Militarism

Definition

Militarism is the belief that a state should maintain strong military capability and that military priorities, values and readiness for war should take precedence in national policy, resource allocation and culture, beyond what ordinary national defense requires.

Historical Origin

Militarism as a recognized political phenomenon is particularly associated with the great-power rivalries preceding the First World War, when European states dramatically expanded standing armies and naval forces and cultivated military prestige as central to national identity, and with the mid-20th-century Cold War arms race between the United States and Soviet Union.

How Supporters Understood It

Advocates of militarist policy have historically framed extensive military investment and readiness as essential to national survival, prestige and deterrence, particularly during periods of perceived existential rivalry with other powers.

Criticisms

Critics, including many military historians, have argued that militarism can become self-perpetuating — with military institutions and industries developing an independent interest in continued expansion and readiness beyond what strategic circumstances actually require — and can crowd out civilian oversight and non-military policy priorities.

Historical Uses

The Cold War nuclear arms race, including the extensive U.S. and British nuclear weapons testing programs documented in this archive’s Marshall Islands and British Nuclear Testing in Australia files, reflected militarist prioritization of weapons-development imperatives that, in both cases, proceeded with limited regard for the consent of civilian populations near the testing sites.

Documented Consequences

Militarist policy has historically produced arms races, extensive military expenditure relative to civilian priorities, and, as documented in this archive’s nuclear-testing Files, significant harm to populations located near weapons-testing and development sites.

Misuse or Distortion of the Idea

Ordinary, proportionate national defense policy is sometimes conflated with militarism in political rhetoric; scholars distinguish the two by whether military considerations are treated as one input among many in national policy, or as a dominant, largely unquestioned priority.

Related Files

• Marshall Islands Nuclear Testing
• British Nuclear Testing in Australia

Counterarguments

Some defense scholars argue that a degree of sustained military investment and deterrent capability is a rational and necessary response to genuine external threats, distinguishing legitimate deterrence policy from the excesses militarism’s critics identify — a distinction this archive’s Files treat as a matter of ongoing policy debate rather than a settled question.

Do Not Confuse

Bibliography