The traditional understanding of soldier's identity is based on two main conceptualisations: a warrior and a peacekeeper. Both of them are closely linked to the context and type of tasks performed by the armed forces – the involvement in warfare and the participation in peacekeeping missions respectively. However, in today's complex and dynamic security environment, and given the internal diversity of the armed forces, this division is no longer sufficient. This analysis is the first part of the discussion on the conceptualisation of military identity and focuses on its two more traditional forms: warrior and peacekeeper. The components of these two conceptualisations constitute the foundation for a variety of more nuanced contemporary forms of military identity.
KBN Analysis no. 3 (55) / 2020
17 February 2020
The traditional understanding of soldier's identity is based on two main conceptualisations: a warrior and a peacekeeper. Both of them are closely linked to the context and type of tasks performed by the armed forces – the involvement in warfare and the participation in peacekeeping missions respectively. However, in today's complex and dynamic security environment, and given the internal diversity of the armed forces, this division is no longer sufficient. This analysis is the first part of the discussion on the conceptualisation of military identity and focuses on its two more traditional forms: warrior and peacekeeper. The components of these two conceptualisations constitute the foundation for a variety of more nuanced contemporary forms of military identity.
Photo credit: https://www.flickr.com/photos/29781381@N08/21829150688/ (Author: Scubatoo, licence: CC BY 2.0)