What do we owe soldiers? Evidence from the UK Armed Forces Covenant

What do people in liberal polities believe they owe soldiers for their service? The UK’s Armed Forces Covenant, promulgated in 2000 and enshrined in law in 2021, presents a real-world opportunity to examine the effects of inducing citizens to reflect on soldiering. We develop and test two contending theoretical logics, grounded in the liberal political culture from which the Covenant emerged, using unique observational data and a novel survey experiment. Does prior knowledge of the Covenant or exposure to a Covenant prime highlight the abiding tensions between liberal ideals and military service and underscore the debt that citizens owe soldiers? Or does it prompt liberal citizens to resolve their discomfort with military service in a distinctively liberal way – by emphasising soldiers’ contractual terms and their willing consent to deployment? In line with the latter logic, respondents with prior knowledge of the Covenant or exposure to the Covenant prime were more likely to endorse the use of force and were less sensitive to casualties, and they were no more likely to grant soldiers and veterans additional benefits or preferential treatment. This paper has significant implications for public support for military missions and the relationship between military service and citizenship.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of International Security
Published
2025-12-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/eis.2025.10027
Primary Topic
Gender, Security, and Conflict
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

What do we owe soldiers? Evidence from the UK Armed Forces Covenant

David Blagden, Ronald R. Krebs, Robert Ralston
European Journal of International Security
Gender, Security, and Conflict
article

What do we owe soldiers? Evidence from the UK Armed Forces Covenant

David Blagden, Ronald R. Krebs, Robert Ralston
article en

Abstract

What do people in liberal polities believe they owe soldiers for their service? The UK’s Armed Forces Covenant, promulgated in 2000 and enshrined in law in 2021, presents a real-world opportunity to examine the effects of inducing citizens to reflect on soldiering. We develop and test two contending theoretical logics, grounded in the liberal political culture from which the Covenant emerged, using unique observational data and a novel survey experiment. Does prior knowledge of the Covenant or exposure to a Covenant prime highlight the abiding tensions between liberal ideals and military service and underscore the debt that citizens owe soldiers? Or does it prompt liberal citizens to resolve their discomfort with military service in a distinctively liberal way – by emphasising soldiers’ contractual terms and their willing consent to deployment? In line with the latter logic, respondents with prior knowledge of the Covenant or exposure to the Covenant prime were more likely to endorse the use of force and were less sensitive to casualties, and they were no more likely to grant soldiers and veterans additional benefits or preferential treatment. This paper has significant implications for public support for military missions and the relationship between military service and citizenship.

European Journal of International Security
University of Exeter (GB), University of Minnesota System (US), University of Birmingham (GB)
University of Minnesota, Royal British Legion, University of Oxford
Openalex Percentile: Top 54%
Gender, Security, and Conflict
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.