The uses and limits of small-scale military interventions /

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Imprint:Santa Monica, CA : RAND, 2012.
Description:xxviii, 129 p. : ill. (chiefly col.) ; 23 cm.
Language:English
Series:RAND Corporation monograph series
Rand Corporation monograph series.
Subject:
Format: Print Book
URL for this record:http://pi.lib.uchicago.edu/1001/cat/bib/8939881
Hidden Bibliographic Details
Other authors / contributors:Watts, Stephen (Stephen Baldwin)
Arroyo Center.
ISBN:9780833076533 (pbk. : alk. paper)
0833076531 (pbk. : alk. paper)
Notes:"MG-1226-RC"--P. [4] of cover.
"Arroyo Center"
Includes bibliographical references (p. 113-129)
Summary:"The authors assess the utility and limitations of "minimalist stabilization" -- small-scale interventions designed to stabilize a partner government engaged in violent conflict. They propose policy recommendations concerning when minimalist stabilization missions may be appropriate and the strategies most likely to make such interventions successful, as well as the implications for U.S. Army force structure debates and partnership strategies. Minimalist stabilization missions do not significantly increase a partner government's odds of victory in a counterinsurgency campaign, but they do dramatically reduce the probability of defeat. Minimalist stabilization typically yields operational successes that degrade rebel capabilities and make it unlikely that the insurgents can topple the government. Such missions typically do not, however, alter the underlying structure of the conflict. They usually do not help foster significant political reforms in the partner government. Nor are they typically able to cut insurgents off from their resource bases. These dynamics suggest that the operational gains attributable to minimalist stabilization can usually be converted into strategic success only if the underlying political or international structure of the conflict can be altered. Military power plays a role, but the infrequency of victory suggests that the role of force is more about creating the framework within which a political process can operate successfully rather than winning per se. These findings do not yield simple policy prescriptions. These findings do, however, caution against viewing minimalist stabilization as a panacea. Modest resource commitments generally yield modest results. In some circumstances, such modest results will be adequate to secure important U.S. interests. In other cases they will not, and in some cases the under-resourcing of interventions may have catastrophic results."--P. [4] of cover.

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a2200000 a 4500
001 8939881
003 ICU
005 20200918142300.9
008 120917s2012 caua b 000 0 eng
010 |a 2012036806 
020 |a 9780833076533 (pbk. : alk. paper) 
020 |a 0833076531 (pbk. : alk. paper) 
035 |a (OCoLC)811137286 
040 |a DLC  |b eng  |c DLC  |d YDX  |d OCLCO  |d YDXCP  |d BTCTA  |d OUN  |d COD 
043 |a n-us--- 
049 |a CGUA 
050 0 0 |a UA11.5  |b .U73 2012 
082 0 0 |a 355.02/15  |2 23 
245 0 4 |a The uses and limits of small-scale military interventions /  |c prepared for the United States Army ; Stephen Watts ... [et al.]. 
260 |a Santa Monica, CA :  |b RAND,  |c 2012. 
300 |a xxviii, 129 p. :  |b ill. (chiefly col.) ;  |c 23 cm. 
336 |a text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent  |0 http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/contentTypes/txt 
337 |a unmediated  |b n  |2 rdamedia  |0 http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/mediaTypes/n 
338 |a volume  |b nc  |2 rdacarrier  |0 http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/carriers/nc 
490 1 |a RAND Corporation monograph series 
500 |a "MG-1226-RC"--P. [4] of cover. 
500 |a "Arroyo Center" 
504 |a Includes bibliographical references (p. 113-129) 
505 2 |a Introduction -- Arguments for and against minimalist stabilization -- Overview of the results of minimalist stabilization -- Case studies -- Conclusion -- Cases and coding notes. 
520 |a "The authors assess the utility and limitations of "minimalist stabilization" -- small-scale interventions designed to stabilize a partner government engaged in violent conflict. They propose policy recommendations concerning when minimalist stabilization missions may be appropriate and the strategies most likely to make such interventions successful, as well as the implications for U.S. Army force structure debates and partnership strategies. Minimalist stabilization missions do not significantly increase a partner government's odds of victory in a counterinsurgency campaign, but they do dramatically reduce the probability of defeat. Minimalist stabilization typically yields operational successes that degrade rebel capabilities and make it unlikely that the insurgents can topple the government. Such missions typically do not, however, alter the underlying structure of the conflict. They usually do not help foster significant political reforms in the partner government. Nor are they typically able to cut insurgents off from their resource bases. These dynamics suggest that the operational gains attributable to minimalist stabilization can usually be converted into strategic success only if the underlying political or international structure of the conflict can be altered. Military power plays a role, but the infrequency of victory suggests that the role of force is more about creating the framework within which a political process can operate successfully rather than winning per se. These findings do not yield simple policy prescriptions. These findings do, however, caution against viewing minimalist stabilization as a panacea. Modest resource commitments generally yield modest results. In some circumstances, such modest results will be adequate to secure important U.S. interests. In other cases they will not, and in some cases the under-resourcing of interventions may have catastrophic results."--P. [4] of cover. 
630 0 0 |a MG (Rand Corporation)  |v MG-1226-RC. 
650 0 |a Limited war  |v Case studies. 
650 0 |a Intervention (International law)  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85067543 
650 0 |a Counterinsurgency  |v Case studies. 
650 0 |a Military assistance  |v Case studies. 
650 7 |a Counterinsurgency.  |2 fast  |0 http://id.worldcat.org/fast/fst00881325 
650 7 |a Intervention (International law)  |2 fast  |0 http://id.worldcat.org/fast/fst00977583 
650 7 |a Limited war.  |2 fast  |0 http://id.worldcat.org/fast/fst00998918 
650 7 |a Military assistance.  |2 fast  |0 http://id.worldcat.org/fast/fst01020929 
651 0 |a United States  |x Armed Forces  |x Stability operations  |x Evaluation. 
651 7 |a United States.  |2 fast  |0 http://id.worldcat.org/fast/fst01204155 
655 7 |a Case studies.  |2 fast  |0 http://id.worldcat.org/fast/fst01423765 
700 1 |a Watts, Stephen  |q (Stephen Baldwin)  |1 http://viaf.org/viaf/266033507  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n2012062548 
710 2 |a Arroyo Center.  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n93002955  |1 http://viaf.org/viaf/152980982 
830 0 |a Rand Corporation monograph series.  |0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/no2008057654 
903 |a HeVa 
903 |a HeVa 
929 |a cat 
999 f f |i 20fe24f9-0ad8-53df-856e-76c362c013be  |s bd3dcb9e-064f-59fe-96b4-a7fa8b5398c7 
928 |t Library of Congress classification  |a UA11.5 .U73 2012  |l JRL  |c JRL-Gen  |i 1074731 
927 |t Library of Congress classification  |a UA11.5 .U73 2012  |l JRL  |c JRL-Gen  |b 107177061  |i 9109854