”1.. rid—WWW . . A ..Wdaufi..x .fimmi .r 1 U . . Exam. .3: .1. a» .w 1.4 . 2 as. . '1 . it." 9.13 3 wuu‘. !- z. 1 .‘ W. 0. M! 3.....3 .3 v . .. _ . .u .1 hxfiléuwnll .N Lil 9 :3- Vf 1" $1.- .3 .1 a. 1,. .1: . is, . 73:, .3.....q......zs..2 statiihsu ‘lhv‘ b I L rvnl III‘. 1 a,» This is to certify that the thesis entitled An Exploratory Research on U.S. Army Personnel‘s Violent Crimes in the U.S. and Korea: A Perspective of Military Subculture presented by Chang-Hun Lee has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for M.S. Jegree in Criminal Justice ; If,“ 4% % 1/44”... MathJ'T professor If 0-7639 MS U i: an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution LIBRARY Michigan State University PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. DATE DUE DATE DUE ' DATE DUE 6’01 c:/ClRC/DateDue.965-p.15 AN EXPLORATORY RESEARCH ON U.S. ARMY PERSONNEL’S VIOLENT CRIMES IN THE U.S. AND KOREA: A PERSPECTIVE OF MILITARY SUBCULTURE By Chang-Hun Lee A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Criminal Justice and Criminology 2001 ABSTRACT AN EXPLORATORY RESEARCH ON U.S. ARMY PERSONNEL’S VIOLENT CRIMES IN THE U.S. AND KOREA: A PERSPECTIVE OF MILITARY SUBCULTURE By Chang-Hun Lee By analyzing crime data of the U.S. Army Judiciary, the present research examines violent crimes committed by U.S. Army personnel stationed in the continental U.S. and in foreign countries, i.e., Korea. The main questions examined are whether the U.S. soldiers commit more violent crime, what types of soldiers commit more violent crime, whether the U.S. soldiers commit more sex offense in overseas missions, and why they commit more sex offenses in foreign countries. Some demographic variables measured include age, race, marital status, educational level, rank, Military Occupational Specialty (MOS), alcohol use, and crime types. Findings indicate that married male drunken soldiers, who are sergeant or staff sergeant in combat operation unit, are more likely to commit violent crime than others, and that married Soldiers who are stationed in Korea are more likely to commit sex offenses than others. From the results policy recommendations for military and for overseas deployment are suggested. Copyright by Chang-Hun Lee 2001 To All Victims of Crimes Committed by Military Personnel Through the World and Its History iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to thank the fine faculty of School of Criminal Justice and Criminology at Michigan State University for assisting me in the realization of this research. Especially, I am grateful to my thesis chairperson, Dr. VIncent J. Hoffman. Words are not enough to express my grateful mind to his guidance and encouragement. I would also like to thank Dr. Mahesh Nalla and Dr. Sheila Maxwell for their knowledgeable guidance and assistance. It is obvious that this research could not have been completed without the cooperation of Mary B. Dennis, Deputy Clerk of Court in the U.S. Army Judiciary. My deepest appreciation must be extended to her. I also want to thank Dr. Dae H. Chang and Dr. Yoon-Ho Lee for their advice. i also want to thank U.S. soldiers whom I interviewed, and my friends, Yung-Hyeock Lee and Jung-Mi Kim. Most of all, I would like to thank my parents, Pyung-Ho Lee and Young- Ran Lee, and my family members. With their unconditional love, trust, support and encouragement, l could have accomplished this work. Love and thanks to them for their help in every way. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................. ix LIST OF FIGURE ................................................................................... x CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 1 l. Structure and Scope of the Study ....................................................... 4 1. Structure of the study ................................................................. 4 2. Scope of the study .................................................................... 4 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................... 6 I. General Knowledge on Military Crime & Research Trends ....................... 6 1. Definition of “military sociology” and “military subculture” ................... 6 2. Definition of “military crime” ........................................................ 6 3. Historic cases of military crimes in wartime and peacetime ............... 8 In wartime ............................................................................... 8 In peacetime ........................................................................... 8 4. Chronological trend of military sociology and crime research ............ 10 ll. Variables Related to Military Crime ................................................... 14 1. Masculine paradigm ................................................................ 14 Definition .............................................................................. 14 Construction process & traits ..................................................... 15 Problem ................................................................................ 17 2. Combat paradigm ................................................................... 18 Definition .............................................................................. 18 Construction process & Traits .................................................... 18 3. Rank system of military ............................................................ 20 4. Alcohol consumption and military recreation ................................. 22 5. Marriage and overseas missions in foreign country ........................ 24 6. The deployment location and its environments .............................. 26 Prejudice .............................................................................. 27 SOFA ................................................................................... 30 vi Ill. Research Questions ..................................................................... 35 1. Two main questions ................................................................. 35 2. Specific research questions derived from the previous research ....... 35 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................. 37 I. Data Collection Procedure and Sample .............................................. 37 1. Data collection procedure ......................................................... 37 2. Sample ................................................................................. 37 ll. Variables ..................................................................................... 38 1. Independent variables ............................................................. 38 2. Dependent variables ............................................................... 38 3. Control variables .................................................................... 39 III. Operational Definitions .................................................................. 40 1. Locations .............................................................................. 40 2. Circuit courts ......................................................................... 40 3. Military crimes ........................................................................ 40 4. Masculine paradigm (Gender) ................................................... 41 5. Combat paradigm (MOS) ......................................................... 41 6. Rank structure ........................................................................ 42 7. Alcohol ................................................................................. 43 8. Marriage ............................................................................... 43 9. Deployment location ................................................................ 43 10. Educational Level .................................................................. 44 11. Race (Ethnicity) .................................................................... 44 IV. Data Analysis Procedure .............................................................. 45 V. Assumptions and Limitations in the Research Methodology .................. 46 CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ........................................................... 47 l. Crime Trend and Characteristics ..................................................... 47 1. U.S. Army crime trends from 1995 to 2000 .................................... 47 vii 2. Socio-demographic characteristics of Army crime ............................ 49 ll. Testing the Research Questions for the General Factors ..................... 54 1. Gender and type of crime ........................................................... 54 2. MOS and type of crime .............................................................. 54 3. Rank and type of crime ............................................................. 55 4. Alcohol use and type of crime ..................................................... 56 5. Multivariate statistics for overall general factors .............................. 57 III. Testing the Research Questions for the Differential Factors ................. 59 1. Marital status and sex offense ..................................................... 59 2. Deployment location and sex offense ........................................... 59 3. Multivariate statistics for overall differential factors .......................... 60 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION .......................................................... 62 l. Summary and Interpretation of Findings .......................................... 62 ll. Limitations of the Present Study .................................................... 66 Ill. Conclusion and Policy Recommendations ...................................... 67 APPENDICES ...................................................................................... 70 Appendix A. U.S. Army Six Circuit Courts and Jurisdictions ....................... 71 Appendix B. Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) ................................ 75 Appendix C. Military Rank / Payroll Structures & Abbreviation ................... 84 Appendix D. Approval of the University Committee on Research involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS) ............................................................... 85 BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................. 86 Bibliography ................................................................................... 87 viii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. U.S. Army Crime Trend in the Different Countries ............................. 48 Table 2. Socio-Demographic Characteristics of the Accused Soldiers: Violent Crime vs. Property Crime from 1995 to 2000 .......................... 51 Table 3. Socio-Demographic Characteristics of the Soldiers Accused for Violent Crimes: USA and European countries vs. Korea from 1995 to 2000 ..................................................................................... 53 Table 4. Crosstabulation for the Type of Crime and Gender, MOS, Rank, and Alcohol Use ............................................................................... 56 Table 5. Logistic Regression Results Predicting Probability of Violent Crime Occurrence Controlling for Race and Educational Level ..................... 58 Table 6. Crosstabulation for the Type of Violent Crime and Marriage and Deployment Location .................................................................. 60 Table 7. Logistic Regression Results Predicting Probability of Sex Offense Occurrence Controlling for Race and Educational Level ...................... 61 ix LIST OF FIGURE Figure 1. U.S. Army VIolent and Property Crime Trends ............................... 47 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION All throughout the history of the world in times of war and when armed forces have been stationed in a country, some military personnel commit crimes. Well-publicized examples are: “Rape of Nanking” in 1937, “Comfort Women” by Japan (Chang, 1997; Durham & Loff, 2001), Nogun-Ri massacre in 1950 by the U.S. (Lee, 1999b; Shin, 1999; U.S. Army, 2001), and massacres in Vietnam by Korean troops and by the U.S. Armed Forces (Linder, 2001; Wehrfritz & Moreau, 2000). When foreign soldiers invade another country which they see as the “enemy”, then this may be an excuse for committing crimes against the people of that country, even though international laws define it as crime. However, when “friendly” foreign troops are stationed in a country in peacetime, they also often commit crimes against the local people. For instances, Yoon, Kum-i, a 26-year-old Korean woman, was raped and murdered by United States (hereafter referred to as U.S.) soldier in October 1992 (National Campaign for Eradication of Crime by U.S. Troops in Korea [NCECUSTK], 2000). A 12- year—old Japanese elementary schoolgirl was abducted and raped by three U.S. military personnel in September 1995 (Anonymous, 1996; Wiseman, 2000), and, more recently in 2000, a U.S. soldier was sentenced for abducting, sodomizing, raping, and killing an 11-year-old Kosovo girl (Nordwall, 2000). Without doubt, this is crime not only against a person, but against humanitarian society in the modern country as well. But what types of soldiers commit crimes, and why do they hurt their friends like this? Unfortunately contemporary military sociologists or even criminologists l may not have answers for these questions, because, as an excuse, the U.S. Department of Defense (hereafter referred to as 000) has kept the research on the military and military crime confidential so that the public has not been able to access it (Coates & Pellegrin, 1965, p. 10 — 13), and because sociologists have “ignored” the unique configurations of crime and deviancy associated with one of the largest work systems in the world, the United States military establishment (see Bryant, 1979; Lennon, 1994). In addition to this vacuum of study on military crime, friendly deployed soldiers’ crimes against local people may cause a political dilemma between the countries. When U.S. soldiers, who are called to “support multinational efforts to ameliorate human suffering and bring peace (William Cohen’s 1997 Annual Report)” (Warren, 1999), commit crimes against people of that country, can the U.S. deployment to the country be justified? For example, when Yoon, Kum-i was raped and murdered by a U.S. soldier in 1992, an anti-American movement emerged (Lee, 2000). Huge demonstrations followed to publicize U.S. military crimes in Korea and to pressure Korean and the U.S. governments into revising the Status of Forces Agreement (hereafter referred to as SOFA) (NCECUSTK, 2000; Korean Times, 1999). A similar case occurred in Japan right after three U.S. soldiers raped a 12-year-old schoolgirl in 1995 (Anonymous, 1996; Wiseman, 2000). On any given day, the U.S. armed forces have “140,000 soldiers and civilians deployed in 65 different countries” in the world (US Army, 2001). Since the end of the Cold War, the U.S. armed forces have been deployed more than 20 times for “non-conventional" operations, such as peacekeeping, peace 2 enforcement, humanitarian assistance, deterrence and conflict (Doyle, Lewis, & Williams, 1996; see Franke, 1998: p. 253 — 254). With respect to Size and the stated mission of the U.S. armed forces, when friendly deployed U.S. soldiers commit crimes against local people, how does the DoD and the U.S. government resolve the political dilemma? The importance of this research studying violent crimes committed by the U.S. military personnel lies in that this study may provide the DoD with general characteristics of military crimes, possible reasons for the crimes with a statistical analysis of crime data. By doing so, this research may help military authorities to manage and hopefully reduce military crimes, not only in the continental U.S., but also in foreign countries where the U.S. armed forces are deployed. In addition, with this research, this author would like to establish a cornerstone for knowledge of military sociology and military crime. In this research, some questions examined include whether U.S. military personnel commit more violent crimes in foreign countries than in the U.S., what type of U.S. soldiers commit more violent crimes in foreign countries, and what factors may influence the soldiers to commit more violent crimes. At first, historic cases of military crime in war and peacetime will be shown. Then the distinct military sociology and subculture will be studied. While explaining military sociology, this study will attempt to integrate military subculture and criminological theory applicable to military crime. l. Structure and Scope of the Study 1. Structure of the study This study will begin with defining military sociology and subculture, military crime, and with showing historic cases of military crimes in wartime and peacetime. Subsequently, trend of military sociology studies conducted by some researchers after catastrophic world wars and several “small” wars are discussed. Then, based on the previous research, this study will categorize those previous research results into two main categories: general factors and differential factors. In the analysis part of this research, this author will show trends of military crime and demographic characteristics of perpetrators from 1995 to 2000 in the regard to overall crime rate, violent crime rate, and property crime rate of the U.S. soldiers in both the U.S. and foreign countries. The general factors will, then, be examined to test whether U.S. soldiers commit more violent crimes than property crime, and whether the U.S. soldiers commit higher rates for a certain type of violent crime than in other violent crimes. This research will, then, analyze whether there is a significant difference among a certain type of violent crime rate in the U.S., and those in Korea and in Europe. _2_. Scope of the study First of all, since the data that will be used in this study has been accumulated by the U.S. Army Judiciary, this study cannot include the general population of all the U.S. military service members, except the U.S. Army personnel who were accused of violent or property crimes. Thus, the unit of analysis will be the accused U.S. Army persons in the U.S., Europe, and Korea. 4 Secondly, the reason that this author gathered the data ranging from 1995 to 2000 is to study the SOFA and its effect. Since the SOFA between Korea and the U.S. was revised in 1991, a new revision argument has emerged by the Korean government and Korean civilian anti-American groups since 1995 (Lee, 2000). The reason was that, after five years of revision in 1991, there has been no significant Change in US military violent crime trends and case numbers dealt with by Korean courts (Lee, 2000). In 1995, the two countries agreed to revise the SOFA (NCECUSTK, 1999), and after a five-year negotiation, the U.S. and South Korea agreed on new rules giving South Korea more jurisdiction over U.S. soldiers accused of crimes in 2000 (Nordwall, 2000). Even though the SOFA was revised in 2000, still some lawyers and law professors in Korea argue that the SOFA between Korea and the U.S. does not have the equality, which the SOFA between NATO and the U.S. has (Boo & Kim, 2000). Thus, the period between 1995 and 2000 could be considered as a transition era when the SOFA did not have proper control over U.S. military crimes in Korea. However, further research must compare two periods: a period before the new revision (2000), and later the new revision to test control effects of the SOFA. CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW l. GeneLral Knowledge on Military Crime & Research Trend In this chapter, definitions of military sociology and subculture, a definition of military crime, and historic cases of commonly quoted and well- publicized military crimes in wartime and peacetime will be studied. This author will then review the Chronological trend of research on military sociology, and military crimes. 1. Definitions of “military sociolgqy” and “military subculture” Military sociology is a field of sociology, which focuses on military establishments in the same way that sociology research focuses on other social entities in the world (Coates et al., 1965). The major concerns of military sociology include military society, culture, institutions, social differentiation, social group, control, and change (Coates et al., 1965). Among these, military culture means the totality of what is learned by military individuals; it is a way of life, a mode of thinking, acting, and feeling (Coates et al., 1965). The military subculture refers to the military culture when it is compared to the dominant social culture. flefinition of “military crime" Military crime may have three categories: specific (or summary), special, and general crimes (Lennon, 1988, 1994). Specific crimes are defined “specifically in reference to civilian codes”; for example, murder, manslaughter, larceny, and so on, but special crimes do not have “a specific Civilian analog (i.e., 6 hazarding a vessel, willful disobedience, etc)" (Lennon, 1994, p. 399). General crimes have no civilian parallel. They are defined as behaviors that: ...all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital...(Manual for Courts-Martial, Article 134, 1984 Edition, p. lV-109). This means that military activities that may discredit the U.S. armed forces are considered as general crimes of military. Another researcher categorized military crimes into three different broad categories: crimes against property, crimes against persons, and crimes against performance (Bryant, 1979, p. 8 — 10). The crimes against property include destruction of property, theft, forgery, and so forth, and the crimes against persons involve activities harming human beings, such as assault, rape, murder, and torture of persons. Otherwise, the crime against performance, which is distinct from crimes in the civilian sector, refers to activities related to military works or performance. Bryant’s crimes against property and person seem to correspond to Lennon’s specific crimes, and the crimes against performance to the special crimes and the general crimes of Lennon’s typology. Bryant’s crimes against performance and Lennon’s latter two types of crimes seem to need to be studied, not inside of the Civilian criminological context but in the context of the military's own criminal and social knowledge. Thus, in this research, “military crime” is designated in Bryant’s crimes as against persons and property, and in Lennon’s as specific crimes. In other words, military crime is defined in this research as a crime which is committed by one or more military personnel, and which harms either human beings or property that belongs to either the military institution or to civilian society. 3. Historic cases of military crimes in wartime and peacetime ln wartime: Throughout the history of the world, numerous wars have occurred, and these vital conflicts between human beings sacrificed uncountable number of people’s lives toward the next step of social evolution. Researchers argue that killing on a battlefield may be morally justified by war conventions with an argument that “waging war by the state is political communities” right to use their military forces” (Groll-Ya ari, 1994; see also Walzer, 1977). But, for whatever reason, war cannot be justified without existence of a “supreme emergency” (Walzer, 1977, p. 251 - 254). In other words, war only can be morallyjustified when the war saves people and serves as a servant for righteousness of protecting and killing human beings. However, during wartime, anti-humanitarian behaviors have frequently occurred, and many of those violent crimes targeted women in wartime. Seifert (1996) argued, “Mass rapes and sexual torture of women in times of crisis and war are not new phenomena.” Moreover, Scarry (1985) argued that wars are an expression of cultural destruction/deconstruction, and the best way of cultural destruction is injuring and destroying human beings, especially raping women. There are many well-known examples of the cultural deconstruction by 8 raping women in wartime throughout world history. In 1937, Japanese soldiers raped, tortured, and murdered approximately 20,000 Chinese women in Nanking during the first month of the Japanese occupation (Chang, 1997). After the World War II, German war criminals were tried in Nuremberg for their genocidal activities and tattooing “Whore for Hitler's Troops" on the body of Jewish women and using them accordingly (Seifert, 1996). Similarly, Japanese military abducted and locked up the 100,000 - 200,000 Korean women in military camps for sexual service to the “Empire Soldiers” calling them “comfort women” during World War II (Durham et al., 2001; Seifert, 1996). Besides raping women during wartime, a more direct form of the cultural deconstruction could be found in the history of wars. For example, in the 19503, the U.S. military allegedly killed 400 Civilians in Nogun Ri located in southern Korean peninsula at the beginning of the Korean War (US Army, 2001; Lee, 1999b; Shin, 1999). During the \fretnam War, Korean troops killed more than 8,000 Vietnamese civilians, and most of the victims were women and Children (Wehrfritz et al., 2000). A U.S. Army officer, Lt. William Calley, was tried for his slaughter of 504 civilians at My Lai in 1968 after the end of the Vietnam War (see Linder, 2001; Wehrfritz et al., 2000). In peacetime: Regardless of the nationality of military units or personnel, violent military crimes against people during peacetime have been widely reported. Among them, crimes against women, particularly rape, appear to be most prevalent in the content of the military crimes against local people (see Morris, 1996). For instance, Yoon, Kum-i murder case, which served as a catalyst of Civil anti-Americanism in Korea, was a well-publicized typical U.S. military 9 crime casein Korea (NCECUSTK, 2000). In December 28, 1992, Ms. Yoon, a 26-year-old prostitute who lived near the U.S. military base, Camp Casey, was raped and gruesomely murdered by a U.S. soldier, Kenneth Markle, 20-year-old, PFC (Private First Class) in the 25th Infantry Brigade. At the crime scene, the Korean police and U.S. military CID (Criminal Investigation Department) had to remove an umbrella from her vulva, and at the autopsy of the victim, a beer bottle was found in her uterus (NCECUSTK, 2000). Since the Yoon, kum-i case, even though the case detonated an anti-American movement and this gave a warning to U.S. military commanders and soldiers in Korea, the average numbers of violent crime by U.S. military personnel in Korea has increased so far (Hong, 1999; NCECUSTK, 2000). For other examples, in Okinawa, Japan, three U.S. military soldiers raped a 12-year-old schoolgirl in 1995 (Anonymous, 1996; Wiseman, 2000). The crime brought 80,000 protesters onto the streets (Wiseman, 2000). More recently, in January 2000, Staff Sergeant Frank J. Ronghi raped, sodomized, and suffocated an 11-year-old Kosovo girl to death (Nordwall, 2000). The girl’s death raised tensions between the peacekeeping troops in Kosovo and the ethnic Albanians (Nordwall, 2000). 4. Chronological trend of military sociology and crime research As mentioned previously, some military crime researchers asserted that sociologists and/or military jurisprudents have tended to ignore military crimes (Bryant, 1979; Lennon, 1994). Coates et al. (1979, p. 12) argued that the reason that military sociology could not build its own “pyramid of knowledge” was due to 10 the withholding of cumulated research results from the public. However, despite the lack of research on military sociology and military crimes, a trend of military sociology research can be traced back to the end of the World War II. A research movement on military sociology began with World War II because considerable sociological knowledge had accumulated by that time, and because many professional sociologists within and outside of the military were willing to provide their knowledge to the wartime military establishment (Coates et al., 1979). In addition, the military authority also needed to study the military member’s attitude and culture because of the war and rapid mobilization in the society, and because numerous Civilians moved into military environments that they hardly understood (Coates et al., 1979). In 1941, the Research Branch of the Information and Education Division of the Army was established for the purpose of studying the attitude and opinion of military personnel, and in 1949, as a result, Samuel Stouffer and his associates published a four volume work, entitled “Studies in Social Psychology in World War II.” Since 1950, although the DoD and the various branches of the Armed Forces have continued to conduct studies in military sociology, the net result of these efforts were turned over to the military sponsors and “left unavailable to the general public” (see Coates et al., 1979, p. 9 - 13). After the research movement organized by the DoD in the two decades of the 19403 and the 19503, some military research sporadically emerged on various topics. In the 19603, military sociologists devoted themselves to studying and structuring military sociology, culture, and laws (e.g., Bednar, 1962; Coates et al., 1965; Lang & March, 1965). ll In the 19703, military studies seemed to be influenced by the VIetnam War and by its social effect on American society. Some research focused on war and military crime (e.g., Brayant, 1979; Kroll, 1976; Walzer, 1977), and military transition after the war from institutional organization to occupational organization (e.g., Janowitz, 1975, 1977; Lang et al., 1965; Moskos, 1977). In the 19803, a relatively small amount of military research could be found. Based on Moskos’s and Janowitz’s works, the military research mainly focused on studying the military’s institutional or occupationalmodel (I/O model) (e.g., Moskos & Woods, 1988; Stevenson, 1987). Military crime study consisted mainly of “drug abuse in the military” research (see Beary, Mazzuchi, & Richie, 1983) and research on the U.S. Army legal system (Lennon, 1988) was conducted. In the decade of the 19903, the characteristic of military studies can be defined as ‘the era of subdivision of military research topics’ or “military research’s golden era’ because the topics became diverse and the quantity of research became larger. As results of fundamental and accumulated knowledge on military sociology, culture and institution, the topic of military research was specified and subdivided into several agenda. The topics studied in this era include substance abuse topic (e.g., Bary, Kroutil, & Marsden, 1995; Li & Ballweg, 1991), military culture, values, ethics and sociology issues (e.g., Alpass, Long, MacDonald, & Chamberlain, 1999; Bodnar, 1999; Burk, 1998; Dunivin, 1994; Franke, 1998; GrolI-Ya ari, 1994; Priest & Beach, 1998; Schwartz & Marsh, 1999; Soeters, 1997; Soeters et al., 1998; Warren, 1999; Whitten, 1999), management and recruitment issues (e.g., Cooke & Quester, 1992; Fernandez, 1992; Lakhani, 12 1994; Rohall, Segal, 8 Segal, 1999), military crimes and laws (e.g., Firestone & Harris, 1994; Lennon, 1994; Newton, 1996; Seifert, 1994), and militarization (e.g., Caufield, 1999; Haggerty & Ericson, 1999; Kraska, 1999a, 1999b). Even though only one and a half years into the 20003, this decade will be a significantly different era from others, because a new research topic is emerging. The new topic is “rape by military in wartime”, although some research had already conducted on this issue (e.g., Seifert, 1996; Whitten, 1999). This is because some rape cases have drawn not only the public’s attention, but some academia’s interests as well (see Lewis-Horne, 2000; Mumola, 2000; see also Mee, 1999; Sarai, 1999). In the review of the chronological trend of military sociology and crimes, an interesting finding is that most of the studies focused military sociology including military culture, values, institutional or occupational argument and militarization, rather than on military crimes (see Bryant, 1979). 13 ll. Variables Related to Military Crime In this section, variables related to military crime, which were founded in the previous research, will be discussed and categorized into two categories: general factors and differential factors. The general factors include masculine paradigm, combat paradigm, rank structure of military, and alcohol consumption. Based on the previous research results, this author will argue that these factors affect military personnel to commit more violent crimes than property crimes regardless of their different deployment location. The differential factors include marriage and different environments of deployment location of soldiers, and based on the previous research, this author will argue that these factors affect military personnel to commit more a certain type of violent crime in different locations. 1. Mascgline paracflgm In a society or an institution, there are distinctive values, norms and attitudes. Of importance are that these largely constitute societal or institutional cultures, and that these are foundations of a paradigm (Levin, 1991). A paradigm is a particular perspective or view of the world, and this is very important to understand social phenomena (Dunivin, 1994). Then, what are the military’s own values, attitudes, and notions? And what are the military’s basic paradigms explaining its own culture? Definition: Military culture is Characterized by two main paradigms: the combat paradigm and the masculine paradigm (Dunivin, 1994). The masculine paradigm refers to “cult of masculinity”, which accompanies masculine norms, l4 values, and lifestyles (Dunivin, 1994; see Moskos, 1970), and it is an organization of Character around sexual desire, and ongoing developmental construction, rather than completed building (Morgan, 1994). Construction process & trails; Coates et al. (1979, p. 28 - 34) mentioned that the military institution’s value system stresses patriotism, integrity, progress, efficiency, practicality, rationality, work and activity, and success; rather than equality, freedom, individualism, quality of life, and democracy, which are stressed by the Civilian value system in America. These military values constitute the “masculine paradigm”, because the masculine paradigm is accompanying masculine norms, values, and lifestyles (Dunivin, 1994), and because the masculine norms, values, and lifestyles are those of duty and country (the U.S. Anny’s traditional notion, patriotism), cohesion and command (integrity), combat effectiveness (efficiency), combat readiness (practicality, and work and activity), dominance (progress and success) (Coates et al., 1979; Franke, 1998; Soeters et al., 1998; Woodward, 1998). Some traits of masculinity are braveness, wildness, dominance, violence, and aggressiveness (Woodward, 1998). These traits of the military are constructed and reinforced by the military recruitment and military socialization (Morgan, 1994). First, by and large, the military institution recruits male soldiers. Soeters et al. (1998, p. 4) studied culture and discipline of international military academies, and found that homogeneity of military academies in terms of gender ratio was large: “more than 90% of the respondents is male” in military academies across Sixteen countries. This disproportion of gender is because of 15 the origin of the military entity and its roles for preparing and carrying out of war (Coates et al., 1965). Morgan argued that “of all the sites where masculinities are constructed, reproduced, and deployed, those associated with war and the military are some of the most direct” (1994, p. 165). In addition, the military laws and policies still prohibit female employment for certain types of military occupations, such as ground armor crew members. The justifications for the exclusionary laws and policies are physical traits of females, such as pregnancy (Fields, 1997), relative physical weakness (Whitten, 1999), and combat readiness and effectiveness (Coates et al., 1965; Dunivin, 1998). According to Fields’s research (1997, p. 49), for example, in less than seven months in Bosnia, between December 1995 and July 1996, at lease one female soldiers was evacuated every three days “for being too heavy with child.” Secondly, these masculine military culture and values are transmitted down to newcomers of the military, and are trained, enculturated and reinforced by military training. In other words, undoubtedly, the masculine paradigm is maintained and transmitted down to the next generation of military personnel by recruiting largely males and by militarizing them (Morgan, 1994). (This military socialization, which is referred to as militarization in this research, will be discussed further in the following section.) Thus, these military values and norms construct military culture, which is a subculture in the society which the military belongs to, and this military subculture is transmitted to the next generation of military members through the militarization processes, which are comprised of recruitment, military drills, training, and reinforcement of punishments and rewards. l6 Problem: Throughout the militarization processes, which demand physical domination, competitiveness, toughness, and self-restraint, hegemony of masculinity is contested, and force soldiers to adapt themselves to military life and its subculture (Woodward, 1998). This hegemonic masculinity is characterized by ascendancy and tolerance of violence for domination, and causes violence, particularly against women (Woodward, 1998). Some argue that white male’s racism and sexism are an exaggerated expression of the hegemonic masculinity (e.g., Morgan, 1994), because based on Anglo-American values, the white male is in the higher status in the hierarchy, and they have hegemony (Kennedy, 1996). Compared to them, other ethnic females are in lower position, and they tend to try to escalate in the hierarchy. With respect to hegemony, there must be a conflict between each group. Therefore, based on the masculinity values, such as dominance, violence, braveness, wildness, and aggressiveness, male soldiers in the military subculture will respond more violently in the conflict than female soldiers and than Civilian counterparts. For example, in a recent research, Mumola (2000) found that among the federal, state, and local prisoners, male veterans who had military experience were more likely to commit violent crimes than civilian counterparts. Most of the veterans, who were incarcerated in various levels of prisons, were charged with violent activities, especially sexual offenses (31% of all violent offenses). In sum, the military culture has a masculine subculture. This character will affect male soldiers’ behaviors to act more violently than female or civilian counterparts. l7 2. Combat paradigm The zenith of military activity, which defines its existence and purpose, is combat. Dunivin (1994, p. 3) mentioned that “military structures and forces are built around combat activities—ground combat divisions, fighter air wings, and naval aircraft carrier battle groups.” Accordingly, the armed forces are organized by the core purposes of their existence and distinguishing between combat arms and support activities, and this notion emphasizing combat activity constitutes the military’s “combat paradigm” (Dunivin, 1994). Definition: This combat paradigm refers to militarization (or militarism) as a perspective or view of the world, which emphasizes “the use of force and domination as appropriate means to solve problems and gain political power, while glorifying the means to accomplish this — military power, hardware, and technology” (Kraska, 1994, p. 3). In this research, militarization is divided into two levels: macro-level and micro-level militarization. Macro-level militarization means the militarization process in social organizations or institutions, such as militarizing police departments and policing (Haggerty & Ericson, 1999; Kraska, 1999a, 1999b). In contrast, micro-level militarization refers to militarizing movement within individual personal perspective, for example, combat skill training and the Military Occupational Specialty (MOS). Construction process & Traits: As mentioned in the previous section, the masculine paradigm is transmitted to new generations of military personnel by reproduction and reinforcement methods, such as military recruitment and training. Among them military trainings reinforce masculine Characteristics to be 18 enculturated among military personnel. Bryant (1979) argued that military training embodies soldier’s killing skills, mental braveness, and propensity of physical dominance over counterparts, such as the enemy, and that throughout the training, mystical notions and exaggerated beliefs about his new self are encultured in the individual soldiers. Similarly, Morgan (1994, p. 166) stated that “combat and military experience separates men from women, and this separation reaches deep into a man’s sense of identity and self.” This argument is further realized in another recent research. Woodward (1998) argued that military training is a process in which tasks are endlessly taught and tested, and through this repetition of tasks, masculine gender identity is constructed and reinforced. Thus, the military training reinforces masculinity in the military institution, and vice versa. Among these tasks and trainings, as a micro-level militarization, the MOS, which is rewarded after demonstration of proficiency in the given specialty, reinforces an individual’s specialized militaristic skills, such as combat engineering, and this involves “equipping the soldier to be an efficient combat killer” (Bryant, 1979, p. 62). Thus, there should be a difference between characters of infantryman specialized in combat MOS and those of other support unit soldiers, even though initial military basic training is mandatory for all recruits. Moreover, Woodward (1998) argued that physical fitness and durability for physical demands are grounds for the infantrymen to kill the enemy and to survive in a war environment, and this means an infantryman of the military is more likely to be enculturated with hegemonic masculinity. Linking combat training and the MOS with masculinity, Woodward (1998) argued that masculinity 19 is reinforced by the infantryman’s training, and then the combat training reinforces masculinity among infantryman. Thus, it is logical to think that a combat unit soldier is more masculine than other support unit soldiers because of military combat training that emphasizes physical fitness, braveness, and killing skills. This means that a combat unit soldier will respond to a situation more violently than other support unit soldiers do, because the combat unit’s values and norms are more tolerant of violence and physical behaviors which are oriented at man’s body and its drive, and because they learn how to dominate others by killing or fighting. 3. Rank system of military Even though American society stresses social values of freedom, democracy, and individualism (Coates et al., 1965), one of the distinct characteristics of the military is the well-structured rigid hierarchy, i.e., rank system (Lang et al., 1965). This unique system in the military institution works as a direct behavior control mechanism, which provides indirect cues concerning what is acceptable in the institution (Soeters et al., 1998). However, according to Huntington’s professionalism argument, the military rank system could be dichotomously divided into two parts: commissioned officers and enlisted soldiers (Groll-Ya ari, 1994; Huntington, 1957, p. 3 - 20). His notion was that officers are the only professional soldiers who have knowledge and intellectual skills for combat and managing military, and have loyalty to the ideal of the good soldier (Huntington, 1957, p. 17 - 18). About a decade later, Coates et al. (1965, p. 222 — 224) mentioned in 20 their work that officers become more fully dedicated to military service by building their honorable and ethical boundaries than temporary officers, who think of their jobs as “brief interludes” in their life-careers, and temporary civilian enlisted service men (non-career enlisted men) do, and with respect to dedication of their life, some highly ranked enlisted service men (career enlisted men) should be considered as professional soldiers. They further argued that the non-career enlisted man may reject many of the values which the military considers basic to effective organizational performance. These researchers arguments are based on “professional motivation” (GrolI-Ya ari, 1994, p. 3), which differs from the temporary civilian solders’ motivation, such as “economic or political appeals.” Thus, it is reasonable to think that military officers, whohave honorable and ethical boundaries of behavior, and highly ranked enlisted servicemen, who dedicate their lives, will be less likely to commit crimes than temporary civilian soldiers who are motivated by economical or political benefits of military jobs rather than the loyalty and honor of it. In addition, it is believed that the military institution has less equality of opportunity and freedom of life and self, which are dominant values of the American society (Coates et al., 1965). Coates et al. argued that: Armed forces are organized in terms of rank, with an attendant inequality of privileges and obligations. Relationships between persons of different ranks are formally prescribed and followed in detailed ritual. Military society provides detailed rules and regulations to govern the behavior of persons holding each position in the hierarchy. So each military personnel may have a tendency to go up in its hierarchy to obtain more freedom and equality of opportunity. 21 This is also contingent with the traits of hegemonic masculinity. In other words, based on the hegemonic masculinity characters, “rank” could be the goal of life in the military to achieve using every meaningful measure to obtain more freedom and equality. Like Jackson Toby’s the “stake in conformity”, the fear of losing important relationships in a person’s life may be a barrier to acting out the impulse to violate, and thus, the greater the stake in something of importance to the person, the less likely the urge to violate it will be acted upon. In this respect, the “rank” of an individual in the military, especially highly ranked service man like a commissioned officer, may develop a “stake in conformity”, and then will be less likely to commit crimes. 4. Alcohol consumption and military recreation One of the problematic cultures of military life is recreation for military personnel. This is not an individual problem, but a structural and cultural problem of military institution. Coates et al. (1965) argued that many civilians perceive servicemen as lower class people, as drinking too much, and as engaging in promiscuous behavior. The basic reason for these recreational problems is the nature of the military job itself, “high degree of mobility,” which is caused by frequent changes in job assignment (Coates et al., 1965). In addition, historically, the military’s masculinity values and norms (masculinity paradigm) have tended to encourage alcohol use as a recreational means (Bray, et al., 1995; Bryant, 1979). Bryant (1979) gave precise insight of sex, alcohol and military masculinity in his work: 22 Military life is the scene of a wide variety of deviant behavior ranging from excessive use of alcohol and narcotic addiction, to sex crimes, and even mass murder. (p. 7)....Although many armies attempt to provide prostitutes (some even have prostitute units attached to military units), promote or encourage contiguous prostitution, or at least tacitly tolerate prostitution, this never provides an adequate range of sexual outlets for the troops. Alcohol serves the function of relieving the tension of or blunting sexual drives, acting as a kind of sexual anesthetic. It may be a substitute for sex, or at least make prostituted sex more acceptable. (p. 176). Thus, the ability to drink large amounts of alcohol is something of a masculine test and in some ways a test of suitability for the demanding masculine military role. (p. 178). Military authorities also have tended to encourage alcohol consumption with structured methods. For example, alcoholic beverages have been available to military personnel at reduced prices in any military complexes, and have been used to reward hard work, ease interpersonal tensions, and promote unit cohesion (Bray, et al., 1995). However, a problem with the military and alcohol is that alcohol consumption causes some violent activities. Giacopassi and Stein (1989) noted that alcohol has been a major role in America’s crimes, and in over half of all murders, rapes, and assaults, the offender and/or victim has been drinking. Without exception, alcohol in the military causes violent crimes. With the masculine subculture, drinking alcohol will not only increase the relaxation of soldiers, but increase the possibility of criminal misbehaviors as well. 23 In addition, several studies have revealed that alcohol use and illicit drug use are consistently related to age, gender, educational level, marital status, and rank (Beary, Mazzuchi, & Richie, 1983; Bray, et al, 1995; Giacopassi, et al., 1989). In other words, young male soldiers, who have lower educational level and rank, are more likely to use alcohol and illicit drugs in the military, and then more likely to commit violent crimes. 5. Marriage and overseas missions in foreign country In 1989, approximately 51% of all enlisted soldiers in the Army were married and 37 % were single (see Lakhani, 1994). However, somewhat old but only empirical research on military crime and marital status, which was conducted in 1946, revealed that about 53 % of all military prisoners were single, and 39% were married (MacCormick & Evjen, 1946). This figure suggests the needs for investigation of military crimes and marital status. However, this problem is not that simple in a foreign setting. Abundant research on military and on its members’ families revealed that about 37 % of soldiers residing with their spouse could expect to be separated for thirty days or more, and at any given time, 8 % of Army soldiers are separated from their spouse for active-duty service (see Rohall et al., 1999). These frequent separations are due to high mobility, the nature of military life itself and lack of residence places in military bases around foreign countries (Coates et al., 1965). They cause soldiers to experience guilt for leaving families, anxiety, depression, and family conflicts, such as divorce and destabilization of family (Rohall et al., 1999). These emotional or physical conflicts cause alcohol consumption, and 24 then increase the possibility of criminal activities (Li et al., 1991 ). Coates et al. (1965) argued that soldiers experience discontinuity in social control when they are deployed to a foreign country, and one of the disappearing social control institutes is the family, especially the spouse. If a soldier is assigned to a foreign country and he or she moves to the country with a spouse, the soldier may feel their attachment to spouse, and then he or she will be less likely to commit crime. Conversely, it is logical to think that a solider who is married but assigned to a foreign country without his or her spouse, may be more likely to suffer family conflict (based on Rohall et al.’s result), then the soldier may not feel attachment to the spouse or family. In addition to the complicated problem of marriage, based on this author’s interview with a Captain in the U.S. Marine Corps, most of the soldiers who are assigned to an overseas mission are single. When the soldiers are married, they have to choose one of two options: staying for 6 months or 1 year without spouse, or staying for 3 years with spouses (Richard A. Dickey, Personal Interview, March 20, 2001). So most of them Choose to stay one year or less for the overseas mission without their spouse because they are supposed to be back earlier (Richard A. Dickey, Personal Interview, March 20, 2001), and they will not have problems in settling down with their family in a foreign country (Rohall et al., 1999). The problems in settling-down include a lack of residence facilities and child-care facilities, and a far different social culture and language barrier (Coates et al., 1965; Rohall et al., 1999). Thus, soldiers tend to accompany their spouses in deployment to certain foreign countries, such as European countries, but not to certain other countries. For example, in 1994, the 25 soldiers, in the 2Ind Battalion (PATRIOT) 7th Air Defense Artillery Regiment, moved to Europe with spouses right after the six months deployment without spouses in Korea (Rohall et al., 1999). Thus, marriage may not affect a soldier’s behavior in Korea because many married soldiers do not accompany their spouses, but it may have an effect on the behavior in European countries. 6. The deployment localiognd its environments In this section, this author will argue that different Army deployment locations will affect a soldier’s pattern of criminal behaviors. In other words, when a soldier is deployed to Korea, several social environments, such as culture and laws, socialize the soldiers and may influence them in the way of committing criminal behaviors. Social process theorists of criminology argue that individuals may commit crime based on their social experiences, and the process of socialization may include social learning and differential association (Einstadter et al., 1995; Vold et al., 1998). Thus, it is logical to think that if there are different social environments in Korea, the soldiers, who are stationed in Korea, may be socialized by the environments and behave according to acquired knowledge from them. In this research, the prejudice and the perception on the SOFA will be discussed in terms of the different military subculture among soldiers in Korea. However, since little research has been conducted in the U.S. on studying prejudice between Americans and Asians and the SOFA between the U.S. and Korea, this author will largely rely on Korean research on those topics in this argument. Most of the Korean research on the U.S. military crimes in Korea focuses on prejudice of the U.S. military personnel against Koreans, particularly 26 Korean women, and the unequal provisions in the SOFA (e.g., NCECUSTK, 2000). Their arguments are based on imperialism, racial prejudice and ethnic superiority, political power structure and unequal SOFA provisions, and sexual exploitation by American soldiers. This author categorizes these into two categories: prejudice and the SOFA. Prejudice: The prejudice has two sub-arguments: U.S. military personnel’s prejudice against Koreans (ethnocentrism or even racism) and prejudice against Korean women (sexual exploitation). First, historically, U.S. military personnel have been blamed for their racially biased behaviors, such as genocide of the Vietnamese. Research, which was conducted after the VIetnam War, revealed that white soldiers who were incarcerated for violent crimes against Vietnamese persons were six times as many as the black soldiers who were incarcerated for these crimes (Kroll, 1976). Kroll concluded that the white soldiers generalized certain racial prejudices to include the Vietnamese, and consequently viewed the Vietnamese with a mixture of suspiciOn, fearfulness, and disdain. Even in peacetime, Coates et al. (1965, p. 400) argued that military personnel normally possess ethnocentrism, which was defined as “the tendency of persons to judge other cultures by the standards of judgment prevailing in their own”. Although ethnocentrism is a universal feeling among the people of the world, American servicemen are subjected to the feeling when they were assigned to a foreign country (Coates et al., 1965). For extreme example, research found and argued that Canadian peacekeepers committed violent crimes against Somalians based on racial prejudice, and these prejudices have 27 stemmed from racism and ethnocentrism (Brodeur, 1997). Thus, based on the prejudicial perceptions, U.S. military personnel perceive Koreans and Korean culture with disdain and “lower class people without future” (Coates et al., 1965, p.401) Secondly, U.S. military personnel prejudice against Korean women is well visualized in recent research. Sturdevant and Stoltzfus (1992) studied the women prostitutes in three Asian countries, and argued that there is no difference between Japanese “comfort women” and prostitutes for U.S. soldiers, except the prostitutes for U.S. soldiers were volunteers, not prisoners. One thing even worse than Japanese’s “comfort women” is that U.S. soldiers sell their properties to new military arrivals, and the property includes their local house, furniture, and their local girlfriends (NCECUSTK, 2000;Moon, 1997; Sturdevant et al., 1992). However, there is something largely omitted by such researchers. Those are Koreans’ prejudice against different ethnic groups and cultures and Koreans’ prejudice against Korean women. First, Korea has a long history of homogeneity. For over five thousand years, the Korean people have been protecting their blood from invasions by foreign countries (Kim & Park, 1980). As Tumin and his colleagues argued that homogeneous group members are more likely to be prejudiced toward people outside of the group (Tumin, Barton, & Burrus, 1958), Kim and his colleague (1980) argued that Korean people tend to be defensive or even prejudiced toward foreigners. Especially, when the Korean War began, most Korean lay persons saw black people for the first time. Throughout the war, Korean people had seen the “white soldier’s prejudice toward black soldiers” (Graham, 1996; Shenon, 1996), and even now they are educated by Hollywood 28 cinema on “the white American manhood” (Kennedy, 1996, p. 96). In the most famous research on American military, “The American Soldier”, Schwartz et al. (1999) argued that it was widely believed that black soldiers were lazy, uninterested in personal advance, and simply they are not fit to do theirjobs, as combat soldiers, but that they were more violent and crime prone. Thus, Koreans are not an exception for believing in black soldiers’ deficiencies and criminality based on social prejudice imported from outside of Korea. And this is a problematic issue between Korean people and black soldiers in Korea. Korean people think black soldiers commit more violent crimes that white (NCECUSTK, 2000), and they may treat black soldiers based on their prejudice. Secondly, researchers should have studied Korean male’s attitudes toward females. Moon (1997) mentioned that Korean males regard prostitution for U.S. soldiers as physical and psychological self-marginalization, and that even the Korean government uses women prostitutes for U.S. soldiers as instruments for enhancing the friendly relationship between U.S. and Korea. She further noticed: The vast majority of these women have experienced in common the pain of contempt and stigma from the mainstream Korean society. These women have been and are treated as trash, “the lowest of the low,” in a Korean society characterized by classist (family/educational status-oriented) distinctions and discrimination. (p. 3). 29 Thus, based on this prejudice against Korean female prostitutes for U.S. soldiers, Korean police do not pay attention to rape committed by U.S. soldiers in Korea, and they hand over the cases to the U.S. military authority in Korea, then the cases are reduced or even disappear (NCECUSTK, 2000). Therefore, to some degree, Korean people’s prejudice against these women causes degradation of them, and may contribute to U.S. soldiers’ imperial behaviors against them. m The SOFA stands for the Status of Forces Agreement between the U.S. and the countries around the world in which the U.S. armed forces are stationed. On any given day, the U.S. armed forces have “140,000 soldiers and civilians deployed in 65 different countries” in the world (US Army, 2001). In Korea, about 37,000 U.S. soldiers assigned to the 8th U.S. Army, the 2"d Infantry Division, the U.S. Air Force, and Navy are stationed in Korea (Korean Department of Defense, 1999). The SOFA is the only means of governing the 37,000 U.S. armed forces in Korea and protecting them from any possible maltreatment by Korea. This law was mutually agreed to in 1967, and this was revised in 1991 and in 2000. However, the SOFA recently has drawn the Korean public’s attention bigger than ever, because of Korean civilian interest groups which are blaming the SOFA for its invasion of sovereignty of Korea. In this section, the current critique on the SOFA, and its problematic structure will be discussed to bolster one possible difference causing the U.S. military crime in Korea. According to the social control theorists’ arguments, a law should have a control effect on certain crimes when the law is obeyed, or at least, considered to be worth obeying (Einstadter et al., 1995; Vold et al., 1998). Thus, it is assumed 30 that the SOFA has a control effect on U.S. military personnel’s criminal behaviors in Korea because this law is legally governing the 37,000 U.S. armed forces in Korea. And, that is not because the crimes draw the Korean public’s attention, but because the crimes should be punished properly and because the law should have no exception for the crimes. However, the reality is somewhat different. According to the Korean Department of Justice report in 1994, between 1985 and 1991 (7 years), the mean number of the U.S. military crime cases was 1095, birt between 1991 and 1998 (7 years), the mean number of the crime cases sharply decreased to 608 (Korean Department of Justice (KDJ), 1994). The NCECUSTK explained that the sharp decrease in U.S. military crime was not because of revision of the SOFA in 1991, but because of the Korean public’s attention to the crime right after the Yoon, Kum-i murder case occurred (NCECUSTK, 2000). The NCECUSTK argued that since the SOFA between the U.S. and Korea was revised in 1991, the provisions prohibiting Korean courts’ jurisdiction over U.S. military violent crimes were not substantially changed (NCECUSTK, 2000). This explanation of the decrease seems to be reasonable because the number of the U.S. soldiers who committed violent crimes in Korea has continuously increased from 125 to 182 between 1996 and 1998 (Hong, 1999). Hong (1999) asserted in the “Annual Parliamentary inspection 1999: lnterpellation on U.S. military crime to administers of Kyungki province police agency” that the U.S. military violent crime has been increasing, but still 95 % of these crimes are processed without local police’s arresting or detaining the perpetrators. 3l Moreover, based on the NCECUSTK’s research, compared to crimes committed by other foreigners in Korea, which are dealt with by the Korean criminal justice system, the crimes committed by the U.S. military personnel are an exception for the Korean criminal courts, so that an average of only 1.7% of all U.S. military crimes have been adjudicated by Korean courts (KDJ, 1994; see also NCECUSTK, 2000, p. 3). This adjudication rate is important because the rate represents the magnitude of Korean courts’ judicial power over U.S. military crime, and supports the NCECUSTK’s arguments saying the SOFA does not have the expected control effects on the military crimes. Based on a review of the literature, the problems of the SOFA can be categorized into two perspectives: problem in the structure of the SOFA and problem in administration of the SOFA. First, the SOFA between the U.S. and Korea has several unfair provisions, such as the Articles 4, 5, 22 and 23 (Lee, 19993; NCECUSTK, 2000). Among them, the Article 22, which regulates criminal jurisdiction, is the most favorable to the perpetrators of the U.S. military crime (Boo, 2000; KDJ, 1994; Lee, 1999a; Lee, 2000; NCECUSTK, 2000). This Article has been criticized for having “sympathetic consideration” phrase in the provision, because based on the “sympathetic consideration” phrase, Korean criminal justice authority should turn over any criminal case to the U.S. military authority, when it is asked to do so (Lee, 1999a; NCECUSTK, 2000). Even the Korean Bar Association has begun to publicly blame invasion of sovereignty of Korea and her judicial rights, and unfairness of the SOFA compared to the SOFA between NATO or Japan and the U.S. (Han, 1996; Lee, 1999b; NCECUSTK, 2000). However, in the U.S. soldiers’ murder of Koreans, most of the cases 32 were adjudicated by the Korean criminal justice system with local police’s arrest and detention of the perpetrators (NCECUSTK, 2000). For example, in 1996, two murders occurred and one of those cases was adjudicated by a Korean court. There were two murder cases in 1998, and both murder cases were dealt with by Korea (KDJ, 1994). This attributes to revision of the SOFA in 1991, and because of Korean public’s antagonism against U.S. military crime perpetrators (NCECUSTK, 2000). But, most of the crimes except murder were transferred to the U.S. authority, and the cases were decreased or even disappeared because of administrative protection of the U.S. military authority (NCECUSTK, 2000). Secondly, military crime prosecution or punishment largely depend on military commanders” discretion (Coleman, Gaboury, Murray & Seymour, 1999, Chapter 3, section 3). Coleman et al. summarized the military commanders’ possible four disposition decisions as followings: 1. The commander may choose to take no action. 2. The commander may initiate administrative action against a service member. 3. The commander may dispose of the offense with nonjudicial punishment. 4. The commander may dispose of the offense by court-martial. If the commander decides that the offense is serious enough to warrant trial by court-martial, the commander may exercise the fourth option, preferring and fonrvarding charges. (chapter 3, section 3). Thus, based on the commander’s discretion, the actual crime and its punishment may vary. If a commander has a notorious crime case against Civilians, the 33 commander tends to promptly dissolve the crime as soon as possible by punishing the crime perpetrator according to his or her own discretion, because prompt punishment may decrease the public’s negative perception on the military (Bryant, 1979). Therefore, with the unfair SOFA provision, a commander may request the Korean authority for the “sympathetic consideration,” and then, may try to reduce negative perception with prompt punishment, and to protect his or her soldiers from being treated by foreigners. In this case, most of the prompt punishment is administrative punishment or referring offenders to summary or special court-martial, not general court-martial because the general court-martial requires more time than other courts’ processes take (Coleman et al., 1999), and because the commander needs swift resolution. In addition to this, the negative perception of the Korean public and police toward prostitutes contributes to the high rate of disappearance of the rape cases (this was discussed previous section, “prejudice”) (NCECUSTK, 2000). In sum, based on the two problems of the SOFA, U.S. military personnel may perceive the SOFA as a nominal law, and then, the SOFA does not have proper control effects over the sex offenses. In other words, the recent SOFA and its administration cannot socialize the soldiers in Korea to obey the SOFA and the commanders to administer the SOFA fairly because of the U.S. military personnel’s perceptions on it. 34 Ill. Research Q_ugstions 1. Two main questions As mentioned in the previous section, this research is comprised of largely two parts: the general factors and the differential factors. Thus the two main questions are the following: 0. Do U.S. Army personnel commit more violent crime than property crime? 0. Do U.S. Army personnel commit more sex offenses in foreign countries than in the continental U.S.? 2. Specific research questions derived from the previous resea__rcb_ The general factors include the masculine paradigm, the combat paradigm, military rank structure, and alcohol consumption. Several research questions derived from these factors: 1. Do male soldiers commit more violent crime than female soldiers do? 2. Do combat unit personnel of the U.S. Army commit more violent crime than non-combat unit (support units) personnel of the U.S. Army? 3. Do lower ranked soldiers commit more violent crime than higher ranked soldiers do? 4. Are soldiers who drink alcohol more likely to commit violent crime than those who are sober? The differential factors include marriage and the deployment location. 35 The research questions derived from those factors are the following: 5. Do soldiers, who are not married or are not living with their spouse, commit more sex offenses than those who are married or are living with their spouse in foreign countries? 6. Do soldiers, who are stationed in Korea, commit more sex offenses than those who are stationed either in the U.S. or in the European countries, because of different deployment locations and their environments? 36 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY I. Data Collection Procedure and Sample 1. Data collection procedure The source of the data, which is used in this study, is the U.S. Army Judiciary. This author sent a letter asking the data set to the U.S. Army Judiciary under the Freedom of lnfonnation Act, and the data was extracted from the Army Court-Martial Information System (ACMIS) Including the variables mentioned in the previous section. 2. Sample The subjects in this data are the U.S. Army soldiers, who were accused between 1995 and 2000 for their criminal activities in the continental U.S., in European countries, or in Korea. The data has total 2795 cases. Among those cases, 667 cases (24% out of total) were involved with violent crimes and 2128 cases (76% out of total) were involved with property crimes. The sample is predominantly male (94% of the sample). The mean age of the violent crime perpetrators is about 30 years-old, while the mean age of the property crime perpetrators is about 29 years-old. The majority of the military crime perpetrators are white and black soldiers (about 88% of the total crimes) compared to other ethnic groups. 37 ll. Variables 1. Independent variables The independent variables in this research are the general factors and the differential factors. The general factors include gender (masculine paradigm), the MOS (combat paradigm), rank (military rank structure), and alcohol consumption. The differential factors include marital status (marriage) and the deployment location. (See Table 2) g. Dependent variatfl There are two dependent variables: the first one for the general factors is the type of crime, i.e., violent crime or property crime, and the second one for the differential factors is the type of violent crime, i.e., rape or other violent crimes, such as murder or manslaughter. The crime types include two categories: one is violent crime including premeditated murder, unpremeditated murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, rape, carnal knowledge. The second category is property crime including robbery, burglary, larceny of military property and larceny of nonmilitary property. The type of violent crime, the second dependent variable, is drawn from only violent crime cases, and is recoded into two categories: one is sex offense including rape and carnal knowledge, and another is other violent crime including murder and manslaughter. As the “carnal knowledge” is defined in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, it means sexual intercourse under circumstances not amounting to rape in this research. 38 3. Control variables The variables of educational level and race (ethnicity) of the U.S. Army personnel are used as control variables. Since about 94% of. the subjects in this sample have the four-year of college or graduate educations, comparison across educational levels of the accused soldiers was impossible. Therefore, educational level was dichotomized to “graduate work” or “lower than graduate work” which included “high school certificate”, “four-year high school” and “four- year college.” In the light of the literature review, Korean people may have prejudice against black soldiers, not against white, Hispanic or other ethical soldiers. In addition, the sample has almost half of the black accused soldiers (about 46%). Thus, the race variable was also dichotomized to “black” and “nonblack.” 39 III. Operational Definitions 1.Locafions The location means that where the U.S. Army personnel are deployed, and where the U.S. Army personnel commit crimes. This variable has three categories: Korea, the U.S., and Europe countries. This variable later is used as the deployment location variable. _2_. Circuit courts There are six Army circuit courts for the entire U.S. Army. The first four judicial Circuit courts cover the U.S. Army soldiers in America. The firth circuit covers the U.S. Army establishments and soldiers in Europe countries, such as 1st and 2"d Armored Divisions, 3rd Infantry Division, 21st Theater Army Area Command, and 32"“ Army Air Defense Command. Finally, the six judicial circuit covers the U.S. Army establishments and soldiers in Korea, such as 8th U.S. Army, 2Ind Infantry Division, 19th Support Command, 10th Area Support Group, and USA Japan / IX Corps. However, according to a Deputy Clerk of Court in the U.S. Army Judiciary, the number of crimes committed by the U.S. Army in Japan is “statistically very few” (Mary B. Dennis, Personal Communication, September 20, 2000), this author regards that there is no U.S. military crime in Japan, which is adjudicated by the Sixth Judicial Court, during the period from 1995 to 2000. Specific military establishments in a circuit are shown in the Appendix A. 3. Military crimes In this research, the military crime is defined as crime committed by U.S. 4o military personnel against person and / or property (see Chapter 2). The military crimes are categorized based on the typology of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, specifically violent crimes including Article 118 (murder), Article 119 (manslaughter), Article 120 (rape and carnal knowledge), and property crimes including Article 121 (larceny), Article 122 (robbery), and 129 (burglary). The type of crime, i.e., violent crime or property crime, is used as the first dependent variable for the general factors, and the type of violent crime, i.e., rape and carnal knowledge or other violent crime, is used as the second dependent variable for the differential factors. 4. Masculine wadigm (Gender) The masculine paradigm refers to the “cult of masculinity”, which accompanies the masculine norms, values, and lifestyles (Moskos, 1970). Since this data is a secondary data, this author could not have a variable measuring existence of masculinity or the masculine traits. However, this author assumes that most of male solders have traits of the hegemonic masculinity because the hegemonic masculinity can be found largely among males (Morgan, 1994), and the masculine paradigm is the dominant view of the world among male soldiers (Morgan, 1994; Moskos, 1970; Woodward, 1998). This variable will measure the U.S. Army accused personnel’s biological gender: male and female. 5. Combat paradigm (MOS) The combat paradigm refers to the militarization, which emphasizes “the use of force and domination as appropriate means to solve problem and gain 41 political power over others.” (Kraska, 1994, p. 3). Thus, as a micro-level militarization process, the MOS (Military Occupational Specialty) will be used to measure the degree of individual militarization process. The MOS is rewarded to an individual for demonstrating personal proficiency in a certain field of military job. Thus, it is logical to think that a soldier, who has a combat operation MOS, such as infantry, is specialized in the infantry combat skills. (see Appendix B). There are Six categories in the U.S. Army MOS: administration, intelligence, combat operation, logistics, civil and public affairs, and communication. These Six main MOSs have overall 212 specialties. In this research, this author recoded these six categories into two categories: combat operation MOS and support MOS, which included all MOSS except combat MOS. 6. Rank structure As one of the distinct Characteristics of military institution, rank structure is employed to measure an individual soldiers’ status in the military hierarchy. The military rank structure comprises mainly two categories: enlisted soldiers and commissioned officers. The enlisted soldiers are divided into three broad categories: junior enlisted soldiers, higher ranking enlisted soldiers, and senior ranking enlisted soldiers. The warrant officer rank includes five steps, and there are ten steps from Second Lieutenant to General. The rank structure of the Army and its payroll grade are shown in the Appendix C. In this research, the author recoded these rank structure into two categories: one includes junior enlisted soldier and higher ranking enlisted soldier, and another includes senior ranking enlisted soldier, warrant officer, and 42 commissioned officer, based on the previous literature (i.e., Coates et al., 1965). 7. Alcohol The “alcohol” variable measures whether the accused soldiers were drunk at the time of their crimes. 8. Marriage Marriage is divided into four categories: single, married, widowed, and separated. These are categorized into married and single including widowed and separated. However, since the data, which is used in this study, is the secondary data gathered by the U.S. Army Judiciary, and the data does not have a variable measuring whether the accused soldiers accompanied their family or not in overseas missions, this author analyzes only the fact that whether the soldiers are married or not. In the future research on military crime in different countries, marriage variable should include whether the soldiers are living with spouse in a foreign country at the time of committing crimes. 9. Deployment location The deployment location means where Army soldiers are deployed, and where the soldiers commit crimes. Each geographical location has its own social environments, which may affect foreign soldiers behaviors. In Korea, the deployment location has the Korean social environments, such as prejudice and the SOFA between Korea and the U.S. The deployment location is measured by the locations where the U.S. Army personnel committed their crimes, which are 43 represented by the U.S. Army judicial circuit court number. 10. Eddcational level Educational level has several categories, such as high school certificate, four-year high school, four-year college, gradate work, and higher than graduate education. These categories are dichotomized to “graduate work” and “lower than graduate work” to be used as control variable, because about 94 % of the sample had at least four-year college education. 11. Race (Ethnicity) The race of the accused soldiers is divided into six categories: white (Caucasoid), black (Negroid or African), Hispanic, red (American Indian), yellow (Asian or Mongoloid), and others. These categories are also dichotomized to “black” and “nonblack” to be used as control variable, because about 46% of the accused soldiers were black. 44 IV. Dajtg Analysis Procedure To show the demographic characteristics of the accused soldiers, the frequency distribution is employed. The frequency distribution is also used to analyze crime trends of the U.S. Army soldiers between 1995 and 2000 in the different locations. The research hypotheses are tested by using crosstabulation and binary logistic regression. Specifically, crosstabulation is used to test independence in relationship between the dependent variables and the independent variables, i.e., gender, MOS, rank, alcohol consumption, marital status, and deployment location. To test the main two hypotheses, the binary logistic regression is used. The reason for use of logistic regression is that the two dependent variables have categorical measure on the type of crime (violent crime or property crime) and on the type of violent crime (sex offense or other violent crime). The .05 alpha level is the criterion for significance in all analysis. The Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS) is used to analyze the data. 45 V. Assumptions in the Research Methocflgy Based on the literature review, this author suggested two assumptions. First, this author assumes that there is a direct relationship between hegemonic masculinity and male soldiers. However, most of the research on masculinity of military found that masculinity is produced and reproduced among males by biological traits of the male, masculine values and norms, and gender-based socialization processes (e.g., Morgan, 1994; Moskos, 1970; Woodward, 1998). Thus, it seems logical to argue that almost all male soldiers have masculine traits, so that they will behave according to their masculine values, norms, and lifestyles, and will respond to a situation according to them. Secondly, in the light of the literature review, this author assumes that when the U.S. Army soldiers are stationed in Korea, their behaviors may be affected by the prejudice and the SOFA in the way that they commit crimes against Korean people, especially women. This is because most of the research on contemporary U.S. military crimes in Korea concluded that prejudice and lack of the control effect of the SOFA have contributed to U.S. military crimes in Korea (e.g., Boo et al., 2000; Han, 1996; Hong, 1999; Kim et al., 1980; Lee, 2000; Lee, 1999a; NCECUSTK, 2000). And, also according to social process theorists, these societal prejudices and previously cumulated perceptions on the law socialize military personnel to behave accordingly (Einstadter et al., 1995; Vold et al., 1998). However, future study on this topic should research the prejudice and the control effect of the SOFA with proper variables measuring them, and generalizations to populations should be made with extreme caution. 46 CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS In this chapter, the results of the data analysis will be discussed. The first stage of the analysis will focus on the U.S. Army crime trends and socio- demographic characteristics of the accused soldiers with the division of crime type and locus of crime. Then, bivariate and multivariate analyses will test each hypothesis proposed in the light of the literature review. I. Crime Trend and Characteristics 1. U.S. Army crime trends from 1995 to 2000 As can be seen in Figure 1, overall the violent and property crimes of the U.S. Army had decreased dramatically from 1995. Specifically, in the year 2000, both crimes occurred only half as many as times in 1995 (see Table 1). Figure 1. U.S. Army \fiolent and Property Crime Trends. (Total N=2795) 500 400 -\ 300 ' \ 5 200 l '0 N E s 3 ‘\ ’-——— Z 100 " ‘.—-"‘"“ ————————— a) 8 o 0 - - _ f 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year (*Legend: \fiolent crime: - - - -, Property crime: 47 This downtrend of military crime is similar to the crime trend in civilian counterpart. Based on the Uniform Crime Reports in 2001, from 1996 to 2000, violent and property crimes have continuously decreased, only except from 1999 to 2000 where violent crime increased by .1% and property crime remained same (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2001). Table 1. U.S. Army Crime Trend in the Different Countries. (Total N=2795)/ n (%) Violent Crime USA Europe Korea Total Property Crime USA Europe Korea Total 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Total 114 70 78 80 61 63 466 (-) (-) (.020*) (.021) (.016) (.016) 37 19 32 23 28 17 156 (-) (~) (.050) (.033) (.041) (.024) 13 4 11 7 6 4 45 (-) (-) (.041) (.025) (.022) (.014) 164 93 121 110 95 84 667 372 342 274 259 260 190 1697 ( - ) ( - ) (.070) (.069) (.068) (.050) 66 63 49 50 57 24 309 ( - ) ( - ) (.078) (.072) (.083) (.034) 27 28 20 17 21 9 122 ( - ) ( - ) (.075) (.060) (.078) (.033) 465 433 343 326 338 223 2128 * Rate = Numbers of crime cases I Populations of Army X 100 Specifically, Table 1 shows U.S. Army personnel violent and property crime trends in three different regions. From 1997 to 2000, average about 48 380,000 U.S. Army soldiers were stationed in the U.S., about 68,000 soldiers in European countries, and approximately average 27,000 Army soldiers in Korea (Department of Defense, 2001). Based on each total population of the U.S. Army in three different regions, the rates of the accused soldiers for violent or property crimes were calculated. As those rates show, overall military crimes have decreased from 1997 to 2000. Proportionally more U.S. Army personnel were involved with violent crime in both European countries and Korea than in the U.S., but in year 2000, the rate of accused soldiers in Korea dramatically decreased. 2. Socio-demographic Chardcteristiig of Army crime Table 2 (p. 51) shows a description of the demographics of soldiers accused of violent or property crimes. The mean age of the property crime perpetrators (about 29 years-old) is slightly lower than the mean age of the violent crime perpetrators (about 30 years-old). The sample is predominantly male (94% of the sample), and most of the soldiers have four-year college or higher education (93.8% of the sample). Overall, the male soldiers were involved with more violent crimes (98.2%) than property crimes (92.8%). The majority of the military crime perpetrators are white and black soldiers (about 88% of the total crimes), compared to Hispanic and other ethnic groups. This seems to represent the proportion of white and black soldiers in the total population of the Army. One interesting fact is that white soldiers (45.6%) committed more property crimes than black soldiers did (43.1%), and contrastingly, black soldiers (50.8%) committed more violent crimes than white soldiers did (36%). 49 Unexpectedly, 49.7% of the property crimes were committed by single soldiers, while 44.2% of them were by married soldiers. In contrast, 49.3% of the violent crimes were committed by married soldiers, while 43% of them were by single soldiers. As expected, 72.4% of the sample was junior enlisted soldiers and 20.1% of the total sample was higher ranking enlisted soldiers. Only 2% of the total sample was officers. One interesting point about rank is that junior enlisted soldiers were involved with more property crimes (74.8%) than violent crime (64.9%), while higher ranked enlisted soldiers were involved with more violent crime (27%) than the property crime (17.9%). Combat operation MOS soldiers have the biggest portion in violent crimes (40.3%), while of property crimes, logistics MOS soldiers have the biggest portion (38.4%). Most of the military crimes were committed by soldiers who were not drunk at the time of crimes (88.4%). However, in violent crimes, about 30% of the cases were related to alcohol use, while only 6.2% of the property crimes were related to alcohol use. 50 Table 2. Socio-Demographic Characteristics of the Accused Soldiers: Violent Crime vs. Property Crime From 1995 To 2000. (Total N=2795)/ n (%) Age Mean Std. Deviation Gender Male Female Race White Black Hispanic Asian Others Educational level High school certificate Four year high school Four year college Graduate work Marital status Single Married Divorced Others (widowed) Rank Junior enlisted (E1 — E4) Higher ranking enlisted (E5 - E6) Senior ranking enlisted (E7 — E9) Warrant officer (W1 — W5) Officer (01 - 04) Military Occupational Specialty Administration Intelligence Combat operation Logistics Civil & Public affairs Communications Alcohol use at the time of crime No Yes Violent crime Property crime Total 30.11 28.66 29.01 6.45 6.43 6.47 655 (98.2) 1974 (92.8) 2629 (94.1) 12 (1.8) 154 (7.2) 166 (5.9) 240 (36.0) 971 (45.6) 1211 (43.4) 339 (50.8) 915 (43.1) 1254 (44.9) 47 (7.0) 116 (5.5) 163 (5.8) 8 (1.2) 38 (1.8) 46 (1.6) 17 (2.5) 43 (2.0) 57 (2.0) 10 (1.5) 4 (.2) 14 (.5) 42 (6.3) 119 (5.6) 161 (5.8) 329 (49.3) 948 (44.5) 1277 (45.7) 286 (42.9) 1057 (49.7) 1343 (48.1) 287 (43.0) 1058 (49.7) 1345 (48.1) 329 (49.3) 941 (44.2) 1270 (45.4) 43 (6.4) 119 (5.6) 162 (5.8) 8 (1.2) 10 (.5) 18 (.6) 432 (64.9) 1590 (74.8) 2022 (72.4) 180 (27.0) 380 (17.9) 560 (20.1) 38 (5.7) 99 (4.7) 137 (4.9) 5 (.8) 13 (.6) 18 (.6) 11 (1.7) 45 (2.1) 56 (2.0) 54 (8.2) 269(13.1) 323(11.9) 20 (3.0) 42 (2.0) 62 (2.3) 265 (40.3) 737 (35.8) 1002 (36.9) 249 (37.8) 791 (38.4) 1040 (38.3) 27 (4.1) 90 (4.4) 117 (4.3) 43 (6.5) 131 (6.4) 174 (6.4) 474 (71.1) 1997 (93.8) 2471 (88.4) 193 (28.9) 131 (6.2) 324 (11.6) 51 Table 3 shows a description of the demographics of soldiers accused of violent crime in three different regions. The mean age of violent crime perpetrators in U.S. and European countries is 30, and in Korea about 31. There seems to be no difference in the age of the accused soldiers. In Korea, the number of black soldiers who committed violent crimes dramatically increased (71.1% compared to about 50% in the U.S. and European countries). Contrastingly, white soldiers committed much fewer violent crimes in Korea (only 13.3% compared to 37.6 % in the U.S. and European countries). Educational level of the soldiers in Korea is similar to those of the soldiers in the U.S. and Europe, however, in Korea, 60% of the accused soldiers have graduate work education, while 41.6% of the soldiers in the U.S. and Europe have graduate work. 60% of the soldiers who committed violent crimes in Korea were single, and 37.8% of the married soldiers in Korea committed violent crime. Married soldiers committed 50% of the violent crimes in the U.S. and European countries, the single soldiers committed 41.8% of the crimes in the regions. Ranks of the soldiers accused for violent crimes seems not to vary across the different regions. However, in Korea, only 15.6% of violent crimes were committed by combat operation MOS soldiers, while 42.1% of the total violent crime cases by combat soldiers in the U.S. and Europe. Alcohol seems to cause many more violent crimes in Korea, because 40% of the violent crimes in Korea were related to alcohol use, but only 28.1% of the violent crime in the U.S. and Europe were related to alcohol. 52 Table 3. Socio-Demographic Characteristics of the Soldiers Accused for Violent Crimes: USA and Europe vs. Korea from 1995 to 2000. (n=667)/ n (%) Age Mean Std. Deviation Gender Male Female Race White Black Hispanic Asian Others Educational level High school certificate Four year high school Four year college Graduate work Marital status \ Single Married Divorced Others (widowed) Rank Junior enlisted (E1 - E4) Higher ranking enlisted (E5 - E6) Senior ranking enlisted (E7 - E9) Warrant officer (W1 - W5) Officer (01 - 04) Military Occupational Specialty Administration Intelligence Combat operation Logistics Civil & Public affairs Communications Alcohol use at the time of crime No Yes USA 8 Europe Korea Total 30.05 30.91 30.11 6.44 6.67 6.45 611 (98.2) 44 (97.8) 655 (98.2) 11 (1.8) 1(2.2) 12 (1.8) 234 (37.6) 6 (13.3) 240 (36.0) 307 (49.4) 32 (71.1) 339 (50.8) 46 (7.4) 1(2.2) 47 (7.0) 8(1.3) 4(8.9) 8 (1.2) 13(21) 2(4.4) 17 (2.5) 10(1.6) - 10 (1.5) 41 (6.6) 1(2.2) 42 (6.3) 312 (50.2) 17 (37.8) 329 (49.3) 259 (41.6) 27 (60.0) 286 (42.9) 260 (41.8) 27 (60.0) 287 (43.0) 312 (50.2) 17 (37.8) 329 (49.3) 42 (6.8) 1(2.2) 43 (6.4) 8(1.3) - 8 (1.2) 405 (65.2) 27 (60.0) 432 (64.9) 166 (26.7) 14 (31.1) 180 (27.0) 35 (5.6) 3(6.7) 38 (5.7) 5(8) - 5 (.8) 10(1.6) 1(2.2) 11 (1.7) 46 (7.5) 8(17.8) 54 (8.2) 16(2.6) 4(8.9) 20 (3.0) 258 (42.1) 7 (15.6) 265 (40.3) 232 (37.8) 17 (37.8) 249 (37.8) 23 (3.7) 4(8.9) 27 (4.1) 38(6.2) 5(11.1) 43 (6.5) 447 (71.9) 27 (60.0) 474 (71.1) 175 (28.1) 18 (40.0) 193 (28.9) 53 ll. Testinlthe Research Qpestions for the General Factors To test each specific research questions, crosstabulation was used. All the results of the bivariate analysis were shown in the Table 4 (See Table 4, p. 56). 1. Gender and gpe of crime As Table 4 shows, 24.9% of males soldiers committed violent crimes compared to only 7.2% of females, whereas female soldiers committed more property crimes (93% of females soldiers, compared to 75% of males soldiers). Based on the result, it is concluded that there is a statistically significant relationship between the type of crime and the gender of the accused soldiers (p <.05). Male soldiers are more likely to commit violent crime than female soldiers. However, the relationship is weak (Phi = .098), and no error can be reduced in prediction of type of crime by using gender of soldiers. 2. MOS and gpe of crime All MOSS were recorded into one variable, support MOS, except combat operation MOS. The reason for the record is to test whether combat operation MOS soldiers commit more violent crime. There seems to be a slight difference between propensity for crime of combat operation MOS soldiers and that of support MOS soldiers (26.4% of combat unit soldiers committed violent crimes compared to 22.9% of support unit soldiers, whereas support unit soldiers committed 77.1% property crime compared to 73.6% of combat unit soldiers). Based on the result, it is concluded that there is a significant relationship 54 between the type of crime and the soldiers’ MOS (p<.05). Combat unit soldiers are more likely to commit violent crime than support unit soldiers. However, the relationship is weak (Phi = .040), and no error can be reduced in the prediction of the type of crime by using soldiers’ MOS. 3. Rank and type of crime Since warrant officers and commissioned officers committed a few crimes (.6% and 2.0% respectively, see Table 2), these ranks were recorded into the senior ranking enlisted soldiers. Since Coates et al (1965) have argued that some highly ranked enlisted service men should be considered as professional soldiers, who have honorable and ethical boundaries of behavior, it seems reasonable to combine senior ranking enlisted soldiers, warrant officers and commissioned officers into one variable. In a comparison between the highly ranked service men group (E 7 — 9, W, and O) and the lower ranked group (E 1 — 4, and E 5 — 6), the higher ranking enlisted soldiers ( E 5 - 6) committed more violent than the highly ranked service men group (32.1% vs. 25.6%), and the junior enlisted soldiers (E 1 - 4) committed more property crimes than the highly ranked service men group (78.6% vs. 74.4%). Over all, it is concluded that the type of crime and soldiers’ rank are significantly related to each other (p<.05). The relationship is weak (Phi = .101), and no error can be reduced in prediction of type of crime using soldiers’ rank. 55 4. Alcohol use and ype of crime 59.6% of those who committed violent crimes have used alcohol compared to only 19% who have not used alcohol, whereas most of those who committed property crimes (80.8%) have not used alcohol. Based on the result, it is concluded that there is a significant relationship between the type of crime and alcohol consumption at the time of crime (p<.05). Alcohol use can increase probability of violent crime occurrence. The relationship could be considered as a relatively moderate relationship (Phi = .303), and 9.3% of error could be reduced in prediction of the crime type (Lamda = .093). Table 4. Crosstabulation for the Type of Crime and Gender, MOS, Rank, and Alcohol Use Violent Property {- [Significance Phil Lamda Gender Male 655 (24.9%) 1974 (75.1%) 26.879 / .000 .098 / .000 Female 12 (7.2%) 154 (92.8%) MOS Combat 265 (26.4%) 737 (73.6%) 4.333 / .037 .040 l .000 Support 393 (22.9%) 1323 (77.1%) Rank E 1 - 4 432 (21.4%) 1590 (78.6%) 28.437 / .000 .101 / .000 E 5 - 6 180 (32.1%) 380 (67.9%) E7-9IWO/O 54 (25.6%) 157 (74.4%) Alcohol use Related 193 (59.6%) 131 (40.4%) 257.129 / .000 .303 / .093 Not related 474 (19.2%) 1997 (80.8%) 56 5. Multivariate statistics for overaneneral factors Table 5 presents the results of the logistic regression analysis predicting the likelihood of violent crime occurrence. As the table indicates, all variables of the general factors, except the rank of the accused soldiers, significantly related to the type of crime committed .by the soldiers, when all general factors and the control variables were analyzed simultaneously. In a situation, as the coefficient of gender indicates (1.2801), male soldiers are significantly more likely to react to the situation violently than female soldiers. The odd ratio of 3.5970 indicates that the odds of a violent crime occurrence by male soldier are almost 3.6 times higher for a violent crime occurrence by female soldiers. Similarly, combat MOS was significant and positively related to violent crime occurrence, and the odds of a violent crime occurrence by combat soldiers are about 1.2 times higher a violent crime occurrence by support unit soldiers. The regression coefficient for alcohol use was positive, suggesting that drunken soldiers were more likely to commit violent crime than the soldiers who were not drunk at the time of crime. As the most significant predictor, the odds ratio of the alcohol use (6.5780) indicates that the odds of a violent crime occurrence by drunken soldiers are almost 6.6 times higher for a violent crime occurrence by soldiers who are not drunk. Although the U.S. Army personnel’s rank was significantly related to the type of crime in the bivariate analyses, the relationship disappeared when all general factors and the control variables were analyzed together. Educational level of soldiers negatively affects the type of crime, and this means that if the 57 soldier does not have a graduate education, the probability of violent crime occurrence increases. In the multivariate model, the variable that most strongly predicted the type of crime was whether the soldier was drunk at the time of crime. In addition, as it was well expected that male soldier committed more violent crime than female soldier, the gender of the soldier was also one of the strongly related factors to the type of crime. Table 5. Logistic Regression Results Predicting Probability of Violent Crime Occurrence Controlling for Race and Educational Level. (N=2653) B SE Significance Odds Ratio Male soldier (1) 1.2801 .3110 .0000 3.5970 Lower ranked (1) -.0499 .1822 .7841 .9513 Combat MOS (1) .2090 .1008 .0381 1.2324 Alcohol use ( 1) 1.8837 .1314 .0000 6.5780 Black soldier (1) .4328 .0978 .0000 1.5415 Graduate education (1) -.4160 .1005 .0000 .6597 Constant _2_7024 Log-likelihood (:6) 2661.239 Chi-Square (X2) 272-621 Model significance :0000 58 Ill. Testing the Research Qpestions for the _Differentigl Factors To test each specific research questions, crosstabulation was used. All the results of the bivariate analysis were shown in the Table 6 (See Table 6, p. 60). 1. Marital Swim sex offense Interestingly, 78.1% of married soldiers committed sex offenses compared to only 65.1% of unmarried soldiers, whereas 34.9% of unmarried soldiers committed property crimes compared to only 21.9% of married soldiers. Overall, it is possible to conclude that there is a significant relationship between the type of violent crime and the accused soldiers’ marital status (p<.05). The relationship is weak (Phi = .144), and no error can be reduced in the prediction of the violent crime type by using the marital status. Even though the result contrasts with the author’s argument, that unmarried soldiers commit more sexual offenses, one thing that should be pinpointed exactly is why the married soldiers commit more rape or carnal knowledge than unmarried. apployment Iocption Mex offense 84.4% of soldiers in Korea committed rape or carnal knowledge compared to only 70.6% of soldiers in the U.S. or Europe, whereas 29.4% of soldiers in the U.S. or Europe committed 29.4% of other violent crime compared to only 15.6% of soldiers in Korea. Based on the result, it is concluded that there is a statistically significant 59 relationship between the type of violent crime and the deployment location (p<.05). Soldiers who are stationed in Korea are more likely to commit sex offenses than other violent crime. However, the relationship is weak (Phi = .077), and no error can be reduced in the prediction of the type of violent crime by using the information of soldiers’ deployment location. Table 6. Crosstabulation for the Type of Violent Crime and Marriage and Deployment Location Sex offenses Other violent leSignificance Phi/Lamda Marriage Married 257 (78.1%) 72 (21.9%) 13.888 / .000 .144 / .000 Unmarried 220 (65.1 %) 118 (34.9%) Location US/Europe 439 (70.6%) 183 (29.4%) 3.960 I .047 .077 l .000 Korea 38 (84.4%) 7 (15.6%) 3. Mpltivariate statistics for overall differential f_a_ctors Table 7 presents the results of the logistic regression analysis predicting the likelihood of sex offense occurrence. As the table indicates, all variables of the differential factors significantly related to the type of crime committed by the soldiers. Notably, marital status of soldiers were significant and positively related to the type of violent crime, suggesting that married soldiers were significantly more likely to commit a sex offense than soldiers who were not married. The odds ratio of marital status (2.1307) indicates that the odds of a sex offense (rape or carnal knowledge) occurrence by married soldiers are almost 2.2 times higher 60 than a sex offense occurrence by unmarried soldiers. Deployment location was also positively related to the type of crime, suggesting that when soldiers were assigned to Korea, they were significantly more likely to commit sex offense than soldiers who were deployed to European countries or their home country, although the deployment location variable failed achieve statistical significance in the logistic regression analysis. Although the U.S. Army personnel’s race and educational level, and deployment location were significantly related to the type of crime in the previous analysis, the relationships disappeared when all differential factors and the control variables were analyzed together. In this analysis, the variable that most strongly predicted the type of violent crime was the U.S. Army personnel’s marital status. Table 7. Logistic Regression Results Predicting Probability of Sex Offense Occurrence Controlling for Race and Educational Level. (N=651) B SE Significance Odds Ratio Married soldiers (1 ) .7564 .3225 .0190 2.1307 In Korea (1 ) .8146 .4292 .0577 2.2583 Black soldiers (1 ) .1224 .1774 .4901 1.1303 Graduate education (1 ) .0752 .3194 .8139 1.0781 Constant .4272 Log-likelihood (:8) 759.039 Chi-Square ()8) 19-908 Model significance 0005 61 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION I. Supimary and Interpretation of Findings The bivariate analyses found that male soldiers who have combat MOS were more likely to commit violent crime than property crime, and especially alcohol consumption significantly increase probability of violent crime occurrence. These results are consistent with the result of the literature reviewed (e.g., Bryant, 1979; Kraska, 1994; Woodward, 1998). In addition, rank, marital status, and deployment location of Army personnel were significantly related to the type of crime and the type of violent crime. In the multivariate analyses, the results presented that alcohol use and gender of soldier had the strongest effect on the type of crime, and race and educational level also significantly affect the occurrence of violent crime. In overseas missions, although the sex offense rate did significantly vary along with the different countries in the bivariate analysis, the relationship disappeared when the differential factors and the control variables were analyzed together. Marital status of the soldier was effectively related to the type of violent crime, however, the race and educational level of the soldier did not significantly affect the type of violent crime in a foreign country. In sum, findings indicate that married male drunken soldiers, who are sergeant or staff sergeant in combat operation unit, are more likely to commit violent crime than others, and that married soldiers who are stationed in Korea are more likely to commit sex offenses than others. Several unexpected interesting findings emerged from this study. First of 62 all, overall unmarried soldiers committed more crimes, including both violent and property crimes, than married soldiers. This result is consistent with a previous research (MacCormick et al., 1946). However, the present research revealed that married soldiers committed more sex offenses than unmarried soldiers. One possible explanation is that unmarried soldiers may have an outlet for sexual drives without any legal or moral hazard with family members or other relatives. Traditional military recreation, such as alcohol consumption and prostitution, has long been a sexual outlet for the troops. Indeed, military authorities sometimes unofficially encourage prostitution, or at least tolerate prostitution for their members’ morale (Bryant, 1979). Thus, unmarried soldiers may feel that they are free to indulge their sexual drives, while married soldiers have to consider their spouses, and might not be able to indulge such drives. Especially, when married soldiers are assigned to overseas missions, they may not accompany their spouse, and then they may not have proper outlet of their sexual drives. So they feel frustration and may feel relative deprivation of sexual freedom in foreign countries. Abruptly, these married but living-alone soldiers may face the limit of their patience, and then they choose to release their sexual drives without moral hazard, e.g. rape. Further research, however, is strongly recommended to study the relationship between military personnel’s marriage, their separation from family for active-duty service, their sexual propensities, and crime. Secondly, the result of the bivariate analysis of relationship between rank and type of crime is partially consistent with the result of the literature reviewed. Although the relationship between rank and type of crime was significant, and 63 although the lower ranking service men group (junior or higher ranking enlisted soldiers) committed more crime, higher ranking enlisted soldiers and highly ranking service men group (senior enlisted, warrant officers and commissioned officers) were more likely to commit violent crime than property crime. Especially, soldiers who are ranked at sergeant or staff sergeant are most likely to commit violent crime. This finding also suggest a further research on ranks of soldiers and their relationship with criminal activities. Third, although statistic probability was not calculated in this research, when combat operation MOS soldiers were assigned to Korea, their violent crime cases decreased dramatically, from 42.1% to 15.6% (see Table 3). However, support unit soldiers seem to be more likely to commit violent crimes in Korea. One possible reason for this is that there may be strong tension in Korea among combat operation soldiers, because of the confrontation between South and North Korea. Combat operation soldiers may feel they have to be prepared at any time to protect South Korea or to prevent an invasion from North Korea. Thus, they perhaps may devote themselves to maintain combat readiness and combat efficiency. Fourth, according to the NCECUSTK, the U.S. government has argued that U.S. military crime in Korea has sharply decreased, and is still decreasing after the revision of the SOFA in 1991 (NCECUSTK, 2000). Otherwise, the NCECUSTK argued that the sharp decrease was not because of the SOFA revision, but because of the Yoon, Kum-i murder case, which drawn Korean public attention to the U.S. military crime. However, the present research revealed that neither of the arguments explains the downtrend of military crime in 64 Korea. As the Figure 1 (p.47) and Table 1 (p. 48) Show, both U.S. military violent and property crime has been decreasing not only in Korea, but also in the U.S. and in European countries. The decrease of the U.S. military crime seems to be a general trend among the U.S. military, and not a localized phenomenon. Thus, it is necessary to study whether SOFA has been effective in controlling U.S. military crime in Korea. Finally, in this research, the author found that there was a discrepancy between numbers of rape or carnal knowledge against Korean women recorded by the U.S. Army Judiciary and those recorded by Korean National Police Agency (KNPA). There were more sex offenses cases in Korean data sources than the cases in the U.S. Army Judiciary data; for example, there were four more rape cases in 1995, two more cases in 1998, and one more case in 1999 in the Korea Police Annual Report (KNPA, 2001). Based on the crime data gathered by the NCECUSTK, there was also one more sex offense case in each 1996 and 1997 than the cases in the Korean National Police Agency’s U.S. military crime data (NCECUSTK, 2000). This discrepancy may be generated by the fact that the U.S. Army data had only Army soldier’s crime cases or that the data had only records of crime cases handled by the U.S. Army Judiciary. 65 Mimitations of the Present Stigy There are several limitations of this research that merit mentioning. First, the sample used in this study consists only of accused U.S. Army personnel for their criminal activities in the continental U.S., European countries, and Korea. No comparison group of non-deviant soldiers was available. In addition, even though Army population largely constitutes the total population of the U.S. Armed Forces, crime pattern and Characteristics may vary along with different organizations, such as Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine. As such, the findings can only be generalized to a very specific population. Secondly, there were no available measurements for masculinity characteristics, prejudice, and the control effect of the SOFA between Korea and the U.S. Thus, based on the previous research results, this author assumed that almost all male soldiers have masculine traits, so that they would behave according to their masculine values, norms, and lifestyles. The author further assumed that there would be a relationship between the prejudice and the U.S. military crime along with the lack of control effect of the SOFA and the U.S. military crime against women. Future study should empirically measure the socialization process, which may result in any change of military subculture in overseas mission, for the U.S. Army personnel in foreign countries. Finally, when studying sex offense against women in different countries, the variable measuring sex offense victim’s nationality or ethnicity may allow a better understanding of the sex offense in different countries. Future study should consider deliberately including the victims’ Characteristics, and the victims’ culture perceives the victims. 66 Ill. Conclpsion and Policy Recommendations The present. study revealed interesting and even important results. Military subculture itself is important for organizational management, as well as for individual components of the military organization. In this sense, these research results may provide unique perspectives for managing the military subculture, organization, and its individual members. Furthermore, the management of military organization and individuals may diminish Cacophony resulting from military dilemma for both the U.S. and Korean governments. Political tension burdens military authority and the U.S. government with being blamed for poor relations between the U.S. military and friendly foreign societies where the U.S. military personnel are deployed. Ultimately, to assist in resolving military crime, the present study suggests several policy recommendations related to U.S. military crimes in the U.S. and in foreign countries, based on the results obtained by this research. First, most interestingly, this study found that married soldiers are more likely to commit rape or carnal knowledge than unmarried soldiers. However, since there has been lack of previous research on soldier’s marital status and sex offense, the present study recommends that further research is necessary to study this subject among all military organizations, i.e., Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine for generalization of this result. Second, the present study suggests that various recreation programs could be initiated and operated for military personnel. Since alcohol drinking and prostitution, as major recreational tools for troops, have been playing their roles in military crimes, could there be alternatives for soldiers’ recreation to decrease 67 alcohol related military crimes? Third, this research revealed that soldiers in Korea committed more sex offense than soldiers in the U.S. or in European countries. One possible explanation this author argued was the different socialization for the U.S. soldiers in Korea, which was affected by the prejudice of the soldiers and of Korean people, and by the ineffective SOFA. Thus, when soldiers are deployed to a foreign country, such as Korea, where they could barely find any interests outside of their work, more educational programs seem to be required. The educational programs could focus on alleviating the soldier’s cultural shock, and teaching history or society of the foreign country for a better understanding in cooperation with local people. Finally, as this author pointed out in the previous discussion section, there was a discrepancy between U.S. Army record of military crime in Korea and Korean Police Agency record of U.S. military crime. This discrepancy seems to hamper sound academic research on military crime in foreign environments, or even obstruct people in understanding U.S. military crime in foreign countries. Thus, this author suggests U.S. and Korean governments discuss and agree upon a universal recording system of military crime in Korea. The appropriate data recording system of military crime may facilitate future research on U.S. military crime in Korea, and may help people to understand U.S. military crime in foreign countries. To enhance the friendly relationship between the U.S. and Korea, and to reduce crime by the U.S. military, more research is needed which explores such crimes based on appropriately recorded data of military crime. Especially, for 68 example, the present'research revealed that combat operation soldiers were less likely to commit violent crime when they were deployed to Korea, but other support unit soldiers became violent-prone soldiers in Korea. Why is this so? It seems that unless this question and related questions are addressed with sound research, the problem of crime by U.S. military in Korea and the related political dilemma for the U.S. military authority will persist. 69 APPENDICES 70 Appendix A. l_J.S. Army Six CMt Courts and Jurisdictions GCM CONVENING AUTHORITIES 1 March 1993 First Jucflcial Circuit District of Columbia USA Military District of Washington Maryland First US Army and Fort George G. Meade USA Garrison, Fort George G. Meade USA Test and Evaluation Command Aberdeen Proving Ground 7"1 signal Command and Fort Ritchie Massachusetts Fort Devens New Jersey USA Training Center and Fort Dix USA Communications-Electronics Command Eastern Area, Military Traffic Management Command New York 10th Mountain Div (Light Infantry) and Fort Drum US Military Academy New York Area Command and Fort Hamilton Panama USA South Virginia USA Training and Doctrine Command USA, Fort Belvoir USA Quartermaster Center and Fort Lee USA Quartermaster Center and School (Provisional) USA Logistics Center and Fort Lee (Provisional) Fort Lee USA Transportation Center and Fort Eustis 71 ACIVLS CODES JURIS MACOM MDW MDW 1 F MEA F TE AMC ABE AMC RIT ISC DEV F DIX F CE AMC MTE MT 10M F MA MA HAM T SOU SOU T T BEL MDW QM T QMS T LOG T LEE T EUS T Military Traffic Management Command USA Intelligence and Security Command USA Material Command Second Judicial Circuit Alabama USA Aviation Center and Fort Rucker USA Chemical and Military Police Centers and Fort McClellan USA Missile Command USA Strategic Defense Command Georgia USA Forces Central Command / 3rd Army USA Forces Command Third US Army Fort McPherson Second US Army 24th Infantry Division (Mechanized) and Fort Stewart Fort Stewart USA Infantry Center and Fort Benning USA Signal Center and Fort Gordon Illinois Fourth US Army and Fort Sheridan USA Garrison, Fort Sheridan Indiana USA Soldier Support Center and Fort Benj. Harrison Kentucky USA Armor Center and Fort Knox 101’”t Airborne Div (Air Assault) and Fort Campbell Fort Campbell North Carolina Special Operations Command XVIII Airborne Corps and Fort Bragg Fort Bragg 82nd Airborne Division 1"t Corps Support Command USA Special Forces Command (Airborne) 72 MT ITL AMC RUC MCC Ml SD ARC MCP 241 STE INF GOR SHE BEN KNO 101 CAM SOC 18C BRA 82 108 180 MT ITL AMC .4 AMC SD ARC 'l'l —I—I‘Tl"|'l'TI'l'l'11'I'I 'TI 'TI SOC Tl'l'l SOC South Carolina USA Training Center and Fort Jackson Thirifludicial Circuit Arizona USA lnforrnation Systems Command Fort Huachuca USA Intelligence Center & Fort Huachuca Colorado Fort Carson and 4th Infantry Division (Mechanized) Fort Carson Kansas 1"t Infantry Division (Mechanized) and Fort Riley Fort Riley USA Correctional Brigade USA Combined Arms Center and Fort Leavenworth US Disciplinary Barracks Louisiana Fort Polk Missouri USA Engineer Center and Fort Leonard Wood USA Aviation and Troop Command New Mexico USA White Sands Missile Range Oklahoma USA Field Artillery Center and Fort Sill Texas Fifth US Army and Fort Sam Houston USA Garrison, Fort Sam Houston 2nd Armored Division, Fort Hood Ill Corps and Fort Hood Fort Hood 1“"t Cavalry Division USA Air Defense Center and Fort Bliss USA Health Services Command 73 JAC ISC HUA INT 41 CAR 1| RIL CA LEA DB POL WOO AS WSR SIL SAM 2A 30 HOO 1CD BLI HSC T ISC —rl m‘n -l—ITI'rr'n AMC AMC H‘H‘H‘HTI'TITI HSC Epdrth Jiflicial Circu_it Alaska 6th Infantry Division (Light) and US Army Garrison, Alaska California Sixth US Army and Presidio of San Francisco USA Garrison, Presidio of San Francisco National Training Center and Fort ln~in 7‘" Infantry Division (Light) and Fort Ord Fort Ord Western Area, Military Traffic Management Command Washington I Corps and Fort Lewis Fort Lewis Hawaii USA Pacific Command 25th Infantry Division (Light) Fifth Judicial Circuit USAREUR & Seventh Army V Corps 1"t Armored Division 3rd Infantry Division 21St Theater Army Area Command 32"d Army Air Defense Command Berlin Brigade USA Southern European Task Force and 5th Spt. Command ARCENT Forward (Provisional) 2"d Armored Division Fwd. Sixth Judicial Circuit Eighth us Army 2nd Infantry Division 19"1 Support Command USA Japan / IX Corps 10"1 Area Support Group 74 6| SFO IRW 7| ORD MTW 1C LEW 251 5C 1A 31 21 S 32D BER 58 AFP 2AF 21 198 JA OKI 'TI'I'I'TI'H'T‘I TI '0'!) \IVNVNNVV ARC 'u'uoooooo Appendix B. Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) MOS 6 Categories : Administration, Intelligence, Combat Operation, Logistics, Civil & Public Affairs, Communication (Overall 212 specialties) 1. Administration CMF-71: Administration (08 jobs) Legal Specialist Administrative Specialist Chaplain Assistant Finance Specialist Accounting Specialist Personnel Administration Specialist Personnel Information System Management Specialist Personnel Services Specialist CMF-74: Record Information Operations (02 jobs) Information Systems Operator-Analyst Telecommunications Operator-Maintainer CMF-792Recruitment and Reenlistment CMF-79: Recruitment and Reenlistment (04 jobs) Recruiter Noncommissioned Officer Retention Noncommissioned Officer (Active Component) Recruiting and Retention Noncommissioned Officer (National Guard) Retention and Transition Noncommissioned Officer (Reserve Component) CMF-91: Medical (18 jobs) Medical Equipment Repairer 75 Medical Specialist Practical Nurse Operating Room Specialist Dental Specialist Patient Administration Specialist Optical Laboratory Specialist Medical Supply Specialist Medical Laboratory Specialist Hospital Food Service Specialist Radiology Specialist Pharmacy Specialist Veterinary Food Inspection Specialist Preventive Medicine Specialist Animal Care Specialist Respiratory Specialist Health Care Specialist Mental Health Specialist CMF-97: Bands (15 jobs) Coronet or Trumpet Player Baritone or Euphonium Player French Horn Player Trombone Player Tuba Player Flute or Piccolo Player Oboe Player Clarinet Player Bassoon Player Saxophone Player Percussion Player Keyboard Player Special Band Member Guitar Player Electric Bass Guitar Player 76 2. Intelligence CMF-96: Military Intelligence (08 jobs) Intelligence Analyst Imagery Analyst Imagery Ground Station Operator Ground Surveillance Systems Operator (Closed to women) Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Operator Counterintelligence Agent Interrogator/Linguist Translator/Interpreter (Reserve Component) CMF-98: Signals Intelligence (SlGINT)/Electronic Warfare (EW) Operations (06 jobs) Signals Intelligence Analyst Emitter Locator/ldentifier Electronic Warfare/Signal Intelligence Voice Interceptor (Linguist) Morse Interceptor Non-Communications Interceptor/Analyst Communications Signal Collections and Processing Specialist 3. Combat Operations CMF-11zlnfantry (04 jobs) Infantryman (Closed to women) Indirect Fire Infantryman (Closed to women) Heavy Anti-armor Weapons Infantryman (Closed to women) Mechanized Infantryman (Closed to women) CMF-12: Combat Engineering (02 jobs) Combat Engineer (Closed to women) Bridge Crewmember CMF-13: Field Artillery (10 jobs) Cannon Crewmember (Closed to women) Tactical Automated Fire Control Specialist (Closed to women) Field Artillery Automated Tactical Data Systems Specialist (Closed to women) 77 Cannon Fire Direction Specialist (Closed to women) Fire Support Specialist (Closed to women) Multiple Launch Rocket System Crewmember (Closed to women) Multiple Launch Rocket System Automated Tactical Data Systems Specialist (Closed to women) Field Artillery Firefinder Radar Operator (Closed to women) Field Artillery Surveyor (Closed to women) Field Artillery Meteorological Crewman CMF-14: Air Defense Artillery (06 jobs) PATRIOT Missile System Enhanced Operator/Maintainer (Reserve Component) Early Warning System Operator (Closed to women) (Reserve Component) Man Portable Air Defense System Crewmember (Reserve Component) Bradley Linebacker Crewmember (Closed to women) AVENGER Crewmember (Closed to women) PATRIOT Launching Station Enhanced Operator/Maintainer CMF-18: Special Forces (04 jobs) Special Operations Weapons Sergeant (Closed to women) Special Operations Engineer (Closed to women) Special Operations Medical Sergeant (Closed to women) Special Operations Communications Sergeant (Closed to women) CMF-19: Armor (02 jobs) Cavalry Scout (Closed to women) Armor Crewman (Closed to women) CMF-93: Aviation Operations (02 jobs) Air Traffic Control Operator Aviation Operations Specialist 4. Logistics CMF-51: General Engineering (13 jobs) Diver Carpentry and Masonry Specialist 78 Construction Engineering Supervisor Plumber Firefighter Interior Electrician Technical Engineering Specialist Utilities Equipment Repairer Power Generation Equipment Repairer Prime Power Production Specialist Turbine Engine Drive/Generator Repairer Transmission and Distribution Specialist (Reserve Component) Special Purpose Equipment Repairer CMF-54: Chemical (01 jobs) Chemical Operations Specialist CMF-55: Ammunition (02 jobs) Ammunition Specialist Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Specialist CMF-63: Mechanical Maintenance (25 jobs) Metal Worker Machinist Small Arms/Artillery Repairer Self-propelled Field Artillery Turret Mechanic (Closed to women) Fire Control System Repairer Armament Repairer M60A1/A3 Tank Turret Mechanic (Reserve Component) (Closed to women) Construction Equipment Repairer Heavy Construction Equipment Operator Crane Operator Quarrying Specialist Concrete and Asphalt Equipment Operator General Construction Equipment Operator Construction Equipment Supervisor M1 ABRAMS Systems Maintainer (Closed to women) Light-Wheel Vehicle Mechanic 79 Self-propelled Field Artillery Repairer (Closed to women) Fuel and Electrical Systems Repairer Track Vehicle Repairer Quartermaster and Chemical Equipment Repairer M2/3 Bradley Fighting Vehicle System Maintainer (Closed to women) M60A1/A3 Tank System Mechanic (Closed to women) (Reserve Component) Heavy-Wheel Vehicle Mechanic Wheel Vehicle Repairer Track Vehicle Mechanic CMF-67: Aircraft Maintenance (20 jobs) Utility Airplane Repairer (Reserve Components) Utility Helicopter Repairer AH-64 Attack Helicopter Repairer OH-5BD Helicopter Repairer UH-60 Helicopter Repairer Medium Helicopter Repairer Observation/Scout Helicopter Repairer Heavy Lift Helicopter Repairer (Reserve Component) AH-1 Attack Helicopter Repairer Aircraft Powerplant Repairer Aircraft Powertrain Repairer Aircraft Electrician Aircraft Structural Repairer Aircraft Pneudraulics Repairer Aircraft Armament/Missile Systems Repairer Aircraft Components Repair Supervisor Avionic Mechanic Armament! Electrical/Avionics Systems Repairer AH-64 Armament/Electrical Systems Repairer Armament/Electrical/Avionic Systems Repairer CMF-77: Petroleum and Water (03 jobs) Petroleum Supply Specialist Petroleum Laboratory Specialist Water Treatment Specialist 80 CMF-81: Topographic Engineering (03 jobs) Lithographer Topographic Analyst Topographic Surveyor CMF-88: Transportation (09 jobs) Cargo Specialist Watercraft Operator Watercraft Engineer Motor Transport Operator Transportation Management Coordinator Railway Equipment Repairer (Reserve Component) Railway Section Repairer (Reserve Component) Railway Operations Crewmember (Reserve Component) Railway Senior Sergeant CMF-92: Supply and Services (07 jobs) Fabric Repair Specialist Laundry and Bath Specialist Automated Logistical Specialist Food Service Operations Mortuary Affairs Specialist Parachute Rigger Unit Supply Specialist 5. Civil & Public Affairs CMF-25: Visual Information (03 jobs) Multimedia Illustrator Visual lnforrnation Equipment Operator-Maintainer Combat Documentation/Production Specialist CMF-37: Psychological Operations (01 jobs) Psychological Operations Specialist 81 CMF-38: Civil Affairs (Reserve Components) (01 jobs) Civil Affairs Specialist (Reserve Component) CMF-46: Public Affairs (02 jobs) Journalist Broadcast Journalist CMF-95: Military Police (03 jobs) Military Police Corrections Specialist Criminal Investigations Special Agent 6. Communications CMF-31: Signal Operations (09 jobs) Radio Operator-Maintainer Network Switching Systems Operator-Maintainer Cable Systems Installer-Maintainer Microwave Systems Operator-Maintainer Multichannel Transmission Systems Operator-Maintainer Satellite Communication Systems Operator-Maintainer Satellite/Microwave Systems Chief Signal Support Systems Specialist Telecommunications Operations Chief CMF-33: Electronic Warfare/Intercept Systems Maintenance (01 jobs) Intelligence and Electronic Warfare System Repairer CMF-35: Electronic Maintenance and Certification (18 jobs) Land Combat Electronic Missile System Repairer CHAPARRAL and REDEYE Repairer Multiple Launch Rocket System Repairer AVENGER System Repairer PATRIOT System Repairer Land Combat Support System Test Specialist Air Traffic Control Equipment Repairer 82 Radio/Communications Security Repairer Special Electronic Devices Repairer Test, Measurement and Diagnostic Equipment Support Specialist Telecommunications Terminal Device Repairer Avionic Communications Equipment Repairer Radar Repairer Wire Systems Equipment Repairer Avionic Radar Repairer Electronic Maintenance Chief I ntegrated Family of Test Equipment Operator/Maintainer Automatic Test Equipment Operator/Maintainer 83 Appendix C. Military Rank I Payroll Strdgdres & Aflneviation Category Payroll Abbreviation Rank Junior Enlisted E-1 PV1 Private 1 Soldier E-2 PV2 Private 2 E3 PFC Private First Class E-4 SPC Specialist (4,5,6) CPL Corporal Higher Ranking E-5 SGT Sergeant Enlisted Soldier E-6 SSG Staff Sergeant Senior Ranking E-7 SFC Sergeant First Class Enlisted Soldier E-8 MSG Master Sergeant 1SG First Sergeant E-9 SGM Sergeant Major CSM Command Sergeant Major SMA Sergeant Major of the Army Warrant Officer W-1 WO1 Warrant Officer One W-2 CW2 Chief Warrant Officer Two W-3 CW3 Chief Warrant Officer Three W-4 CW4 Chief Warrant Officer Four W—5 CW5 Master Warrant Officer Five Officer O-1 2LT Second Lieutenant O-2 1LT First Lieutenant 0-3 CPT Captain 0-4 MAJ Major O-5 LTC Lieutenant Colonel O-6 COL Colonel O-7 BG Brigadier General O-8 MG Major General 0-9 LTG Lieutenant General O-10 GEN General Special General of Army (Wartime Only) 84 Appendix D. Approval of the University Committee on Research involving_ HumaLSfiubiects (UCRIHS) MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY June 5. 2001 TO: Vincent HOFFMAN 518 Baker Hall RE: lRBff 01-214 CATEGORY: FULL REVIEW APPROVAL DATE: June 4, 2001 ‘ITTLE' THE CRIME COMMITTEED BY THE U.S. MILITARY PERSONNEL ST ATIONED IN KOREA AND IN THE U.S.: A PERSPECTIVE OF SOCIAL CONTROL THEORY ‘nie Univeislty Committee on Renard) lrmtvlng Human Subjects' (UCRIHS) review of this projeotleoompleteendIarnploasodtoadviselhetltieriglitearidwelfareofthomhian mbjeds appeartobeadequetetyprotected endmettiodetoobtaii'ntomd consentarc appropriate Thurston. the UCRIHS approved this project. RENEWALs: UCRIHS approval lo valld for one calendar year, begiinlng with me approval date shown above. Projects omti‘nuing beyond one year must be renewed with ire green renewal form. A maximum of four such expedited renewals possible. Investigators wishing to continue a project beyond that time need to submit it again for a complete review. REVISIONS: UCRIHS must review any Changes in procedures invotv'ng human subjects, prior to initiation of the 6116093. 11 this is done at the time of renewal. please use the green ruiewal form. To revise an approved protocol at any other time during the year, send your written request to the UCRIHS Choir, requesting revised approval and referencing the project's IR8# and tide. Include In your request a dissertation of the change and any revised instruments, oortsent forms or advertisements that are applicable- PROBLEMSlCl-IANGES: Should either of the following arise dirriig the comes of the work. notify UCRIHS promptly. 1) problems (mexpected side effects, cornplante. etc.) iivolvhg human subjects or 2) changes it the research environment or new Information Matting greater rlsk lo the human subjects than exlsted when the protocol was previously reviewed and pm: (I approved. BEEN-lull A!!! If we can be of Iiirthor esststmoe, please contact us at (517) 355-2180 or via email: mm UCRIHS@msu.edu. Please note that all UCRll-ls forms are located on the web: 811108 httpdrwwwrnsuodulusermaihe , m lie-Illa . Show, tin-m Insuring harrie- Suited: Mm an: 1mm . 206 mixtures Bulldog W MAI/:7 “WWW Ashir mar M D “mm Interim Chair. UCRIHS Simona: we 5|?A53~?$l’$ Witt "emanation: E-Mal Damn: AK: bd 0C1 Chang-Hun Lee or": . a, 560 Baker Hall 1103mm Mum talcum m 85 BIBLIOGRAPHY 86 Alpass, F., Long, N., MacDonald, C., & Chamberlain, K. (1999). The Moskos institution-occupation model: Effects on individual work related perceptions and experience in the military. Journal of Political and Military Sociology, 27 (1), 67 — 80. Anonymous. (1996). Women focus on military crimes. National Catholic Reporter. 3 (21), 10 - 10. Bedner, R.J. (1962). Discharge and dismissal as punishment in the armed forces. Military Law Review. 16. 1 — 42. Bodnar, J.W. (1999). How long does it take to change a culture? Integration at the U.S. Naval Academy. Armed Forces and Society. 2_5 (2), 289 - 306. Boo, H.K., & Kim, SR. (2000, April 7). ee SOFA 7H 23 {slid fil/Zlkzt new 3.5%‘% KNEE 53*} [Korean Bar Association’s review of SOFA revised: Only 3.5% of total U.S. military crimes were dealt by Korean courts in last year]. %°t%l§_, pp. A1. Bray, R.M., Kroutil, R.M., & Marsden, ME. (1995). Trends in alcohol, illicit drug, and cigarette use among U.S. military personnel: 1980 — 1992.A_ITEC1_ Forces amt Society. 21 (2), 271 — 280. Brodeur, J-P. (1997). \fiolence and racial preiu_dice in the context of peacekeeping. Ottawa, Canada, Minister of Public Works and Government Services. Bryant, CD. (1979). Khaki-collar crime. New York: The Free Press. Burk, J. (1998). Breaking ranks: Social change in military communities. Socieg, _3_§ (3), 93 — 94. 87 Caufield, S. (1999). Transforming the criminological dialogue: A feminist perspective on the impact of militarism. 'Jfltrnal of Political and Military Sociology, 27 (2), 291 — 306. Chang, I. (1997). The rape of Nankinithe forgotten holocaust of World War II. New York: Basic Books. Coates, C.H., & Pellegrin, R.J. (1965). Military sociology: A study of American military institutions and military life. University Park, MD: The Social Science Press. Coleman, 6., Gaboury, M., Murray, M., & Seymour, A. (1999). 1999 National victim assistance acafidemy Office of Justice Program, U.S. Department of Justice. [On-line]. Availablezhttpzllwwwojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/assist/nvaa99. Cooke, T.W., & Quester, AD. (1992). What characterizes successful enlistees in the all-volunteer force: A study of male recruits in the U.S. Navy. M Science Quarterly, 73 (2), 238 — 252. Department of Defense (D00). (2001). Selected Manpower Statistics: Fiscal Year 1997 - 2000. [On-line] Available: http://web1.whs.osd.millmmid/pubs.htm. Doyle, F.M., Lewis, K.J., & Williams, LA. (1996). Named military operations: U.S. military operation from January 1989 to December 1993. Armed Forces and Socieg, 23 (2), 285 — 298. Dunivin, KC. (1994). Military culture: Change and continuity. Armed Forces and Sociey, 20 (4), 531 - Durham, H., & Loff, B. (2001). Japan’s “comfort women”. The Lancet, 357 (9252), 302 — 303. 88 Einstadter, W., & Henry, S. (1995). Criminological theory: An analysis of its underlying assumptions. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). (2001). Uniform Crime Reports. [On-line] Available: http:llfbi.org. Fernandez, JC. (1992). Soldier quality and job performance in team tasks. Social SciencefiQgrterly. 73 (2), 253 - 265. Firestone, J.M., & Harris, R.J. (1994). Sexual harassment in the U.S. military: Individualized and environmental contexts. Armetfiorces and Socieg, _21 (1), 25 —. Fields, S. The Marines still look for a few good men. Insight on t_he News, 13 (48), 48 - 51. Franke, V.C. (1998). Old ammo in new weapons?: Comparing value-orientations of experienced and future military leaders. Mal of Politicai and Militfl Sociology, 26 (2), 253 — 271. Graham, B. (1996, April 29). Black Regiment’s failure in Korea traced to bigotry. The Washington Post, A01. Groll-Ya ari, Y. (1994). Toward a normative code for the military. Armefiorces and Sociem 20(3), 457 —. Haggerty, K.D., & Ericson, R.V. (1999). The militarization of policing in the information age. dggrnal of Political and Military Socioldgyfi (2), 233 — 255. Han, K.H. (1996, February 15). 23511-9: Uli‘ga‘l 731511917}: 051331? 1 id 7 81,173. ”£8. TEE x] 94 fl 78 “1.94% $53.93. 7H23 3110):, [Is Korea a heaven for U.S. military crime?) News Maker,161, p. 46 — 50. 89 Hong, M.J. (1999). '99 7g 716%?) 51.12389 <73 7le BOW-3 737-<04) ataxia. [Annual Parliamentary inspection 1999: lnterpellation on U.S. militfl crime to administers of Kyung_k_i_province police agency]. Seoul: Korean National Assembly. Huntington, SP. (1957). The soldier and the state. New York, NY: \fintage Books. Janowitz, M. (1975). Military conflict: Essays in the institptional analysis of way; and peace. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. . (1977). From institution to occupation: The need for conceptual clarity. Armed Forces am, Society. 4 (1), 51 — 54. Kennedy, L. (1996). Alien nation: White male paranoia and imperial culture in the United States. Journal of American Studies 30 (1), 87 - 100. Kim, H.K., & Park, H.K. (1980). Studies on Korea: A scholar’s guide. Honolulu, Hawaii: The University Press of Hawaii. Korean Department of Defense (KDoD). (1999). ifléfil] *1 1999. [Korean Department of Defense Annual Report]. Seoul, Korea: Korean Department of Defense. Korean Department of Justice. (KDJ). (1994). 130L335 E 13 ARI. it E] €8.53}. [Report on the process of crimes related to the SOFA]. Seoul, Korea: Korean Department of Justice. Korean National Police Agency. (KNPA). (2001). 73 73119.41 2001 [Korean Police Annual Report 2001]. Seoul, Korea: Korean National Police Agency. Kraska, P.B. (19993). Militarizing criminal justice: Guest editor’s introduction. Journal of Political and Military Sociology, 27 (2), 200 — 204. 90 . (1999b). Militarizing criminal justice: Exploring the possibilities. Journal of Political and Milita_ry Sociology, 27 (2), 205 - 215. . (1994). The police and military in the Post-Cold War era: Streamlining the State’s use of force entities in the drug war. ELICEL mm (1). p- 3 - - Kroll, J. (1976). Racial patterns of military crimes in Vietnam. Psychiatry. 39 (February), 51 - 64. Lakhani, H. (1994). The socioeconomic benefits to military families of home- basing of armed forces. Armedflarces and Socieg, 21 (1), 113 - . Lang, K., & March, JG. (1965). Military organizations. (Eds). Hand_book pf_ organizations. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally. Lee, JS. (2000, May 18). Lawmakers united in calling for revision of SOFA clauses. The Korea Herald, pp. A2. Lee, CS. (1999a). {tin} 3323§739I 7H4“; 3339i — 131314 7H 23 ”8%. [Discussion on the SOFA revision - Issues and direction of revision]. Seoul, Korea: Korean National Parliamentary Legislative Research Center. [On-line]. Available: httpzllwww.nanet.go.kr/nal/3/3-1- 1/leg961 06.htm Lee, S.Y. (1999b, October 13). Cohen assures Cho of thorough investigation of Nogun-ri killings. The Korea Herpld, pp. A1. Lennon, DA. (1988). Naked power and dressed iudges: A description of the U.S. Army legal system. 1917 —1984. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northeastern University, Boston, MA. 91 . (1994). Crime in the U.S. coast guard, 1964 - 1990. Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Joprnal, 15, 397 - 416. Levin, WC. (1991). Sociological ideas. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Lewis-Horne, N. (2000). School for Rape: The Burmese military and sexual \fiolence [Review of the book School for Rape: The Burmese MiMy arfi Sexual Violence ]. Violence against Women, 6 (10), 1174 - 1178. Li, L., & Ballweg, J.A. (1991). Demographic and sociological determinants of alcohol use by U.S. military personnel. Sociological Sgctrpm, 11,105 - 125. Linder, D. (2001). Famous American Trials: The My Lai Court-Martial 1970. [On- line]. Availablezhttpzllwww.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/myali. htm. MacCormick, A.H., & Evjen, V.H. (1946). Statistical study of 24,000 military prisoners. F_ederal Probation, 10 (2), 6 — 11. Mee, C. (1999). Nothing but this otherness: Rape discourses in peace and war. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Temple University, USA. Moon, K.H.S. (1997). Sex Amonflllies: Militaprrostitution in U.S. - Korea relations. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Morgan, D.H.J. (1994). Theater of war: Combat, the military, and masculinities. P. 165 — 182. In H. Brod & M. Kaufman (Eds.), Theorizing mascylinity (pp. 165 - 182). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 92 Morris, M. (1996, November 24). Commentary: Military violent crime low, but its rape record needs scrutiny. The Detroit News, pp. . Moskos, C.C. Jr. (1970). The American enlisted man. New York, NY: Sage. . (1977). From institution to occupation: Trends in military organization. Armed Forces arycl_§ociety. 4 (1), 41 - 50. Moskos, C.C. Jr., & Wood, F.R. (Eds). (1988). The military: More than lust a 103 New York, NY: Pergamon-Brassey’s. Mumola, C.J. (2000). Specipl Report: VeteLdns in prison or iail. (NCJ 178888). Washington DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics. US Department of Justice. National Campaign for Eradication of Crime by U.S. Troops in Korea (NCECUSTK). (2000). Ell-38334 ’éEIIQJr it aI E531 [Report on U.S. militamrime gpd on statistics of its process]. [On-line] Available: http:lew.usacrime.co.kr. Newton, MA. (1996). Continuum crimes: Military jurisdiction over foreign nationals who commit international crimes. Military Law Review, 153, 1 — 93. Nordwall, SP. (2000, August 2). U.S. soldier gets life in prison for killing girl, 11, in Kosovo. USA Today. pp. 14A. . (2000, December 29). South Korea given wider power over U.S. soldiers. USA Today, pp. 04A. . (2000, December 29). U.S. to let South Korea detain servicemen. USA Today, pp.04A. Priest, R.F., & Beach, J. (1998). Value changes in four cohorts at the U.S. military academy. Armed Forces and Society. 25 (1), 81 — 102. 93 Rohall, D.E., Segal, M.W., & Segal, DR. (1999). Examining the importance of organizational supports on family adjustment to Army life in a period of increasing separation. Journal of Political and Military Sociologyfl (1), 49 - 65. Sarai, SK. (1999). The rape of Mlkan women: An arment for the hi recognition of wdrtime rape as 3 war crime. Unpublished master’s thesis, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. Scarry, E. (1985). The body in pain. The making and unmaking of the world; New York: Oxford University Press. Schwartz, T.P., & Marsh, RM. (1999). The American soldier studies of WW II: A 50th anniversary commemorative. dgprnal of Political and Military Sociology, 27 (1), 21 — 37. Seifert, R. (1996). The second front: The logic of sexual violence in wars. Women’s Stddies International Forum, 19 (1/2), 35 - 43. Shenon, P. (1996, May 7). Veterans of black unit threaten suit over Army’s account of their service. ligfiew York Times, A16, C1. Shin, Y.B. (1999, October 13). Hong and Roth to discuss Nogun-ri. The Korea Herald pp. A1. Soeters, J.L. (1997). Value orientations in military academies: A thirteen country study. Armed Forces and Society. 2_4_ (1), 7 — 32. Soeters, J.L., & Recht, R. (1998). Culture and discipline in military academies: An international comparison. Mal of Political dgd Military Sociology._2§ (2), 169 — 189. 94 U.S. Army. (2001). The United States Artmr [On-line]. Available: http:llwww.army.mi| U.S. Government Printing Office. (1984). Mal for Courts-Martial (rev. ed.). Washington DC: Author. Vold, G.B., Berard, T.J., 8 Snipes, J.B. (1998). Theoretical criminology. (4th ed_.)_. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Walzer, M. (1977). Just and uniust wars: A moral argument with historica_|_ illustrations. New York: Basic Books. Warren, J. (1999). Small wars and military culture. Society. 36 (6), 56 - 65. Wehrfritz, G., & Moreau, R. (2000, April 10). South Korea’s Vietnam: An American ally confronts its own troubled legacy from the war in Southeast Asia. Newsweek. pp. 36 - 37. Whitten, RC. (1999). By force of arms: Rape, war and military culture [Review of the book _ByForce of Arms: Rape. War and Military Culture]. Jodrnal of Political and Military Sociologyfl (1), 170 - 172. Wiseman, P. (2000, July 20). Demonstrators protest U.S. military in Japan bad behavior hurts foreign relations. USA Today, pp. A7. Woodward, R. (1998). “It’s a man’s life”: Soldiers, masculinity, and countryside. Gender. Place and Culture 5 (3), 277 - 300. 95 LIR Milli] 83 Y llIll'llllIlllllllllllllsll I 3 1595821534