Send to KindleSend to Kindle

Abstract

Legal study of the institutions of national security decisionmaking has focused primarily on the allocation of authority between the president and the U.S. Congress to wage war. An overlooked gap within this framework is the strained relations between the U.S. civilian leadership and the military. The War on Terror has exacerbated these tensions—particularly with the Judge Advocate General’s (JAG) Corps. A rational choice framework is proposed to better address challenges to the civilian-military relations.

Leave a Comment