Pub Date : 2022-09-26DOI: 10.1080/01402390.2022.2127090
A. Maire, O. Schmitt
Abstract French civil-military relations under the 5th Republic are marked by the imposing figure of the President, because of their role in nuclear deterrence. In that context, the role of the ministry of defence in general, and of its leader (the minister) in particular, is ambiguous: the minister is technically not the highest authority in charge of defence issues (since both the Prime Minister and the President are constitutionally tasked with important responsibilities in the defence realm), but they nevertheless need to find a role between the presidential guidelines and the military demands. In this article, we show that civil-military relations within the French ministry of Defence are therefore characterized by an “unstable equilibrium”: the history of the French MoD is rife with regular swings between the primacy of the military or the primacy of civilians. Overall, the French MoD has adopted a model civil-military relations which is structurally unstable, due to the shifting legitimacy of the military elite within the French bureaucracy and the importance of the personality of the political and military actors involved: without fundamentally altering bureaucratic rules and organization, the power balance between civilian and military actors can quickly evolve. To a degree, this shows the plasticity of French civil-military relations and its ability to adapt to the actors involved, especially the President.
{"title":"An unstable equilibrium: Civil-military relations within the French Ministry of Defence","authors":"A. Maire, O. Schmitt","doi":"10.1080/01402390.2022.2127090","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2022.2127090","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract French civil-military relations under the 5th Republic are marked by the imposing figure of the President, because of their role in nuclear deterrence. In that context, the role of the ministry of defence in general, and of its leader (the minister) in particular, is ambiguous: the minister is technically not the highest authority in charge of defence issues (since both the Prime Minister and the President are constitutionally tasked with important responsibilities in the defence realm), but they nevertheless need to find a role between the presidential guidelines and the military demands. In this article, we show that civil-military relations within the French ministry of Defence are therefore characterized by an “unstable equilibrium”: the history of the French MoD is rife with regular swings between the primacy of the military or the primacy of civilians. Overall, the French MoD has adopted a model civil-military relations which is structurally unstable, due to the shifting legitimacy of the military elite within the French bureaucracy and the importance of the personality of the political and military actors involved: without fundamentally altering bureaucratic rules and organization, the power balance between civilian and military actors can quickly evolve. To a degree, this shows the plasticity of French civil-military relations and its ability to adapt to the actors involved, especially the President.","PeriodicalId":47240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strategic Studies","volume":"117 1","pages":"798 - 819"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2022-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77982904","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-12DOI: 10.1080/01402390.2022.2118115
A. Mukherjee
ABSTRACT This article analyses India’s Ministry of Defence and its influence on civil-military relations. It argues that, until very recently, the strategic intent of the defence ministry has primarily focused on civilian control over the military. The resultant institutional structure of civilian control compromised the effectiveness of the Indian military. This was due to several features of the country’s model of civilian control, including a lack of civilian expertise, bureaucratic procedures underlying civil-military interactions as well as military autonomy. Acknowledging these problems, the government has currently embarked on reforms to maximize military power. It is doing so mainly by infusing military expertise at the ministerial level. However, this may upend the civil-military dynamic in India and the success of this initiative remains to be seen. Conceptually, this article examines a possibly pernicious effect of a civilian dominated ministry and highlights the importance of expertise in enhancing both control and military effectiveness.
{"title":"Towards control and effectiveness: The Ministry of Defence and civil-military relations in India","authors":"A. Mukherjee","doi":"10.1080/01402390.2022.2118115","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2022.2118115","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article analyses India’s Ministry of Defence and its influence on civil-military relations. It argues that, until very recently, the strategic intent of the defence ministry has primarily focused on civilian control over the military. The resultant institutional structure of civilian control compromised the effectiveness of the Indian military. This was due to several features of the country’s model of civilian control, including a lack of civilian expertise, bureaucratic procedures underlying civil-military interactions as well as military autonomy. Acknowledging these problems, the government has currently embarked on reforms to maximize military power. It is doing so mainly by infusing military expertise at the ministerial level. However, this may upend the civil-military dynamic in India and the success of this initiative remains to be seen. Conceptually, this article examines a possibly pernicious effect of a civilian dominated ministry and highlights the importance of expertise in enhancing both control and military effectiveness.","PeriodicalId":47240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strategic Studies","volume":"74 1","pages":"820 - 842"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2022-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74161627","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-10DOI: 10.1080/01402390.2022.2104254
Itamar Lifshitz, Erez Seri-Levy
ABSTRACT What started as opportunistic operations has gradually given rise to Israel’s prevailing military doctrine of Inter-War Campaigns (IWC). This article provides a comprehensive analysis of a phenomenon that has shaped conflicts in the Middle East, one that has been overlooked in the literature. The IWC utilises advantageous conditions to formulate continuous military campaigns below the threshold of severe conflict. This article argues that the IWC creates and manages limited competitive conflicts intended to mitigate adversaries’ force buildup in preparation for war. It provides the first account of the doctrine’s development, analyses its enabling factors, and discusses its degree of success.
{"title":"Israel’s inter-war campaigns doctrine: From opportunism to principle","authors":"Itamar Lifshitz, Erez Seri-Levy","doi":"10.1080/01402390.2022.2104254","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2022.2104254","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT What started as opportunistic operations has gradually given rise to Israel’s prevailing military doctrine of Inter-War Campaigns (IWC). This article provides a comprehensive analysis of a phenomenon that has shaped conflicts in the Middle East, one that has been overlooked in the literature. The IWC utilises advantageous conditions to formulate continuous military campaigns below the threshold of severe conflict. This article argues that the IWC creates and manages limited competitive conflicts intended to mitigate adversaries’ force buildup in preparation for war. It provides the first account of the doctrine’s development, analyses its enabling factors, and discusses its degree of success.","PeriodicalId":47240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strategic Studies","volume":"65 1","pages":"293 - 318"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2022-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84763178","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-04DOI: 10.53532/ss.042.01.00153
Farhan Hanif Siddiqi Associate Professor
Pakistan finds itself at the horns of a strategic dilemma as the US-China rivalry intensifies in international politics. At the heart of the dilemma is the spectre of choosing between the US and China which has the intended effect of raising costs for Pakistan’s foreign policy. Recent commentaries on Pakistan’s foreign policy advocate the need for Pakistan to strike a balance between China and the US. In contradistinction to such commentaries, the present article makes a more nuanced case for the ‘hedging’ strategy. Hedging involves policies that advocate a mixture of return-maximization and risk-contingency planning that circumvents the dominance of major powers. The article argues that Pakistan’s hedging strategy necessitates the avoidance of binaries in international politics, domestic political stability and the prioritization of economic gains.
{"title":"US Indo-Pacific Strategy and Pakistan’s Foreign Policy: The Hedging Option","authors":"Farhan Hanif Siddiqi Associate Professor","doi":"10.53532/ss.042.01.00153","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53532/ss.042.01.00153","url":null,"abstract":"Pakistan finds itself at the horns of a strategic dilemma as the US-China rivalry intensifies in international politics. At the heart of the dilemma is the spectre of choosing between the US and China which has the intended effect of raising costs for Pakistan’s foreign policy. Recent commentaries on Pakistan’s foreign policy advocate the need for Pakistan to strike a balance between China and the US. In contradistinction to such commentaries, the present article makes a more nuanced case for the ‘hedging’ strategy. Hedging involves policies that advocate a mixture of return-maximization and risk-contingency planning that circumvents the dominance of major powers. The article argues that Pakistan’s hedging strategy necessitates the avoidance of binaries in international politics, domestic political stability and the prioritization of economic gains.","PeriodicalId":47240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strategic Studies","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2022-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75422717","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Taliban takeover of Kabul is a significant regional development having domestic, regional and global implications. Regarding the recognition of the new Taliban government; recently announced, the important states of the international community are responding with caution based on their strategic calculations, political values and long-term foreign policy goals in the regions adjoining Afghanistan. The states having stakes in Afghanistan are mainly divided in two groups: The US led group and the China-Russia led group of states. The US led group has advocated that the conduct of the Taliban on fundamental human rights, their commitment of forming an inclusive government and their detachment from international terrorist networks will be taken in consideration for deciding on the question of recognition and determining the nature of engagement with Afghanistan. The China-Russia group, is more in favor of regional stability and interested in filling the strategic vacuum left in Afghanistan by the US and its allies. The regional states are realigning themselves, with either of the major group, to respond to the unfolding situation in Afghanistan. Based on the conceptual framework of recognition of new governments in International Law and International Relations, this paper attempts to analyze the responses and concerns of the diverse international community vis-à-vis the newly formed Taliban government in Afghanistan.
{"title":"Recognition of the Taliban Government in Afghanistan","authors":"Muhammad Faheem, Minhas Majeed Khan","doi":"10.53532/ss.042.01.0014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53532/ss.042.01.0014","url":null,"abstract":"The Taliban takeover of Kabul is a significant regional development having domestic, regional and global implications. Regarding the recognition of the new Taliban government; recently announced, the important states of the international community are responding with caution based on their strategic calculations, political values and long-term foreign policy goals in the regions adjoining Afghanistan. The states having stakes in Afghanistan are mainly divided in two groups: The US led group and the China-Russia led group of states. The US led group has advocated that the conduct of the Taliban on fundamental human rights, their commitment of forming an inclusive government and their detachment from international terrorist networks will be taken in consideration for deciding on the question of recognition and determining the nature of engagement with Afghanistan. The China-Russia group, is more in favor of regional stability and interested in filling the strategic vacuum left in Afghanistan by the US and its allies. The regional states are realigning themselves, with either of the major group, to respond to the unfolding situation in Afghanistan. Based on the conceptual framework of recognition of new governments in International Law and International Relations, this paper attempts to analyze the responses and concerns of the diverse international community vis-à-vis the newly formed Taliban government in Afghanistan.","PeriodicalId":47240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strategic Studies","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2022-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90242178","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-04DOI: 10.53532/ss.042.01.00134
Muhammad Nadeem Mirza, Muhammad Shahzad Akram
This qualitative exploratory and embedded case study deliberates the nature of 3-Cs – cybercrime, cyber-terrorism, cyber warfare – against Pakistan. What are the three Cs and how are they impacting the state and society in Pakistan. How Pakistan has been dealing with these threats related to its cyberspace. While taking cue from cyber realism – which provides the basic lens to conduct this research – this study notes that states and state-sponsored individuals, groups, and organisations remain the main actors in the cyberspace who are active against each other. The perception that the cyberspace has diminished the role of state is an exaggeration. States still are the most important actors in the cyber world order animated by the typical great power politics. Pakistan remained a prime target of the cybercrimes, cyber-terrorism, and cyber warfare launched by the regional and extra-regional states. Though, it has implemented Prevention of Electronic Crime Act (PECA) and passed National Cyber Policy, yet it still has to go a long way in order to protect itself against the 3-Cs of the cyberspace. Adopting a proactive strategy to counter these threats prematurely is still a far-fetched cry for Pakistan.
{"title":"3-Cs of Cyberspace and Pakistan: Cybercrime, Cyber-Terrorism, and Cyber Warfare","authors":"Muhammad Nadeem Mirza, Muhammad Shahzad Akram","doi":"10.53532/ss.042.01.00134","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53532/ss.042.01.00134","url":null,"abstract":"This qualitative exploratory and embedded case study deliberates the nature of 3-Cs – cybercrime, cyber-terrorism, cyber warfare – against Pakistan. What are the three Cs and how are they impacting the state and society in Pakistan. How Pakistan has been dealing with these threats related to its cyberspace. While taking cue from cyber realism – which provides the basic lens to conduct this research – this study notes that states and state-sponsored individuals, groups, and organisations remain the main actors in the cyberspace who are active against each other. The perception that the cyberspace has diminished the role of state is an exaggeration. States still are the most important actors in the cyber world order animated by the typical great power politics. Pakistan remained a prime target of the cybercrimes, cyber-terrorism, and cyber warfare launched by the regional and extra-regional states. Though, it has implemented Prevention of Electronic Crime Act (PECA) and passed National Cyber Policy, yet it still has to go a long way in order to protect itself against the 3-Cs of the cyberspace. Adopting a proactive strategy to counter these threats prematurely is still a far-fetched cry for Pakistan.","PeriodicalId":47240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strategic Studies","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2022-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88440066","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-04DOI: 10.53532/ss.042.01.00131
Salma Malik Assistant Professor
South Asian nuclear tests in summer of 1998, heralded a new chapter in the pervasive & deeply rooted sub-continental cold war, bringing forth the sobering realization that given geographical proximity and an inherent risk of tension escalation, there is a need to implement safeguards against incidental or accidental nuclear weapons usage, as well as avoidance of brinksmanship. Resultantly, Lahore MoU of 1999, and later the comprehensive dialogue process (2004), were positive steps initiated to institutionalize nuclear restraint measures. However, given the checkered history of bilateral relations, after making initial progression, this critical track like all other tracks of dialogue also faced a setback. Further exacerbated by populist ultra nationalist rhetoric and anti-Pakistan hate mongering of the Saffron regime in India under Narendra Modi. The recent Indian missile incident, trivialized as a mere accident is latest in the series of such episodes, that breaches mutual nuclear restraint protocols, as such actions carry the risk of inadvertent war under the nuclear shadow. Given the nature of relations between the two neighbours, these “accidents” can very well be misperceived or considered an intentional and deliberate misadventure, which can lead not only to tension escalation, but a nuclear crisis with grim consequences. This paper would appraise the often overlooked yet established nuclear restraint protocols between the two countries, seeking the fundamental question, whether after quarter of century, the South Asia neighbours fully understand the consequence of using nuclear weapons as elements of political currency. Can this incident be used as a positive turning point in helping usher a viable risk reduction regime between the two adversaries or the region is destined to gradually slide up the escalation ladder to an eventual catastrophe.
{"title":"99 seconds to Midnight: A Case for Institutionalizing Nuclear Risk Reduction Measures in South Asia","authors":"Salma Malik Assistant Professor","doi":"10.53532/ss.042.01.00131","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53532/ss.042.01.00131","url":null,"abstract":"South Asian nuclear tests in summer of 1998, heralded a new chapter in the pervasive & deeply rooted sub-continental cold war, bringing forth the sobering realization that given geographical proximity and an inherent risk of tension escalation, there is a need to implement safeguards against incidental or accidental nuclear weapons usage, as well as avoidance of brinksmanship. Resultantly, Lahore MoU of 1999, and later the comprehensive dialogue process (2004), were positive steps initiated to institutionalize nuclear restraint measures. However, given the checkered history of bilateral relations, after making initial progression, this critical track like all other tracks of dialogue also faced a setback. Further exacerbated by populist ultra nationalist rhetoric and anti-Pakistan hate mongering of the Saffron regime in India under Narendra Modi. The recent Indian missile incident, trivialized as a mere accident is latest in the series of such episodes, that breaches mutual nuclear restraint protocols, as such actions carry the risk of inadvertent war under the nuclear shadow. Given the nature of relations between the two neighbours, these “accidents” can very well be misperceived or considered an intentional and deliberate misadventure, which can lead not only to tension escalation, but a nuclear crisis with grim consequences. This paper would appraise the often overlooked yet established nuclear restraint protocols between the two countries, seeking the fundamental question, whether after quarter of century, the South Asia neighbours fully understand the consequence of using nuclear weapons as elements of political currency. Can this incident be used as a positive turning point in helping usher a viable risk reduction regime between the two adversaries or the region is destined to gradually slide up the escalation ladder to an eventual catastrophe.","PeriodicalId":47240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strategic Studies","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2022-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74898745","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Almas Haider Naqvi, Dr. Syed Qandil Abbas Assistant Professor
This paper is an attempt to analyse the Soviet and Post-Soviet Russian policy responses towards the South Asia particularly India and Pakistan contextualising how the systemic pressures stimulated from balance of power and intervened by domestic factors specifically ideology and leaders’ images played important role in policy formulation and execution. Majority explanations of Soviet-Russian South Asian policy do not offer analysis of inside-out interactions. Incorporation of domestic factors in analysis would provide better explanation of Soviet-Russian policy and the key developments in South Asia. Soft-positivist methodology with qualitative and quantitative methods are employed to analyse data from primary and secondary sources. The paper categorises four distinct phases of Russian South Asia policy responses; Estrangement (1947-1953), Engagement (1954-1971), Indo-Centrality (1971-1991), Pragmatism (1991-2022) stimulated by systemic and intervened by domestic factors. Balancing and competition with the United States (US) and China primarily motivates Soviet Union to shape policy but ideology, leaders’ perceptions and images also influenced.
{"title":"Russian South Asia Policy: From Estrangement to Pragmatism","authors":"Almas Haider Naqvi, Dr. Syed Qandil Abbas Assistant Professor","doi":"10.53532/ss.042.01.0011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53532/ss.042.01.0011","url":null,"abstract":"This paper is an attempt to analyse the Soviet and Post-Soviet Russian policy responses towards the South Asia particularly India and Pakistan contextualising how the systemic pressures stimulated from balance of power and intervened by domestic factors specifically ideology and leaders’ images played important role in policy formulation and execution. Majority explanations of Soviet-Russian South Asian policy do not offer analysis of inside-out interactions. Incorporation of domestic factors in analysis would provide better explanation of Soviet-Russian policy and the key developments in South Asia. Soft-positivist methodology with qualitative and quantitative methods are employed to analyse data from primary and secondary sources. The paper categorises four distinct phases of Russian South Asia policy responses; Estrangement (1947-1953), Engagement (1954-1971), Indo-Centrality (1971-1991), Pragmatism (1991-2022) stimulated by systemic and intervened by domestic factors. Balancing and competition with the United States (US) and China primarily motivates Soviet Union to shape policy but ideology, leaders’ perceptions and images also influenced.","PeriodicalId":47240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strategic Studies","volume":"68 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2022-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81096712","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-04DOI: 10.53532/ss.042.01.00138
Victoria Schofield Independentwriter
Since 1947 the expectation that the fate of the disputed former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir would be decided by a plebiscite has been part of the narrative of the state’s history. Seventy-five years later, the plebiscite has never been held, the state remaining de facto divided between India and Pakistan, both accusing each other of illegally occupying the territory the other controls, while a significant proportion of the inhabitants of the state maintain that they have never been allowed their ‘right of self-determination.’[1] This paper examines the reasoning behind holding a plebiscite, the challenges of holding a unitary plebiscite in a state where the inhabitants of the major regions of the state have differing allegiances and aspirations and the reasons why the plebiscite was not held. It also explains why successive governments of Pakistan have clung to the notion of holding a plebiscite, whereas successive Indian governments have long since decided that a plebiscite is no longer necessary. Finally this paper will examine whether, in a changed demographic environment, with the state de facto divided for over half the time it was ever a united administrative unit, the holding of a plebiscite would resolve the issue or whether it would create more disaffection among disappointed minorities. [1] Pakistani maps and rhetoric describe the area of the state occupied by India as ‘illegally occupied disputed territory’; Indian maps describe the area of the state occupied by Pakistan as ‘Pakistan Occupied Kashmir’ (POK).
{"title":"Plebiscite Conundrum in Jammu and Kashmir","authors":"Victoria Schofield Independentwriter","doi":"10.53532/ss.042.01.00138","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53532/ss.042.01.00138","url":null,"abstract":"Since 1947 the expectation that the fate of the disputed former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir would be decided by a plebiscite has been part of the narrative of the state’s history. Seventy-five years later, the plebiscite has never been held, the state remaining de facto divided between India and Pakistan, both accusing each other of illegally occupying the territory the other controls, while a significant proportion of the inhabitants of the state maintain that they have never been allowed their ‘right of self-determination.’[1] This paper examines the reasoning behind holding a plebiscite, the challenges of holding a unitary plebiscite in a state where the inhabitants of the major regions of the state have differing allegiances and aspirations and the reasons why the plebiscite was not held. It also explains why successive governments of Pakistan have clung to the notion of holding a plebiscite, whereas successive Indian governments have long since decided that a plebiscite is no longer necessary. Finally this paper will examine whether, in a changed demographic environment, with the state de facto divided for over half the time it was ever a united administrative unit, the holding of a plebiscite would resolve the issue or whether it would create more disaffection among disappointed minorities. \u0000 \u0000[1] Pakistani maps and rhetoric describe the area of the state occupied by India as ‘illegally occupied disputed territory’; Indian maps describe the area of the state occupied by Pakistan as ‘Pakistan Occupied Kashmir’ (POK).","PeriodicalId":47240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strategic Studies","volume":"44 3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2022-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82702358","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-31DOI: 10.1080/01402390.2022.2104836
Woody Wu
ABSTRACT This article sheds new light on how the war on the Yangtze became integrated into the broader Allied war effort and contributed to the collapse of the Japanese wartime economy. From 1940 to 1945, the Sino-Japanese conflict on the Yangtze, while influenced by developments in other theatres, remained at the core of Kuomintang’s concerns and strategy. The fall of Yichang caused severe economic and strategic difficulties in Free China. Assisted by the US, the Chinese forces repelled the Japanese expansion in West Hubei. Moreover, the Sino-US aerial interdictions on the Yangtze halted iron ore shipment essential to the Japanese economy.
{"title":"The Yangtze and the Sino-US cooperation in World War II, 1940–1945","authors":"Woody Wu","doi":"10.1080/01402390.2022.2104836","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2022.2104836","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article sheds new light on how the war on the Yangtze became integrated into the broader Allied war effort and contributed to the collapse of the Japanese wartime economy. From 1940 to 1945, the Sino-Japanese conflict on the Yangtze, while influenced by developments in other theatres, remained at the core of Kuomintang’s concerns and strategy. The fall of Yichang caused severe economic and strategic difficulties in Free China. Assisted by the US, the Chinese forces repelled the Japanese expansion in West Hubei. Moreover, the Sino-US aerial interdictions on the Yangtze halted iron ore shipment essential to the Japanese economy.","PeriodicalId":47240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strategic Studies","volume":"42 1","pages":"949 - 976"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2022-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91197538","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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：