To influence and move foreign policy in the direction they desire international leaders have several tools available to them ranging from diplomatic interaction with other countries to the use of overt or covert military force. The United States is not the only country to use its military as a political instrument and all can use the military at various levels of force. This paper will review the levels of force options American political leaders have for the use of the military in accomplishing U. S. national strategy. Unconventional Warfare (UW) is one of the options available and because it is often misunderstood this paper will focus on the United States military’s definition of Unconventional Warfare (UW) and how it can be used to achieve U. S. international political goals.
Levels of Force
Use of the military as a political instrument can occur at different levels of force. The book International Politics on the World Stage, (Rourke, 2008) identifies five ways the military can be used at increasingly escalating levels. At the lowest level the military can be used as “an unmentioned but still present backdrop” (Rourke, 2008, p. 306) in an effort to influence diplomatic negotiations.
The next step is to make overt threats about using the military to persuade other countries to come around to our way of thinking such as when President Bush publicly announced in 2003 that Saddam Hussein and his sons needed to leave Iraq within a specified deadline or it would result in a conflict with the U. S. military (Rourke, 2008, p. 257).
Indirect and covert use of the military is the next step on Rourke’s escalating scale. This level allows the President to avoid committing the military to direct combat while allowing th...
... middle of paper ...
...tion (JP) 1. (2009). Doctrine for the Armed Forces of the United States. Washington, DC: Joint Chiefs of Staff
Joint Publication (JP) 3-05. (2011). Special Operations. Washington, DC: Joint Chiefs of Staff
Lewis, S. J. (1991) Jedburgh team operations in support of the 12th Army Group. Command and General Staff College, United States Army. Fort Leavenworth, KS. Retrieved from http://www.cgsc.edu/carl/resources/csi/Lewis/Lewis.asp.
Meernik, J. (1994). Presidential Decision Making and the Political Use of Military Force. International Studies Quarterly, 38(1), 121-138. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com. vlib.excelsior.edu/ehost/detail?vid=7&hid=125&sid=78dc81ad-fc6e-4ce4-86ff-97ca651e b83b%40sessionmgr112&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=a9h&AN=9406221171.
Rourke, J. T. (2008). International Politics on the World Stage. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Thesis. Air War College, 1987. http://www.airwar.edu//a>. Maxwell, Alabama: United States Air Force, 1987. DTIC Online -.
O'Shea, Brandon J. "ARMY.MIL, The Official Homepage of the United States Army." "OPERATION POWER PACK. N.p., 20 Apr. 2010. Web. 27 Feb. 2014.
During the past decade of military operations combating terrorism, members of the U.S. government have thoroughly debated the power of the President and the role of Congress during a time of war. A historical review of war powers in America demonstrates the unchecked power of the executive when it comes to military decision-making and the use of force. Throughout history the power of the President to initiate, conduct, and sustain military operations without oversight has greatly increased. Through a historical lens, this essay will analyze: the expanding role and use of power of the President; weak Congressional legislative policies that empower the executive; and the Supreme Court’s role legitimizing the autonomy of Presidential war making.
Williams, Charles F. "War Powers: A New Chapter in a Continuing Debate." Social Education. April 2003: 128-133. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 07 May. 2014.
Mingst, K. A. (2011). Essentials of international relations. (5th ed., p. 78). New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.
... of Staff, Joint Operations, Joint Publication 3-0 (Washington, DC: U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, 11 August 2011),III-10
My thinking, though perhaps idealistic, was that the maintenance of a large military during relative international tranquility is an overt admission of weakness and increases the likelihood of unnecessarily employing that force—it is contextually irrelevant. Instead, I propose that a strong and stable economy is the best metric of national prowess, for such an economy can resource many opportunities as they arise. On the contrary, a robust military has a much narrower utility. To be sure, this author is not one that intentionally seeks to take an interdisciplinary approach to academia, but the connection seems relevant given the nature of this assignment. Whereas a nation may accomplish a strategic goal through military force, a leader may accomplish a task relying upon coercive power; whereas a nation may transform and develop the world through its economic strength and versatility, a versatile leader may transform others through the employment of one or many leader development principles—both theoretically based and experientially acquired.
Maxwell, Hilary. “Warfare Plans of Countries.” Monta Vista High School, Cupertino. 26 Jan. 2014. Lecture.
American policy was conflicted on multiple fronts. There was a high-perceived threat, but the means devised to cope with it fell short o...
The military is tasked with the duty and responsibility of protecting the nation from external attacks and managing any attacks that may happen. Over the years, countries across the world have engaged in conflicts originating from differences in policies and invasion of privacy and unfair treatment of citizens in foreign countries. In...
The Strengths and Weaknesses of Joint Warfare Armed with numerous studies, and intensive public hearings, Congress mandated far-reaching changes in DOD organization and responsibilities under the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986. This landmark legislation significantly expanded the authority and responsibility of the chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff. Included in this expanded authority and responsibility was the requirement for the chairman to develop a doctrine for the joint employment of armed forces. As operations Urgent Fury, Just Cause, and Desert Storm have vividly demonstrated, the realities of armed conflict in today's world make the integration of individual service capabilities a matter of success or failure, life or death. Furthermore, the operation Desert One demonstrated the need for a strengthened Joint Warfare Doctrine and the consequent change in Joint Warfare Employment.
Current military leadership should comprehend the nature of war in which they are engaged within a given political frame in order to develop plans that are coherent with the desired political end state. According to Clausewitz, war is an act of politics that forces an enemy to comply with certain conditions or to destroy him through the use of violence. A nation determines its vital interests, which drives national strategy to obtain or protect those interests. A country achieves those goals though the execution of one of the four elements of power, which are diplomatic, informational, military and economical means. The use of military force...
I have organized this paper into five distinct sections; mission, task organization, capabilities, limitations, and finally the conclusion. After the reading and comprehension of this paper, you should have gained a basic understanding of the Special Forces (SF) Chemical Reconnaissance Detachments (CRD). The following paper is mixed with Unclassified (UCI) and For Official Use Only (FOUO) information. FOUO is annotated at the beginning of all For Official Use Only information, the rest of the paper is UCI. If you wish to share this information paper with others, please at a minimum; confirm identity of the person prior to providing (FM 380-5, 2000). For further handling instructions please refer to FM 380-5, or contact me, I will gladly answer all questions.
U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Doctrine for the Armed Forces of the United States, Joint Publication 1 (Washington DC: U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, March 25, 2013), V-17.
- - -, dir. “Air Force Special Operations Command.” The Official Web Site of the United Stated Air Force. U.S. Air Force, 20 Sept. 2011. Web. 9 Feb. 2012. .