Show simple item record  

dc.contributor.authorZirker, Danielen_NZ
dc.date.accessioned2021-05-20T03:49:50Z
dc.date.available2021-05-20T03:49:50Z
dc.date.issued2020en_NZ
dc.identifier.citationZirker, D. (2020). Tanzania: Civil-military relations and nationalism. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. Oxford University Press.en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10289/14334
dc.description.abstractWhy have there been no successful military interventions or civil wars in Tanzania’s nearly 60 years of independence? This one historical accomplishment, by itself striking in an African context, distinguishes Tanzania from most of the other post-1960 independent African countries and focuses attention on the possibilities and nature of successful civil–military relations in sub-Saharan Africa. Contrary to most civil–military relations theory, rather than isolating the military in order to achieve civilian oversight, Tanzania integrated the military, the dominant political party, and civil society in what one observer called a combination of “political militancy” and “antimilitarism,” somewhat akin, perhaps, to the Chinese model. China did provide intensive military training for the Tanzanians beginning in the 1960s, although this could in no way have been expected to ensure successful integration of the military with civil society, nor could it ensure peaceful civil–military relations. Eight potentially causal and overlapping conditions have been outlined to explain this unique absence of civil–military strife in an African country. Relevant but admittedly partial explanations are: the largely salutary and national developmental role of the founding president, Julius Nyerere; the caution and long-term fear of military intervention engendered by the 1964 East African mutinies; Tanzania’s radical foreign policy as a Frontline State; its ongoing territorial disputes with Uganda and Malawi; concerted efforts at coup-proofing through the co-opting of senior military commanders; and the country’s striking ethnic heterogeneity, in which none of the 125 plus ethnolinguistic tribes had the capacity to assume a hegemonic dominance. Each factor has a role in explaining Tanzania’s unique civil–military history, and together they may comprise a plausible explanation of the over 50 years of peaceful civil–military relations. They do not, however, provide a hopeful prognosis for future civil–military relations in a system that is increasingly challenging the dominant-party state, nor do they account for Tanzania’s subsequent democratic deficit.
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherOxford University Pressen_NZ
dc.rightsThis is an author’s accepted version of an article published in the book: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. © 2020 Oxford University Press.
dc.subjectcivil–military relations
dc.subjectTanzania
dc.subjectpan-Africanism
dc.subjectradicalism
dc.subjectJulius Nyerere
dc.subjectnational development
dc.subjectmilitary intervention
dc.subjectmilitary in politics
dc.titleTanzania: Civil-military relations and nationalismen_NZ
dc.typeChapter in Book
dc.relation.isPartOfOxford Research Encyclopedia of Politicsen_NZ
pubs.elements-id258393
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden_NZ
pubs.publisher-urlhttps://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1858en_NZ


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record