Here to Help: Third Party Deterrence Against Insurgent Groups - State Centrism, Nuclear Prominence, and Congruent Relationships, Denial, Delegitimization, Case Study of Boko Haram, Nigeria and America

Nonfiction, History, Military, United States, Social & Cultural Studies, Political Science
Cover of the book Here to Help: Third Party Deterrence Against Insurgent Groups - State Centrism, Nuclear Prominence, and Congruent Relationships, Denial, Delegitimization, Case Study of Boko Haram, Nigeria and America by Progressive Management, Progressive Management
View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart
Author: Progressive Management ISBN: 9781370186037
Publisher: Progressive Management Publication: March 2, 2017
Imprint: Smashwords Edition Language: English
Author: Progressive Management
ISBN: 9781370186037
Publisher: Progressive Management
Publication: March 2, 2017
Imprint: Smashwords Edition
Language: English

This excellent report has been professionally converted for accurate flowing-text e-book format reproduction. During the Cold War, both the United States and the Soviet Union exercised third party deterrence to protect key allies against hostile aggression. However, since the end of World War II, violent non-state groups such as terrorists, insurgents, and criminal organizations represent the predominant security threats to states. This monograph argues that third party deterrence is a valid concept applied against an insurgent group challenging a partner state. This monograph analyzes three key variables of Cold War deterrence—state centrism; nuclear prominence; and congruent relationships. Recognizing the evolution of those variables since the end of the Cold War unlocks deterrence methods not just limited to threats of punishment, but of deterrence through denial and delegitimization. Deterring an insurgent or potential insurgent group through delegitimization is a powerful approach, but it requires the third party state to apply coercive force against both the insurgent group and the partner state's government.

Is deterrence still relevant in the contemporary operating environment? With a few exceptions, deterrence was at the foundation of order during the bipolarity of the Cold War era. The United States and the Soviet Union built alliances, nuclear stockpiles, and even anti-ballistic missile systems, signaling to each other the potential consequences of taking aggressive military action against them or their friends. The fear of punishment or retaliation was the language of deterrence. However, in the current world where the vast majority of armed conflicts since World War II occur within national borders, and arguably the most urgent security concerns arise from violent non-state groups unfazed by threats of punishment, deterrence as a strategy seems anachronistic and impractical. Nevertheless, the term "deterrence" remains a fixture in US strategic planning documents and generally applicable to all types of potential enemies.

Between two adversarial states, the traditional idea of deterrence—threatening punishment through retaliation centered around military capabilities and a willingness to use them—mostly endures. However, third party or "extended deterrence" where a state attempts to deter attacks against an ally, is more dubious than during the Cold War given the preponderance of violent non-state groups that threaten states now. Insurgencies, in particular, which Phil Williams defines as "an organized, armed political struggle whose goal may be the seizure of power through revolutionary takeover and replacement of the existing government," have proven extremely resilient and tough to defeat.

View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart

This excellent report has been professionally converted for accurate flowing-text e-book format reproduction. During the Cold War, both the United States and the Soviet Union exercised third party deterrence to protect key allies against hostile aggression. However, since the end of World War II, violent non-state groups such as terrorists, insurgents, and criminal organizations represent the predominant security threats to states. This monograph argues that third party deterrence is a valid concept applied against an insurgent group challenging a partner state. This monograph analyzes three key variables of Cold War deterrence—state centrism; nuclear prominence; and congruent relationships. Recognizing the evolution of those variables since the end of the Cold War unlocks deterrence methods not just limited to threats of punishment, but of deterrence through denial and delegitimization. Deterring an insurgent or potential insurgent group through delegitimization is a powerful approach, but it requires the third party state to apply coercive force against both the insurgent group and the partner state's government.

Is deterrence still relevant in the contemporary operating environment? With a few exceptions, deterrence was at the foundation of order during the bipolarity of the Cold War era. The United States and the Soviet Union built alliances, nuclear stockpiles, and even anti-ballistic missile systems, signaling to each other the potential consequences of taking aggressive military action against them or their friends. The fear of punishment or retaliation was the language of deterrence. However, in the current world where the vast majority of armed conflicts since World War II occur within national borders, and arguably the most urgent security concerns arise from violent non-state groups unfazed by threats of punishment, deterrence as a strategy seems anachronistic and impractical. Nevertheless, the term "deterrence" remains a fixture in US strategic planning documents and generally applicable to all types of potential enemies.

Between two adversarial states, the traditional idea of deterrence—threatening punishment through retaliation centered around military capabilities and a willingness to use them—mostly endures. However, third party or "extended deterrence" where a state attempts to deter attacks against an ally, is more dubious than during the Cold War given the preponderance of violent non-state groups that threaten states now. Insurgencies, in particular, which Phil Williams defines as "an organized, armed political struggle whose goal may be the seizure of power through revolutionary takeover and replacement of the existing government," have proven extremely resilient and tough to defeat.

More books from Progressive Management

Cover of the book Chemicals Used in Hydraulic Fracturing: Cancer and Health Risks from Underground Injection Natural Gas Production, Marcellus Shale Gas Fracking and Hydrofrac - House Committee Report by Progressive Management
Cover of the book Khobar Towers: Tragedy and Response - 1996 Terrorist Bombing of U.S. Forces Stationed in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Hezbollah, Clinton, Oral Histories of Airmen, Honoring and Remembering by Progressive Management
Cover of the book National Security History Series - The Manhattan Project, Making the Atomic Bomb (2010 Edition) - From the Einstein Letter to the Atomic Bomb and American Strategy, Project Chronology by Progressive Management
Cover of the book Rolling Thunder 1965: Anatomy of a Failure - Airpower Against North Vietnam, Enduring Enigma of the Vietnam War, American Air Power Doctrine, President Johnson's Target Selection and Military Distrust by Progressive Management
Cover of the book 21st Century U.S. Military Manuals: Multiservice Procedures for Humanitarian Assistance Operations - HA - FM 100-23-1 (Value-Added Professional Format Series) by Progressive Management
Cover of the book Challenging the United States Symmetrically and Asymmetrically: Can America be Defeated? Technology, Myth of Blitzkrieg, Terrorism by Progressive Management
Cover of the book Back to Basics: A Study of the Second Lebanon War and Operation CAST LEAD - Israeli IDF Incursions into Lebanon and Gaza 2006 and 2008 Against Hezbollah and Hamas, Tactics, Hard Lessons Learned by Progressive Management
Cover of the book The Persistence of Toxic and Unethical Leadership: How Does the U.S. Army Improve Leader Development and Selection? Evaluating Traits Required by Mission Command and Army Doctrine by Progressive Management
Cover of the book Air War over South Vietnam 1968: 1975: Comprehensive Coverage from the Tet Offensive to the Collapse of South Vietnam, Waging War in South Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos, Vietnamization, Mayaguez by Progressive Management
Cover of the book Eliminating War by Eliminating Warriors: A Case Study in Costa Rica - Abolishing the Military and Army, Culture, Economic Evolution, Domestic Developments, External Threats, Historical Foundations by Progressive Management
Cover of the book Strategic Water: Iraq and Security Planning in the Euphrates-Tigris Basin - History, Geopolitics, Climate Change and Water Demand, Kurdish Control, Hydropolitics, Crisis and Diplomacy by Progressive Management
Cover of the book Turning the Vertical Flank: Airpower as a Maneuver Force in the Theater Campaign: Historic Analysis from Ancient Greece and Rome to the Napoleonic Era and Gettysburg, Normandy, Yom Kippur War by Progressive Management
Cover of the book 2013 Master Guide to Syria and the Syrian Chemical Weapons Crisis: Threat of U.S. Military Strike by Obama, Congressional Options, Sarin Nerve Gas, Civil War, Rebel Groups, Bashar al-Assad by Progressive Management
Cover of the book 21st Century U.S. Military Manuals: Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical (NBC) Vulnerability Analysis - FM 3-14 (Value-Added Professional Format Series) by Progressive Management
Cover of the book 2011 NASA Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) Annual Report, Issued January 2012 - Space Shuttle, International Space Station, Commercial Crew and Cargo, SpaceX, Human Rating, Exploration Program by Progressive Management
We use our own "cookies" and third party cookies to improve services and to see statistical information. By using this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy