supremacy of the civil power. If the politicians appear to be weakening the
nation and making it vulnerable to external forces, economic as well as
military, the army might give priority to the defence of society’s basic val-
ues. The military is then not a neutral instrument of the government of the
day, but rather an instrument of the nation, whose interest is capable of
interpretation by the military itself. If the military contains within its corpo-
rate culture such a set of attitudes, it might provide sufficient justification
for direct intervention in politics, especially since there will almost
certainly be sections within civil society that will approve of the military
taking such responsibility. Military involvement in politics may have a
powerful ideological foundation such as nationalism,dirigism, a moral code
and ‘a deep distrust of organized civilian politics’ (Janowitz, 1970, p. 145).
Foreign influence
Finally, external involvement by a foreign power has sometimes been cru-
cial in the decision of the military to stage a coup d’état. For example, the
USA supported the Chilean military in overthrowing the Allende regime.
There has been mounting evidence that the USA also had a role to play in
the failed coupagainst President Chavez of Venezuela in April 2001.
Continuity of links with developed countries through military aid, training
and equipment have also strengthened national armies in the Third World
relative to the civilian authorities. The influence of foreign support, through
clandestine military, security and intelligence agencies such as the USA’s
CIA, has been critical in a number of Third World coups. Through ‘covert
operations’ involving political advice, subsidies to political organizations
and individuals, propaganda, training, economic interventions, paramilitary
support to domestic groups, and infiltration and co-option of local agents
and allies in trade unions, corporations, political parties, the media and the
military itself, foreign influence has penetrated deeply into Third World
societies (Woddis, 1977, pp. 56–60).
Alternatively, foreign influence has been defined in terms of ‘contagion’
(First, 1972, pp. 20–2). There have been times when it appeared as if some
states experienced coupsbecause neighbouring states had shown how eas-
ily it could be done, and what advantages accrued to the armed forces as a
result. There is some evidence from West Africa that military commanders
did ‘learn’ from the experience of their counterparts in other countries as to
how to take power, and about the financial attractions of it, lessons which
entered into their calculations about whether and when to intervene.
Military Intervention in Politics 189