Militarism: Iran & Nigeria Essay

Every state dreams of having stability and structure to properly govern and control its citizens. All states wish that they possessed such great structure, that every citizen of their country would be fully protected and looked after. However, there are some states that lack resources and are not capable to ensure the safety and well being of their citizens. Most states that offer solidity and organization more than likely have a strong military that have power within the government, referring to militarism. The concept of militarism states that it is â€Å"a strong military spirit or policy. [A] principle or policy of maintaining a large military establishment†[1]. Militarism goes beyond the thought of defense and battleship, it refers to the amount of power a military has over or with a government. With militarism comes the excessive spending on military and the military’s ability to have total control. Though is it important to have a strong relationship between military and the government, Nigeria and Iran have two separate ways of intertwining the two in their states. Nigeria is known for its strong military presence within the government. The degree of militarism in Nigeria is high because of their past history being under civilian rule. During the first forty years of Nigeria’s independence, this state only lasted ten years under a civilian government. A few years after the downfall of their civilian government, they soon fell under military rule. Nigeria has always been considered stronger and more power when they were controlled by their government, rather than following a democracy[2]; this exemplifies militarism. Although in Nigeria they tend to use their military to create a corruption within politics, other countries use their militaries for difference purposes. Iran has always had a mediocre military. Iran does not have a strong military, so their influence is of low impact on politics. The degree of militarism in Iran is subtle because they mostly focus on working with the citizens directly, rather than trying to govern them. With a broken military, all they have to offer is a societal impact. With the citizens of Iran, their military helps keep them in order while under governmental oversight. In Comparative Politics, it was stated, â€Å"since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, the Iranian government has worked hard to maintain control of the military. [†¦] Rather than a strong military and a weak civilian government, Iran had a weak and fractured military alongside a strong civilian political institutions†[3]. Iran has always worked to fall under autonomy and flourish into a well developed independent state. There becomes a time where the military begins to overrule their government and take matters into their own hands. Currently, a lot of Nigerian citizens are realizing what has been going on for the past forty years and are starting to take action. In Iran, they continue to be content with civilians to governing their state, while the military stay under governmental watch to ensure that they do not do anything crazy. Both countries are lesser-developed countries, but when it comes to militarism, it all depends on what they citizens wish to fall under. Having a high degree of militarism is not always a good thing to have because the military having a heavy involvement in politics and governance will not end well due to budgeting, defense, and a positive societal impact. When citizens live under the governance of people, rational decisions are made. When citizens live under the governance of the military, more than likely fear amongst each other arises.