Vloga vojske pri odzivanju na nesrečo

vsebina in pogostost argumentov

Abstract

Naravne nesreče v varnostni razpravi praviloma nimajo ustreznega prostora, čeprav podatki kažejo, da je bilo v obdobju 2002-2011 po svetu vsako leto v povprečju skoraj štiristo nesreč, ki so na leto v povprečju zahtevale 107.000 življenj, prizadele več kot 268 milijonov ljudi in povzročile gospodarsko škodo v višini 143 milijard ameriških dolarjev. Zaradi naraščajočega števila nesreč in njihove intenzivnosti so civilne strukture upravljanja in vodenja vse bolj nemočne pri spoprijemanju s posledicami nesreč, zato se vloga vojske v tem procesu v zadnjem obdobju krepi. Ob tem se pojavljajo različni argumenti, ki bodisi odobravajo večjo vlogo vojske pri odzivanju na nesreče bodisi temu oporekajo. Analiza teoretičnega diskurza na to temo omogoča prepoznavanje naslednjih argumentov: utilitarnega, funkcionalno-humanitarnega in varnostno-strateškega, pa tudi argument militarizacije in odvračanja oziroma osamitve. Analizo nadaljujemo z ugotavljanjem pogostosti teh argumentov pri preučevanju primerov nekaterih nesreč, ki so se zgodile v omenjenem obdobju. V sklepu se opredelimo do vsebine in pogostosti različnih argumentov ter opozorimo na nekatera protislovja sodelovanja vojske in civilnih struktur pri odzivanju na nesreče.

Keywords

Naravne nesreče;Krizno upravljanje;Vojska;Civilno-vojaški odnosi;

Data

Language:	Slovenian
Year of publishing:	2014
Typology:	1.01 - Original Scientific Article
Organization:	UL FDV - Faculty of Social Sciences
UDC:	504.4:355/359
COBISS:	33090141
ISSN:	0040-3598
Parent publication:	Teorija in praksa
Views:	754
Downloads:	113
Average score:	0 (0 votes)
Metadata:

Other data

Secondary language:	English
Secondary abstract:	As a general rule, natural disasters do not attract enough attention in the security debate even though globally there were on average almost 400 disasters annually in the 2002-2011 period. On average, they caused 107,000 deaths, affected more than 268 million people, and caused economic damage close to USD 143 billion annually. The increasing number of disasters and their growing intensity makes civilian disaster management structures ever more helpless in coping with the consequences of disasters, thus making the role of the military in this process extremely prominent in the last few years. Further, various arguments have been developed in order to either approve of the military's increased role in disaster management or to oppose it. The analysis of theoretical discourse on the topic enables us to identify the following arguments: utilitarian, functional-humanitarian and security-strategic argument, the argument of militarisation, and the argument of rejection and isolation, respectively. The analysis is followed by a test of the frequency of those arguments in scientific and professional reports in specific cases of selected huge disasters in the above-mentioned period. In the conclusion, we comment on the content and frequency of various arguments and point out the controversies in the collaboration process between civilian and military structures in the disaster management process.
Secondary keywords:	Natural disasters;Crisis management;Army;Civil-military relations;
URN:	URN:NBN:SI
Type (COBISS):	Not categorized
Pages:	str. 1111-1130, 1404-1405
Volume:	ǂLetn. ǂ51
Issue:	ǂšt. ǂ6
Chronology:	nov.-dec. 2014
ID:	9169604