establishment in 1999–2021. Our analysis focuses on the critical role of civilian-led defense ministries in democratic control over the military, emphasizing the importance of expertise and political incentives for effective oversight. The chapter traces MoD’s fluctuating civilian and military influence, noting significant milestones and setbacks in civilian control. Key findings suggest that increased military input correlates with more internally oriented missions and less jointness in operations. The chapter also examines MoD’s low policymaking capacity, using the procurement and decommissioning of naval flagships as a case study. Ultimately, we argue that Brazilian political elites must prioritize and be knowledgeable of defense affairs to strengthen democracy and ensure that the interests of military officers do not solely dominate defense policymaking.