The civil-military relations in Mexico were stable in colonial times (1492-1810), the authoritarian rule by Diaz (1876-1910), and one-party governments (1929-2000). However, it was tense during the early independence under the caudillos (1810-1876), as well as during Mexican revolution and afterwards (1910-1929). Compared with other Latin American nations, Mexican civil-military relation is unique. Between the 1960s and 1970s, the authoritarian regimes in most South American countries were established and ruled by military. However, at the same time, a civil soft-authoritarian regime was created by a one-party rule in Mexico, without military intervention. Since the 1980s, democratization was accompanied by the political de-militarization in South America, while a national remilitarization tendency appeared in Mexico.

The civil-military relations in India are famous for its long-term stability of “civilian control of military”. During its hundreds of years of colonial rule, Britain constantly adjusted its means to control the armed forces. The relevant institutional arrangement of its control over the military was like a “double-edged sword”. While establishing the civilian control, it also laid a hidden danger for the establishment of a stable civil-military relation in India in the future. With the rise of the Indian independence movement, India's local political groups stepped on the historical stage and began to participate in planning how to control the armed forces. After India's independence, the Indian National Congress carried out a number of decolonization measures, partly overcoming the turbulent factors left by the British “colonial legacy” and initially establishing the basic framework of India-style civil-military relations. Since the beginning of the new century, in response to new challenges in the military and security fields, the Bharatiya Janata Party has forcefully pushed forward the military reform that had been shelved for decades, bringing many variables to the future development of the civil-military relations in India.

The settlement issue has always been the focus and difficulty of Israeli-Palestinian peace process. However, current research focuses mainly on the Israeli government, the relevant political parties or the religious organizations, while the interaction between the IDF and the government and the role of the army in the issue are not discussed thoroughly. On the basis of analyzing three cases, i.e., the settlement construction in 1967, Israeli-Palestinian peace process in 1993, and Sharon's unilateral withdrawal policy in 2005, this paper puts forward the basic model of the interaction between the Israeli government and the army. It points out that the Israeli government has not achieved complete control over the military although the classical exchange relationship between civilian government and the army is stable for the most time. Once the military perceives harm from a certain policy of the government, they would challenge the government. The validity of its challenge is mainly determined by two factors, one is division within the civilian government, the other is the level of government's need for the military to provide legitimacy for this policy.