POSC 2200 – POSC 2200 – International International Security, War and StrifeSecurity, War and Strife

Russell Alan WilliamsRussell Alan Williams

Department of Political ScienceDepartment of Political Science

Unit Six: Unit Six: International Security, War International Security, War and Strifeand Strife

““Nature of War”Nature of War” Required Reading:Required Reading:

Mingst, Chapter 8.Mingst, Chapter 8. Mueller, Mueller, The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear

Weapons: Stability in the Postwar WorldWeapons: Stability in the Postwar World, , Mingst and Snyder, pp. 341-346.Mingst and Snyder, pp. 341-346.

Outine:Outine: Types of WarTypes of War Choices in Military CapabilitiesChoices in Military Capabilities The Impact of “WMD’s”The Impact of “WMD’s”

1) Types of War:1) Types of War:War involves both “interstate” conflict and domestic War involves both “interstate” conflict and domestic

conflict . . .conflict . . . E.g. “E.g. “Civil warsCivil wars”: Internal to a single state”: Internal to a single state

Fight over government & state sovereignty Fight over government & state sovereignty Number of Number of civil warscivil wars has not declined as quickly as has not declined as quickly as

interstate wars . . . .interstate wars . . . . ConcernConcern: Civil wars becoming more “international”: Civil wars becoming more “international”

E.g. Refugees, environmental impacts & regional E.g. Refugees, environmental impacts & regional instability -instability - GlobalizationGlobalization

Nature/type of war depends on strategies and choices of Nature/type of war depends on strategies and choices of participantsparticipants E.g. E.g. What do they want to accomplish?What do they want to accomplish?

What are their capabilities?What are their capabilities?

1) “1) “General WarGeneral War”: War designed to conquer ”: War designed to conquer and occupy territoryand occupy territory

Associated with “Associated with “total wartotal war” – the full utilization ” – the full utilization of societies resources –of societies resources – mobilization mobilization

Involves both military and civilian casualtiesInvolves both military and civilian casualties End goal = Destruction and/or defeat of enemiesEnd goal = Destruction and/or defeat of enemies More common in interstate war as both sides More common in interstate war as both sides

choose general war – choose general war – requires considerable requires considerable capabilitiescapabilities

Examples?Examples? The Peloponnesian War (431-404 BC)The Peloponnesian War (431-404 BC) Thirty Years War (1616-1648)Thirty Years War (1616-1648) WWI (1914-1918) & WWII (1939-1945)WWI (1914-1918) & WWII (1939-1945) None since 1945 . . . ?None since 1945 . . . ?

Analytical question:Analytical question:

Why have Why have general warsgeneral wars become less common? become less common?

RealistRealist: : Balance of power and capabilitiesBalance of power and capabilities E.g. US & allies satisfied with E.g. US & allies satisfied with status quostatus quo

LiberalLiberal: : Spread of Democracy/UNSpread of Democracy/UN

ConstructivistConstructivist: : Horror of modern conflictHorror of modern conflict ““Security Community” – JervisSecurity Community” – Jervis

World is dominated by states which World is dominated by states which believe that believe that general wargeneral war is unthinkable is unthinkable

2) “2) “Limited WarLimited War”: Wars in which ”: Wars in which participants have lower objectives then participants have lower objectives then general wargeneral war

E.g. Not seeking unconditional surrender of E.g. Not seeking unconditional surrender of enemy statesenemy states

Technique:Technique: Full military forces not deployedFull military forces not deployed Objectives:Objectives: Limit control/influence of groups Limit control/influence of groups

which are potentially threateningwhich are potentially threatening Most common limited war = Most common limited war = intervention in intervention in

civil war to support favorable factionscivil war to support favorable factionsE.g. AfghanistanE.g. Afghanistan

Concerns:Concerns:--Number of Number of limited warslimited wars still high still high-Last longer then general wars-Last longer then general wars-Have high human costs-Have high human costs

2) Choices in Military Capabilities:2) Choices in Military Capabilities:

Why do states acquire military capabilities?Why do states acquire military capabilities? Obviously . . . to fight wars and ensure survivalObviously . . . to fight wars and ensure survival Foreign policy - Foreign policy - DeterrenceDeterrence and and CompellenceCompellence Non military functions:Non military functions:

Peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance, criminal Peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance, criminal surveillance, snow removalsurveillance, snow removal

Controlling domestic dissentControlling domestic dissent

Each state/group must weigh the importance of these Each state/group must weigh the importance of these functions in choosing military capabilitiesfunctions in choosing military capabilities Some capabilities not useful for some tasksSome capabilities not useful for some tasks

E.g. Nuclear weapons will not help you maintain E.g. Nuclear weapons will not help you maintain domestic political control . . . .domestic political control . . . .

A) Traditional Types of Capabilities:A) Traditional Types of Capabilities:

1) “1) “Conventional ArmiesConventional Armies”:”:=Infantry soldiers, artillery and landmines=Infantry soldiers, artillery and landmines

Strengths?Strengths? Defense of territoryDefense of territory Maintain order - “boots on the ground”Maintain order - “boots on the ground”

Drawbacks?Drawbacks? Expensive – effective infantries require Expensive – effective infantries require

exhaustive trainingexhaustive training Why are people willing to fight and die?Why are people willing to fight and die?

DeterrenceDeterrence, but less effective at , but less effective at compellencecompellence Domestic problems? Political influence of large Domestic problems? Political influence of large

army . . . .army . . . .

2) Power Projection Capabilities: Necessary to use 2) Power Projection Capabilities: Necessary to use military force beyond national borders military force beyond national borders

=Navies, air forces, modern missiles, logistics=Navies, air forces, modern missiles, logisticsStrengths:Strengths:

CompellenceCompellence Lower casualties!Lower casualties!

Drawbacks:Drawbacks: Extremely Extremely expensive $$$$$$expensive $$$$$$

Technology has widened gap between most armies and Technology has widened gap between most armies and those with power projection capabilitiesthose with power projection capabilities

Communications technologyCommunications technology Precession targeting/stand-off weaponryPrecession targeting/stand-off weaponry StealthStealth

Can “Can “middlemiddle” or “” or “smallsmall” powers afford these weapons?” powers afford these weapons?

Defense Spending & Power Projection – Defense Spending & Power Projection – Who can keep us with the US???Who can keep us with the US???

Defense Spending & Power Projection – Defense Spending & Power Projection – Who can keep us with the US???Who can keep us with the US???

Is Power Projection “worth it”?Is Power Projection “worth it”?E.g. Good for limited wars, but less effective for maintaining control and order over territory . . . .

US mission to IraqUS mission to Iraq(1990-1991)(1990-1991)

600,000 + Soldiers600,000 + Soldiers

US mission to US mission to Vietnam (1968)Vietnam (1968)

800,000 + Soldiers800,000 + Soldiers

US mission to IraqUS mission to Iraq(2003)(2003)

150,000 + Soldiers150,000 + Soldiers

US investment in “power projection” equals insufficient resources to wage conventional war and control territory????? Implications? Only fight wars with limited objectives?

b) Alternative capabilities – “war on the b) Alternative capabilities – “war on the cheap”cheap”

1) “1) “Asymmetric warfareAsymmetric warfare”: War between parties of ”: War between parties of unequal strength in which weaker party tries to unequal strength in which weaker party tries to focus on opponent’s weaknessesfocus on opponent’s weaknesses More common given imbalance in modern forcesMore common given imbalance in modern forces

TechniquesTechniques:: ““Guerrilla warfareGuerrilla warfare”: Approach to war favored ”: Approach to war favored

by “irregular” militariesby “irregular” militaries= = “Hit and run” tactics - relies on concealment “Hit and run” tactics - relies on concealment

among civilian population among civilian population Increase occupation costs for conventional armiesIncrease occupation costs for conventional armies Now common (Vietnam Now common (Vietnam Iraq Iraq Afghanistan)Afghanistan)

““TerrorismTerrorism”: Use of indiscriminate violence by ”: Use of indiscriminate violence by groups or states against noncombatantsgroups or states against noncombatants

Intended to cause fear . . .Intended to cause fear . . . Also increases “costs” of conventional military Also increases “costs” of conventional military

occupationoccupation ““State sponsored?”State sponsored?”

Terrorism has long history as a strategy Terrorism has long history as a strategy used by groups – less common use by states . used by groups – less common use by states . . . . . . . Why?Why?

Asymmetric warfareAsymmetric warfare – Strengths – Strengths Low cost . . .Low cost . . .

Asymmetric warfareAsymmetric warfare – Weaknesses – Weaknesses Effectiveness???Effectiveness??? High risk for supporters???High risk for supporters???

3) The Impact of “WMD’s”:3) The Impact of “WMD’s”:““Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD’s)Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD’s)”: Nuclear, ”: Nuclear,

chemical and biological weapons distinguished by chemical and biological weapons distinguished by their lethality and inability to discriminate targets their lethality and inability to discriminate targets

E.g. non combatants E.g. non combatants likelylikely to be killed to be killed Usually have to combined with a method of “delivery” – Usually have to combined with a method of “delivery” –

states pursuing WMD’s also have to develop missiles etc.states pursuing WMD’s also have to develop missiles etc.

Strengths?Strengths? Cheaper then conventional armies – ultimate form of Cheaper then conventional armies – ultimate form of

asymmetric warfareasymmetric warfare Highly effective form of Highly effective form of deterrencedeterrence Can be a significant source of political leverageCan be a significant source of political leverage

E.g. North Korea E.g. North Korea

Drawbacks?Drawbacks? Risk of use (?)Risk of use (?) Risk of proliferation (?)Risk of proliferation (?)

RealismRealism: : Could make Could make general wargeneral war obsolete (Waltz) obsolete (Waltz)

John Mueller: “John Mueller: “The Essential The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear WeaponsIrrelevance of Nuclear Weapons””

Responding to central Realist Responding to central Realist explanation of the “long post war explanation of the “long post war peace”peace” Cuased by nuclear weapons Cuased by nuclear weapons

Source of restraint Source of restraint War amongst great powers less likelyWar amongst great powers less likely

Mueller:Mueller: Horrors of WWII & “satisfaction Horrors of WWII & “satisfaction of winners” made post war period peaceful of winners” made post war period peaceful – – notnot nuclear weapons nuclear weapons

John Mueller: “John Mueller: “The Essential The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear WeaponsIrrelevance of Nuclear Weapons””

Example of “misperception” – Example of “misperception” – belief systembelief system??

Realist believe evidence of peace fits existing Realist believe evidence of peace fits existing theory focused on power capabilities . . .theory focused on power capabilities . . .

Leads Waltz to believe that WMD Leads Waltz to believe that WMD proliferation may not be a problem!proliferation may not be a problem!

Peace may be explained by other factors – Peace may be explained by other factors – Realists may be learning wrong lesson from Realists may be learning wrong lesson from history . . . !history . . . !

DrawbacksDrawbacks?? Risk of use (?)Risk of use (?) Risk of proliferation (?)Risk of proliferation (?)

RealismRealism: : Could make Could make general wargeneral war obsolete (Waltz) obsolete (Waltz)

Or . . . .Or . . . . Could radically redistribute power – raises Could radically redistribute power – raises

possibility of preemptive warspossibility of preemptive wars

Other Approaches:Other Approaches: Makes use of WMD’s more likelyMakes use of WMD’s more likely

5) For Next Time . . .5) For Next Time . . .

Unit Six: Unit Six: International Security, War and International Security, War and StrifeStrife

““Managing Insecurity”Managing Insecurity”

Required Reading:Required Reading: Mingst, Chapter 8.Mingst, Chapter 8. Mueller, Mueller, The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear

Weapons: Stability in the Postwar WorldWeapons: Stability in the Postwar World, Mingst , Mingst and Snyder, pp. 341-346.and Snyder, pp. 341-346.