Pub Date : 2022-03-06DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2046470
Esben Salling Larsen
ABSTRACT Military geography is implicit in many geopolitical arguments that come with the increased great power competition. However, as military geography is one of the disciplines that informs and constitutes geopolitics it is prudent to move beyond geographical metaphors and make the military geography explicit in the argument in order to gain a better understanding of geopolitics. Using Denmark as a case, this article compares Danish military geography during the Cold War and now in the era of emerging great power competition. Danish military geography changed during the Cold War from a straits to a vulnerable flank. In the post-Cold War era, Denmark became a safe area at a long distance from expeditionary operations and is now emerging as a defendable staging area in the era of great power competition. This case shows that the military geography changed significantly with new technologies, strategies and the adversaries’ capabilities during the Cold War. We should likewise expect the military geography to be constantly changing in the new great power rivalry.
{"title":"The military geographies of Denmark: a new place in a familiar landscape","authors":"Esben Salling Larsen","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2046470","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2046470","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Military geography is implicit in many geopolitical arguments that come with the increased great power competition. However, as military geography is one of the disciplines that informs and constitutes geopolitics it is prudent to move beyond geographical metaphors and make the military geography explicit in the argument in order to gain a better understanding of geopolitics. Using Denmark as a case, this article compares Danish military geography during the Cold War and now in the era of emerging great power competition. Danish military geography changed during the Cold War from a straits to a vulnerable flank. In the post-Cold War era, Denmark became a safe area at a long distance from expeditionary operations and is now emerging as a defendable staging area in the era of great power competition. This case shows that the military geography changed significantly with new technologies, strategies and the adversaries’ capabilities during the Cold War. We should likewise expect the military geography to be constantly changing in the new great power rivalry.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"378 - 397"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46109817","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-02DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2046471
Dilshad Jaff, L. Margolis, Edward Reeder
ABSTRACT Humanitarian agencies and military forces are increasingly interacting on the ground during humanitarian crises. These evolving relationships are often complicated and bring forward many implementation challenges. This paper repurposes this debate by describing three non-conflict humanitarian case studies and using them to reflect on the problematic history and applicability of formal frameworks and guidelines. Recommendations to improve the structures and processes for implementation of relief strategies are offered. If the delivery of humanitarian assistance during non-conflict humanitarian crises is to be efficient, civil–military interactions should receive greater systematic attention.
{"title":"Civil–military interactions during non-conflict humanitarian crises: a time to assess the relationship","authors":"Dilshad Jaff, L. Margolis, Edward Reeder","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2046471","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2046471","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Humanitarian agencies and military forces are increasingly interacting on the ground during humanitarian crises. These evolving relationships are often complicated and bring forward many implementation challenges. This paper repurposes this debate by describing three non-conflict humanitarian case studies and using them to reflect on the problematic history and applicability of formal frameworks and guidelines. Recommendations to improve the structures and processes for implementation of relief strategies are offered. If the delivery of humanitarian assistance during non-conflict humanitarian crises is to be efficient, civil–military interactions should receive greater systematic attention.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"398 - 413"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49221606","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-01DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2037427
Tom Dyson, Y. Pashchuk
ABSTRACT This article examines the development and performance of formal organisational learning processes in the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) during the Donbas War (2014-present). Through original empirical research conducted with UAF personnel and documentary analysis, the article develops understanding about the detail of UAF lessons-learned processes and their effectiveness in helping to recalibrate UAF activities to operational demands. The article finds that the performance of UAF lessons-learned processes during the Donbas War has, on the whole, been poor. Since the escalation of Russian aggression in 2014, some positive steps which have been taken to implement best-practices in UAF lessons-learned processes. However, the article uncovers a number of organisational activities, structures and processes which could be improved to weaken the negative impact of bureaucratic politics and organisational culture on learning. It concludes with recommendations for the further development of UAF lessons-learned processes. The article highlights the particular importance of improving the capacity of the civilian leadership to exert effective oversight of military learning and of US and NATO support for these efforts.
{"title":"Organisational learning during the Donbas War: the development of Ukrainian Armed Forces lessons-learned processes","authors":"Tom Dyson, Y. Pashchuk","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2037427","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2037427","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article examines the development and performance of formal organisational learning processes in the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) during the Donbas War (2014-present). Through original empirical research conducted with UAF personnel and documentary analysis, the article develops understanding about the detail of UAF lessons-learned processes and their effectiveness in helping to recalibrate UAF activities to operational demands. The article finds that the performance of UAF lessons-learned processes during the Donbas War has, on the whole, been poor. Since the escalation of Russian aggression in 2014, some positive steps which have been taken to implement best-practices in UAF lessons-learned processes. However, the article uncovers a number of organisational activities, structures and processes which could be improved to weaken the negative impact of bureaucratic politics and organisational culture on learning. It concludes with recommendations for the further development of UAF lessons-learned processes. The article highlights the particular importance of improving the capacity of the civilian leadership to exert effective oversight of military learning and of US and NATO support for these efforts.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"141 - 167"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42293699","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-17DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2036608
Simon Sweeney, N. Winn
ABSTRACT The quest for substance, capability, and strategic autonomy goes on – or does it? Is the objective of CSDP territorial defence and strategic autonomy, or crisis management and softer security concerns like peacekeeping, border management, protection of shipping lanes, and/or cyber security? The Union needs to move beyond familiar complaints about the lack of common strategic culture and EU intrusion into NATO responsibilities. Geostrategic and economic imperatives dictate that the EU should progress CSDP beyond civilian crisis management in the EU Neighbourhood, and military training and security sector reform (SSR). The Strategic Compass must signal CSDP clarity of objectives, coherence, enhanced capability, and appropriate burden sharing with NATO. The response to the Strategic Compass must build European strategic autonomy in ways that strengthen NATO. For military strategic and economic reasons, both the EU and the post-Brexit UK need intensive cooperation to maintain their geostrategic relevance and strengthen the NATO alliance. This paper reflects on prospects for the EU Strategic Compass and offers timely analysis of recent trends in EU foreign and security policy and expresses cautious optimism regarding the enhanced European strategic autonomy/actorness.
{"title":"Understanding the ambition in the EU’s Strategic Compass: a case for optimism at last?","authors":"Simon Sweeney, N. Winn","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2036608","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2036608","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The quest for substance, capability, and strategic autonomy goes on – or does it? Is the objective of CSDP territorial defence and strategic autonomy, or crisis management and softer security concerns like peacekeeping, border management, protection of shipping lanes, and/or cyber security? The Union needs to move beyond familiar complaints about the lack of common strategic culture and EU intrusion into NATO responsibilities. Geostrategic and economic imperatives dictate that the EU should progress CSDP beyond civilian crisis management in the EU Neighbourhood, and military training and security sector reform (SSR). The Strategic Compass must signal CSDP clarity of objectives, coherence, enhanced capability, and appropriate burden sharing with NATO. The response to the Strategic Compass must build European strategic autonomy in ways that strengthen NATO. For military strategic and economic reasons, both the EU and the post-Brexit UK need intensive cooperation to maintain their geostrategic relevance and strengthen the NATO alliance. This paper reflects on prospects for the EU Strategic Compass and offers timely analysis of recent trends in EU foreign and security policy and expresses cautious optimism regarding the enhanced European strategic autonomy/actorness.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"192 - 210"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41804473","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-31DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2033117
João Reis, N. Melão, Jóana Cósta, Bohuslav Pernica
ABSTRACT The European Defence Industry is undergoing profound changes. Industrial activity is now operating on a quintuple helix innovation model with the deep involvement of universities and governments in innovation. In addition, military innovations are being transferred to civil society, with increasing attention paid to the environment. In the first stage, we report on the state-of-the-art of existing research using PRISMA protocol. The PRISMA technique is widely accepted by the academic community for its ability to discover concepts, ideas, and debates about the defence industry. In the second stage, we present a case study involving the Portuguese Defence Industry, for which multiple data collection sources were used to ensure triangulation and corroboration. The results show that, in the light of the quintuple helix innovation model, it was possible to bring applications from theoretical discussion to real life. Moreover, within the scope of the triple helix, it was possible to develop, produce and test military products, allowing to improve the military capacity of ground forces. In the future, ecological concerns will likely increase, so we suggest a greater focus on this area of research.
{"title":"Defence industries and open innovation: ways to increase military capabilities of the Portuguese ground forces","authors":"João Reis, N. Melão, Jóana Cósta, Bohuslav Pernica","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2033117","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2033117","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The European Defence Industry is undergoing profound changes. Industrial activity is now operating on a quintuple helix innovation model with the deep involvement of universities and governments in innovation. In addition, military innovations are being transferred to civil society, with increasing attention paid to the environment. In the first stage, we report on the state-of-the-art of existing research using PRISMA protocol. The PRISMA technique is widely accepted by the academic community for its ability to discover concepts, ideas, and debates about the defence industry. In the second stage, we present a case study involving the Portuguese Defence Industry, for which multiple data collection sources were used to ensure triangulation and corroboration. The results show that, in the light of the quintuple helix innovation model, it was possible to bring applications from theoretical discussion to real life. Moreover, within the scope of the triple helix, it was possible to develop, produce and test military products, allowing to improve the military capacity of ground forces. In the future, ecological concerns will likely increase, so we suggest a greater focus on this area of research.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"354 - 377"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43336261","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-31DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2030713
J. Amador, D. Baladjay, Sheena Valenzuela
ABSTRACT The Republic Act (R.A.) 10,349, otherwise known as the Revised Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) Modernization Program, is a recapturing of the AFP’s initial efforts at modernizing. Successor to R.A. 7898, the document reorients the priorities and the fiscal responsibilities of the Philippine government in ensuring the modernization of the armed forces into the twenty-first century. The concept of modernization 25 years onward has matured but it has barely deepened in implementation much to the detriment of AFP itself. Despite warnings of external security threats, the study has found nominal evidence hinting at the defence budget’s continuous prioritization of internal security threats. The study has likewise found that modernization funds set forth by R.A. 10,349 are not utilized to “modernize” the armed forces in the truest sense of the word. The study recommends addressing this issue of prioritization before any further attempt at military modernization.
{"title":"Modernizing or equalizing? Defence budget and military modernization in the Philippines, 2010 – 2020","authors":"J. Amador, D. Baladjay, Sheena Valenzuela","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2030713","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2030713","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Republic Act (R.A.) 10,349, otherwise known as the Revised Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) Modernization Program, is a recapturing of the AFP’s initial efforts at modernizing. Successor to R.A. 7898, the document reorients the priorities and the fiscal responsibilities of the Philippine government in ensuring the modernization of the armed forces into the twenty-first century. The concept of modernization 25 years onward has matured but it has barely deepened in implementation much to the detriment of AFP itself. Despite warnings of external security threats, the study has found nominal evidence hinting at the defence budget’s continuous prioritization of internal security threats. The study has likewise found that modernization funds set forth by R.A. 10,349 are not utilized to “modernize” the armed forces in the truest sense of the word. The study recommends addressing this issue of prioritization before any further attempt at military modernization.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"299 - 326"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47429022","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-27DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2030715
E. L. Meyer
ABSTRACT This article applies grounded theory and epistemological, teleological, ontological, and methodological (ETOM) lenses to describe the prevalent contemporary theories of the centre of gravity concept, originated by Carl von Clausewitz. These include the theories of John Warden, Joe Strange & Richard Iron, Antulio Echevarria II, Milan Vego, Dale Eikmeier, and Jacob Barfoed. The article then compares the theories across 14 deduced theoretical aspects and produces a comparison matrix, that can be used as an analytical tool, and discusses implications as guidance for further research and doctrine development. The article argues that the term “centre of gravity” is polluted, and that the application of the term in military planning and doctrines requires careful attention to the specific theory being applied, so that logical consistency and clear, accurate communication is achieved. Alternatively, the concept may be removed from doctrine altogether, renovated with inclusion of a new unpolluted term, or reconstructed with removal of the centre of gravity, leaving a “critical factor analysis” concept behind. This article also provides a level of granularity to the debate about the concept, that renders critics like Paparone & Davis Jr and Zweibelson partly irrelevant and can provide a more nuanced and qualitative basis for future discussion.
本文运用扎根理论和认识论、目的论、本体论和方法论(ETOM)的视角来描述由卡尔·冯·克劳塞维茨(Carl von Clausewitz)发起的当代流行的重心概念理论。其中包括约翰·沃登、乔·斯特兰奇和理查德·铁、安图里奥·埃切瓦里亚二世、米兰·维戈、戴尔·艾克迈尔和雅各布·巴福德的理论。然后，文章从14个推论的理论方面对这些理论进行比较，并产生一个比较矩阵，可以作为分析工具，并讨论其影响，作为进一步研究和理论发展的指导。文章认为，“重心”一词受到了污染，在军事规划和理论中使用这个词需要仔细注意所应用的具体理论，以便达到逻辑上的一致性和清晰、准确的沟通。或者，这个概念可以完全从理论中删除，重新装修，包括一个新的未受污染的术语，或者通过删除重心来重建，留下“关键因素分析”的概念。这篇文章还提供了一个关于这个概念的争论的粒度级别，这使得像Paparone & Davis Jr和Zweibelson这样的批评者在一定程度上无关紧要，并且可以为未来的讨论提供更细致和定性的基础。
{"title":"The centre of gravity concept: contemporary theories, comparison, and implications","authors":"E. L. Meyer","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2030715","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2030715","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article applies grounded theory and epistemological, teleological, ontological, and methodological (ETOM) lenses to describe the prevalent contemporary theories of the centre of gravity concept, originated by Carl von Clausewitz. These include the theories of John Warden, Joe Strange & Richard Iron, Antulio Echevarria II, Milan Vego, Dale Eikmeier, and Jacob Barfoed. The article then compares the theories across 14 deduced theoretical aspects and produces a comparison matrix, that can be used as an analytical tool, and discusses implications as guidance for further research and doctrine development. The article argues that the term “centre of gravity” is polluted, and that the application of the term in military planning and doctrines requires careful attention to the specific theory being applied, so that logical consistency and clear, accurate communication is achieved. Alternatively, the concept may be removed from doctrine altogether, renovated with inclusion of a new unpolluted term, or reconstructed with removal of the centre of gravity, leaving a “critical factor analysis” concept behind. This article also provides a level of granularity to the debate about the concept, that renders critics like Paparone & Davis Jr and Zweibelson partly irrelevant and can provide a more nuanced and qualitative basis for future discussion.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"327 - 353"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48660842","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-25DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2030712
Nicole Stoelinga
ABSTRACT In a time of rising threat, recurring discussions about burden sharing within NATO and twenty years after the start of the “war on terrorism,” I explore a novel idea in the field of alliance and defense spending: the effect of alliance membership on defense spending in response to a threat. Instead of estimating the determinants of defense spending or burden sharing among members, this paper focuses on two types of states (small and large) and how alliance membership shapes their response to threat. Using the synthetic control method, I create a comparison unit for each type consisting of a weighted average of non-NATO, European countries. 2001 is considered as the starting year of widespread threat, caused by a sudden increase in transnational terrorism. This way, I can estimate the “alliance effect.” I find that both types of states have stronger (positive) response to threat as NATO members, compared to if they would not have been part of the alliance.
{"title":"Estimating the alliance effect: a synthetic control approach","authors":"Nicole Stoelinga","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2030712","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2030712","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In a time of rising threat, recurring discussions about burden sharing within NATO and twenty years after the start of the “war on terrorism,” I explore a novel idea in the field of alliance and defense spending: the effect of alliance membership on defense spending in response to a threat. Instead of estimating the determinants of defense spending or burden sharing among members, this paper focuses on two types of states (small and large) and how alliance membership shapes their response to threat. Using the synthetic control method, I create a comparison unit for each type consisting of a weighted average of non-NATO, European countries. 2001 is considered as the starting year of widespread threat, caused by a sudden increase in transnational terrorism. This way, I can estimate the “alliance effect.” I find that both types of states have stronger (positive) response to threat as NATO members, compared to if they would not have been part of the alliance.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"277 - 294"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49543020","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-21DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2030714
I. Muradov
ABSTRACT The term “Hybrid Warfare” has been defined and redefined in multiple diverse manners in the past two decades. Conventionally the concept of Hybrid Wars referred to a combination of regular and irregular forces to obtain synergy on the battlespace. However, following the Russian annexation of Crimea and the destabilization of Eastern Ukraine, the Western community has revisited the definition of Hybrid Wars and reconceptualized it. Interestingly, this term is approached by Russia and the West in quite a different style, as per their own purpose, i.e Russia claims to be a victim of Hybrid Wards waged by the West. This research investigates the philosophy of the two mentioned versions of Hybrid Warfare and finds both irrelevant to comprehend Russia’s wars in the post-Soviet geography. Instead, it suggests to retreat to the original definition of hybrid warfare, in the context of Ukraine and Georgia cases and thereby argues that Russia performs hybrid warfare to restrict foreign policy maneuverabilities of the former Soviet republics.
{"title":"The Russian hybrid warfare: the cases of Ukraine and Georgia","authors":"I. Muradov","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2030714","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2030714","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The term “Hybrid Warfare” has been defined and redefined in multiple diverse manners in the past two decades. Conventionally the concept of Hybrid Wars referred to a combination of regular and irregular forces to obtain synergy on the battlespace. However, following the Russian annexation of Crimea and the destabilization of Eastern Ukraine, the Western community has revisited the definition of Hybrid Wars and reconceptualized it. Interestingly, this term is approached by Russia and the West in quite a different style, as per their own purpose, i.e Russia claims to be a victim of Hybrid Wards waged by the West. This research investigates the philosophy of the two mentioned versions of Hybrid Warfare and finds both irrelevant to comprehend Russia’s wars in the post-Soviet geography. Instead, it suggests to retreat to the original definition of hybrid warfare, in the context of Ukraine and Georgia cases and thereby argues that Russia performs hybrid warfare to restrict foreign policy maneuverabilities of the former Soviet republics.","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"168 - 191"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43116208","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-17DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2022.2028549
A. Barrinha
{"title":"Bitskrieg: the new challenge of cyberwarfare","authors":"A. Barrinha","doi":"10.1080/14702436.2022.2028549","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2022.2028549","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35155,"journal":{"name":"Defence Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"297 - 298"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41736883","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：