Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Armed Forces & Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Smith, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

What Costs Will Democracies Bear? A Review of Popular Theories of Casualty Aversion

Hugh Smith

School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra ACT, Australia 2600h.smith{at}adfa.edu.au

Can democracies any longer tolerate casualties? The question has important implications for national decision-making and for international politics. This article examines how and why governments take casualties into account in decisions about military commitments—the casualty factor. This is a phenomenon that goes beyond the normal military desire to reduce losses. The article explores the wide range of popular theories put forward to explain why the casualty factor appears to have become casualty aversion or even casualty phobia in democratic nations. Explanations are classified under four headings: national interest, strategic calculus, internal politics, and long-term social change. Each type of explanation has strengths and weaknesses. Finally, an assessment is made of the overall influence of casualty aversion in democratic decision-making.

Armed Forces & Society, Vol. 31, No. 4, 487-512 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0095327X0503100403
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?