Military Experience and Casualty Sensitivity in Elite Discourse: Evidence From the U.S. Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan

Veterans are disproportionately represented among political elites, and the question of whether military experience shapes their behavior is a central puzzle in the study of international relations. Existing theories link military experience with hawkish or dovish foreign policy preferences. Rather than determining their positions on the use of force ex ante, we argue that domain-specific knowledge and their elevated social status will make veterans less likely to change their expressed positions, especially in response to wartime casualties. We test our argument by analyzing Congressional speeches referencing the American wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, finding strong support for our expectations. Our core insight is that veteran politicians are partisans first and veterans second, and that military experience may say more about how they update, rather than establish, their political positions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Conflict Resolution
Published
2025-08-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027251365535
Primary Topic
Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Military Experience and Casualty Sensitivity in Elite Discourse: Evidence From the U.S. Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan

Michael Kenwick, Burcu Kolcak, Sumin Lee
Journal of Conflict Resolution
Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
article

Military Experience and Casualty Sensitivity in Elite Discourse: Evidence From the U.S. Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan

Michael Kenwick, Burcu Kolcak, Sumin Lee
article en

Abstract

Veterans are disproportionately represented among political elites, and the question of whether military experience shapes their behavior is a central puzzle in the study of international relations. Existing theories link military experience with hawkish or dovish foreign policy preferences. Rather than determining their positions on the use of force ex ante, we argue that domain-specific knowledge and their elevated social status will make veterans less likely to change their expressed positions, especially in response to wartime casualties. We test our argument by analyzing Congressional speeches referencing the American wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, finding strong support for our expectations. Our core insight is that veteran politicians are partisans first and veterans second, and that military experience may say more about how they update, rather than establish, their political positions.

Journal of Conflict ResolutionVol. 70(4)
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US), Texas A&M International University (US), Mitchell Institute (US), Rutgers Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (NL), Texas A&M University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.