The decision to use force makes paramount the success of a military operation. This may lead to the formal suspension of certain civil rights and for security operations that contradict the declared codes. In a post-civil war situation, where a garrison state prevails, 'military necessity' still seeks to dictate the terms. Militarisation strengthens authoritarianism and reduces transparency. Those who publicly dissent or who try to reveal facets of operations that are not publicly acknowledged are liable to be smeared or worse.
Militarisation protects soldiers from prosecution for criminal actions.
Victors in war may want to prosecute those they defeated yet themselves remain above the law. The loyalty bred among the military inclines them to close ranks, insulating themselves from outside criticism. The militaries of members of the UN Security Council also refuse to accept accountability. For Britain, one recalls the difficulty of investigating summary executions of Argentines who surrendered in the Falklands War and various incidents in Northern Ireland. NATO governments are indignant at the suggestion that there is a case to answer over the 1999 bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.