Military administration, in particular as it is exercised through the missions of the three Armed Forces’ commissariats, has gradually evolved during the course of the military conflicts that mark our history. In order to answer to the needs of the services on operations in the framework of the historical model of a bilateral confrontation, each era, learning from its experiences, has brought its own contribution to the establishment of an original legislative and regulatory framework, distinct in its aim, its field of competency and its methods, some common rules applied by civilian management.

However, the 45 years of general peace that our country has known since 1962 have imperceptibly influenced minds and brought about deep-rooted changes in the ways of envisaging military administration. For many, military administration now differs little from the civilian model. That is to forget that it contributes eminently–like other support mechanisms–to the operational capability of the services and that it needs to safeguard the means of action in dramatic circumstances, the resurgence of which is always possible.

The rationalism of a reforming ‘enlightened spirit’ duped by the huge advances in computers, the search for savings–not always significant–and the forgetting of the lessons of history, lead administrative innovation on the perilous path of a ‘civilianisation’ that affects not only–in the usual meaning of the term–personnel, but also and most importantly, the principles or organisation and therefore of subordination.