The problem of cohesion

Selection processes, insignia and collective memories are all central to the military effectiveness of Europe's empowered brigades; they are signifiers of elitism. Yet elitism alone seems unable to explain the level of performance which is typical of effective military organisations. It does not, in itself, constitute military competence, it merely enables operational performance, which encourages greater effort from members of these organisations and stimulates higher levels of unity. The empowered brigades are not effective organisations simply because they are symbolically united or because they feel themselves to be elect. Rather, they are able to conduct operations which other forces, especially Europe's old conscript armies, could not perform. They have been successful in performing military operations. The question is how are relatively large-scale organisations, such as these empowered brigades or the small sub-units of which they comprise, able to perform the new missions on which they are being deployed. In this, the performance of these brigades connects with long-standing concerns in military sociology about the issue of cohesion.

Military institutions depend on a level of social cohesion which is matched in few other social groups. In combat, the armed forces are able to sustain themselves only as long as individual members commit themselves to collective goals even at the cost of personal injury or death. The point about the armed forces, which perhaps differentiates it from civilian spheres, is that cohesion in and of itself is critical to this prosecution of violence.