Unformatted text preview:

Exam 3 review INR 4083 Toft Describe the relationship between actor strength and conflict outcome over the last 200 hundred years Over the last 200 years weaker states have began to win more victories against stronger states What is the Mack thesis The causal logic deals with the interest and resolve of actor in conflict with the weak states caring more about the conflict because their lives are at steak Strong states are much less interested as survival is still intact after a loss Relative power explains relative interest What is the primary influence on the outcome of an asymmetric conflict Briefly explain Strategy is the primary influence on the outcome of an asymmetric conflict because if strategies coincide we will have strategy matching favoring the strong and if they don t we will have a mismatch favoring the weak Direct attack strategy Indirect attack strategy Is a conventional warfare target the enemies military Is unconventional warfare and can be termed barbarism attempts to destroy the enemies capacity and will to fight Direct defense strategy Is a conventional defense strategy Indirect defense strategy Is unconventional warfare termed as guerilla warfare Hit and run tactic Aim to destroy adversary s will and not their capacity to fight Unconventional You need a sanctuary and support of population to be successful What is the key causal mechanism in Toft s theory The key causal mechanism in Toft strategy is time For example if there is a strategy match the conflict will be short which will favor the strong state however if here is a strategy mismatch the conflict will be long which will favor the weaker state Drawn out conflicts favor the weaker states because they induce cost high causalities and lead to domestic pressure on the big state Can strong actors win if they employ barbarism against a weak actor using a GWS strategy A strong state can win if they employ barbarism vs guerilla warfare but it is more likely that the conflict will take a long time so the strong should eventually loose Combined action platoons Would secure a village and then move in ever widening circle until they encountered and other village to secure Ended badly for the US This is a direct strategy due to reliance on artillery for taking villages The problem is when the military just started shelling villages Unsuccessful Inkblot principle Strategic hamlet program Phoenix program Strategic hamlet program was when the US tried to move all the civilians to a secure area so all that would be left were enemies Went horribly wrong Phoenix program essentially death squads targeting Vietcong leadership that was run by the CIA US gained info through torture very effective Review Four ideal strategies Direct attack conventional Indirect attack barbarism Unconventional Direct defense conventional Indirect defense guerilla warfare unconventional The argument Strategy matching every strategy has a ideal counter strategy Who wins same approach interactions strong state short conflict Who wins opposite approach interactions small state long war creates pressure at home and costs big state pulls out The key causal mechanism for Toft is time A strong state can win if they employ barbarism vs guerilla warfare but it is more likely that the conflict will take a long time so the strong should eventually loose US did not win in Vietnam as it took too long casualties costs and domestic pressure was rising so political pressure ended up forcing the US to pull out The lessons we can draw from US policy is prepare for long wars in the future as well as develop counterinsurgency forces more special forces Lyall Wilson What change in force structure has occurred since World War I Since WWI there has been an increase in mechanization leading armies to be less centered on foraging infantry armies What are the key elements in Lyall Wilson s theory of counter insurgency outcome The key elements are Force structure and that democracies are less likely to be victorious in counter insurgency because they come off as foreign occupiers What is information starvation Information starvation is when an army has become extremely mechanized leading to a reduction in foraging armies that usually supply the state with garnered information This increase in mechanization leads to a lack of information which leads states to use indiscriminate power which leads to alienation of the population which eventually decreases the likelihood of success What is their argument for why states are not learning to more effectively combat insurgencies There are 3 reasons firstly because of the bureaucratic nature of the military secondly because of industrialization in the sense that to keep up with other states power states had to continue mechanizing so as to not fall behind and lastly because of post WWII the Geneva Convention outlawed guerilla warfare Are democracies inferior to autocracies at counter insurgency Explain Democracy could be less successful in counter insurgency because they are more likely to be seen as foreign occupiers Yes because democracies follow the rules of war care about public opinion prone to media freedom more sensitive to costs of war and are normally external occupiers In addition to their primary variable what else do they find significantly influences the outcome of counter insurgency The state s level of mechanization and whether the insurgent has external support According to Lyall Wilson who was more successful at counter insurgency in Iraq the 4 Infantry Division or the 101st Division Briefly explain why The 101st Airborne Division They were able to gather more intel because they lived with the people and patrolled on foot Raids had more positive results The cost was that they were more vulnerable What was a significant drawback to the successful division s success Review Why are incumbents losing more often in counter insurgency warfare Force structure the specific mixture of material and personnel that compromises a militaries war making capabilities Since ww1 more mechanization less foraging armies Casual logic an increase in mechanization leads to a decrease in information about the adversary as less foraging armies which is bad as poor information leads to information problems which leads to indiscriminate use of power this leads to increased alienation of the population which eventually decreases the likelihood of success Causal mechanism is information starvation Statistical analysis supported argument


View Full Document

FSU INR 4083 - Exam #3 review

Documents in this Course
Load more
Download Exam #3 review
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Exam #3 review and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Exam #3 review 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?