1. POSC 2200 – International Security, War and Strife Russell Alan Williams Department of Political Science

2. Unit Six: International Security, War and Strife “Nature of War” Required Reading: Required Reading: Mingst, Chapter 8. Mingst, Chapter 8. Mueller, The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear Weapons: Stability in the Postwar World, Mingst and Snyder, pp. 341-346. Mueller, The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear Weapons: Stability in the Postwar World, Mingst and Snyder, pp. 341-346. Outine: Outine: Types of War Types of War Choices in Military Capabilities Choices in Military Capabilities The Impact of “WMD’s” The Impact of “WMD’s”

3. 1) Types of War: War involves both “interstate” conflict and domestic conflict... E.g. “Civil wars”: Internal to a single state E.g. “Civil wars”: Internal to a single state Fight over government & state sovereignty Fight over government & state sovereignty Number of civil wars has not declined as quickly as interstate wars.... Number of civil wars has not declined as quickly as interstate wars.... Concern: Civil wars becoming more “international” Concern: Civil wars becoming more “international” E.g. Refugees, environmental impacts & regional instability - Globalization E.g. Refugees, environmental impacts & regional instability - Globalization Nature/type of war depends on strategies and choices of participants E.g. What do they want to accomplish? E.g. What do they want to accomplish? What are their capabilities?

4. 1) “General War”: War designed to conquer and occupy territory Associated with “total war” – the full utilization of societies resources – mobilization Associated with “total war” – the full utilization of societies resources – mobilization Involves both military and civilian casualties Involves both military and civilian casualties End goal = Destruction and/or defeat of enemies End goal = Destruction and/or defeat of enemies More common in interstate war as both sides choose general war – requires considerable capabilities More common in interstate war as both sides choose general war – requires considerable capabilitiesExamples? 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... ?

5. Analytical question: Why have general wars become less common? Why have general wars become less common? Realist: Balance of power and capabilities Realist: Balance of power and capabilities E.g. US & allies satisfied with status quo E.g. US & allies satisfied with status quo Liberal: Spread of Democracy/UN Liberal: Spread of Democracy/UN Constructivist: Horror of modern conflict Constructivist: Horror of modern conflict “Security Community” – Jervis “Security Community” – Jervis World is dominated by states which believe that general war is unthinkable World is dominated by states which believe that general war is unthinkable

6. 2) “Limited War”: Wars in which participants have lower objectives then general war E.g. Not seeking unconditional surrender of enemy states Technique: Full military forces not deployed Technique: Full military forces not deployed Objectives: Limit control/influence of groups which are potentially threatening Objectives: Limit control/influence of groups which are potentially threatening Most common limited war = intervention in civil war to support favorable factions Most common limited war = intervention in civil war to support favorable factions E.g. Afghanistan Concerns:-Number of limited wars still high Concerns:-Number of limited wars still high -Last longer then general wars -Have high human costs

7. 2) Choices in Military Capabilities: Why do states acquire military capabilities? Obviously... to fight wars and ensure survival Obviously... to fight wars and ensure survival Foreign policy - Deterrence and Compellence Foreign policy - Deterrence and Compellence Non military functions: Non military functions: Peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance, criminal surveillance, snow removal Peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance, criminal surveillance, snow removal Controlling domestic dissent Controlling domestic dissent Each state/group must weigh the importance of these functions in choosing military capabilities Some capabilities not useful for some tasks Some capabilities not useful for some tasks E.g. Nuclear weapons will not help you maintain domestic political control....

8. A) Traditional Types of Capabilities: 1) “Conventional Armies”: =Infantry soldiers, artillery and landmines Strengths? Strengths? Defense of territory Defense of territory Maintain order - “boots on the ground” Maintain order - “boots on the ground” Drawbacks? Drawbacks? Expensive – effective infantries require exhaustive training Expensive – effective infantries require exhaustive training Why are people willing to fight and die? Why are people willing to fight and die? Deterrence, but less effective at compellence Deterrence, but less effective at compellence Domestic problems? Political influence of large army.... Domestic problems? Political influence of large army....

9. 2) Power Projection Capabilities: Necessary to use military force beyond national borders =Navies, air forces, modern missiles, logistics Strengths: Strengths: Compellence Compellence Lower casualties! Lower casualties! Drawbacks: Drawbacks: Extremely expensive $$$$$$ Extremely expensive $$$$$$ Technology has widened gap between most armies and those with power projection capabilities Technology has widened gap between most armies and those with power projection capabilities Communications technology Communications technology Precession targeting/stand-off weaponry Precession targeting/stand-off weaponry Stealth Stealth Can “middle” or “small” powers afford these weapons? Can “middle” or “small” powers afford these weapons?

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

12. Is Power Projection “worth it”? E.g. Good for limited wars, but less effective for maintaining control and order over territory.... US mission to Iraq (1990-1991) 600,000 + Soldiers US mission to Vietnam (1968) 800,000 + Soldiers US mission to Iraq (2003) 150,000 + Soldiers US investment in “power projection” equals insufficient resources to wage conventional war and control territory????? Implications? Only fight wars with limited objectives?

13. b) Alternative capabilities – “war on the cheap” 1) “Asymmetric warfare”: War between parties of unequal strength in which weaker party tries to focus on opponent’s weaknesses More common given imbalance in modern forces More common given imbalance in modern forces Techniques: Techniques: “Guerrilla warfare”: Approach to war favored by “irregular” militaries “Guerrilla warfare”: Approach to war favored by “irregular” militaries = “Hit and run” tactics - relies on concealment among civilian population Increase occupation costs for conventional armies Increase occupation costs for conventional armies Now common (Vietnam  Iraq  Afghanistan) Now common (Vietnam  Iraq  Afghanistan)

14. “Terrorism”: Use of indiscriminate violence by groups or states against noncombatants “Terrorism”: Use of indiscriminate violence by groups or states against noncombatants Intended to cause fear... Intended to cause fear... Also increases “costs” of conventional military occupation Also increases “costs” of conventional military occupation “State sponsored?” “State sponsored?” Terrorism has long history as a strategy used by groups – less common use by states.... Why? Terrorism has long history as a strategy used by groups – less common use by states.... Why? Asymmetric warfare – Strengths Asymmetric warfare – Strengths Low cost... Low cost... Asymmetric warfare – Weaknesses Asymmetric warfare – Weaknesses Effectiveness??? Effectiveness??? High risk for supporters??? High risk for supporters???

15. 3) The Impact of “WMD’s”: “Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD’s)”: Nuclear, chemical and biological weapons distinguished by their lethality and inability to discriminate targets E.g. non combatants likely to be killed Usually have to combined with a method of “delivery” – states pursuing WMD’s also have to develop missiles etc. Usually have to combined with a method of “delivery” – states pursuing WMD’s also have to develop missiles etc. Strengths? Strengths? Cheaper then conventional armies – ultimate form of asymmetric warfare Cheaper then conventional armies – ultimate form of asymmetric warfare Highly effective form of deterrence Highly effective form of deterrence Can be a significant source of political leverage Can be a significant source of political leverage E.g. North Korea

16. Drawbacks? Drawbacks? Risk of use (?) Risk of use (?) Risk of proliferation (?) Risk of proliferation (?) Realism: Realism: Could make general war obsolete (Waltz) Could make general war obsolete (Waltz)

17. John Mueller: “The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear Weapons” Responding to central Realist explanation of the “long post war peace” Responding to central Realist explanation of the “long post war peace” Cuased by nuclear weapons Cuased by nuclear weapons Source of restraint Source of restraint War amongst great powers less likely War amongst great powers less likely Mueller: Horrors of WWII & “satisfaction of winners” made post war period peaceful – not nuclear weapons Mueller: Horrors of WWII & “satisfaction of winners” made post war period peaceful – not nuclear weapons

18. John Mueller: “The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear Weapons” Example of “misperception” – belief system? Example of “misperception” – belief system? Realist believe evidence of peace fits existing theory focused on power capabilities... Realist believe evidence of peace fits existing theory focused on power capabilities... Leads Waltz to believe that WMD proliferation may not be a problem! Leads Waltz to believe that WMD proliferation may not be a problem! Peace may be explained by other factors – Realists may be learning wrong lesson from history... ! Peace may be explained by other factors – Realists may be learning wrong lesson from history... !

19. Drawbacks? Drawbacks? Risk of use (?) Risk of use (?) Risk of proliferation (?) Risk of proliferation (?) Realism: Realism: Could make general war obsolete (Waltz) Could make general war obsolete (Waltz) Or.... Could radically redistribute power – raises possibility of preemptive wars Could radically redistribute power – raises possibility of preemptive wars Other Approaches: Other Approaches: Makes use of WMD’s more likely Makes use of WMD’s more likely

20. 5) For Next Time... Unit Six: International Security, War and Strife “Managing Insecurity” Required Reading: Required Reading: Mingst, Chapter 8. Mingst, Chapter 8. Mueller, The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear Weapons: Stability in the Postwar World, Mingst and Snyder, pp. 341-346. Mueller, The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear Weapons: Stability in the Postwar World, Mingst and Snyder, pp. 341-346.