Command and military effectiveness in rebel and hybrid battlefield coalitions

IF 1.3 2区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Journal of Strategic Studies Pub Date : 2022-01-28 DOI:10.1080/01402390.2021.2002692
Dan Reiter
{"title":"Command and military effectiveness in rebel and hybrid battlefield coalitions","authors":"Dan Reiter","doi":"10.1080/01402390.2021.2002692","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Conventional thinking frames battlefield coalitions as collections of national armies fighting together as multinational coalitions. However, wars also include rebel groups fighting together as coalitions, and rebel groups fighting alongside states in hybrid coalitions. This paper seeks to better understand rebel and hybrid battlefield coalitions, focusing on command and operational military effectiveness. The paper first presents basic ideas about coalition command and military effectiveness from conventional wisdom on multinational coalitions. It then builds on these ideas to explore potential similarities and differences between multinational coalitions on one hand and rebel and hybrid coalitions on the other. In particular, the paper focuses on the nature of different command structures, the varying operational military effectiveness advantages for unified coalition command, and the political motivations for coalition members to resist creating unified command, despite potential effectiveness benefits. The paper concludes by providing policy recommendations to states who lead hybrid coalitions.","PeriodicalId":47240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strategic Studies","volume":"60 1","pages":"211 - 233"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Strategic Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2021.2002692","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT Conventional thinking frames battlefield coalitions as collections of national armies fighting together as multinational coalitions. However, wars also include rebel groups fighting together as coalitions, and rebel groups fighting alongside states in hybrid coalitions. This paper seeks to better understand rebel and hybrid battlefield coalitions, focusing on command and operational military effectiveness. The paper first presents basic ideas about coalition command and military effectiveness from conventional wisdom on multinational coalitions. It then builds on these ideas to explore potential similarities and differences between multinational coalitions on one hand and rebel and hybrid coalitions on the other. In particular, the paper focuses on the nature of different command structures, the varying operational military effectiveness advantages for unified coalition command, and the political motivations for coalition members to resist creating unified command, despite potential effectiveness benefits. The paper concludes by providing policy recommendations to states who lead hybrid coalitions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
叛军和混合战场联盟的指挥和军事效能
传统思维将战场联盟视为多国军队共同作战的集合。然而,战争也包括反政府组织联合作战,以及反政府组织以混合联盟的形式与政府并肩作战。本文旨在更好地理解叛军和混合战场联盟,重点关注指挥和作战军事效能。本文首先从多国联盟的传统观念出发,提出了联合指挥和军事效能的基本概念。然后,在这些想法的基础上,探索多国联盟与反叛和混合联盟之间潜在的异同。本文特别关注了不同指挥结构的性质、统一联合指挥的不同作战军事效能优势,以及尽管有潜在的效能效益,但联盟成员国抵制建立统一指挥的政治动机。论文最后向领导混合联盟的国家提供了政策建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
5.30%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The defining feature of The Journal of Strategic Studies is its commitment to multi-disciplinary approach. The editors welcome articles that challenge our historical understanding of man"s efforts to achieve political ends through the application of military and diplomatic means; articles on contemporary security and theoretical controversies of enduring value; and of course articles that explicitly combine the historical and theoretical approaches to the study of modern warfare, defence policy and modern strategy. In addition to a well-established review section, The Journal of Strategic Studies offers its diverse readership a wide range of "special issues" and "special sections".
期刊最新文献
How dawn turned into dusk: Scoping and closing possible nuclear futures after the Cold War Going nuclear: The development of American strategic conceptions about cyber conflict Aligning tactics with strategy: Vertical implementation of military doctrine How small states break oil sanctions: Israel’s oil import strategy in the 1970s Information security in the space age: Britain’s Skynet satellite communications program and the evolution of modern command and control networks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1