Suchergebnisse

Why do some near crises tip over into full-blown crisis and others do not? This paper considers existing scholarship and identifies four key barriers to using quantitative analysis for tipping-point analyses: strategic indeterminacy; the incentives for conflict parties to avoid inefficiencies; the paucity of cases; and the availability of quality data. Due to these challenges, many do not perform well as immediate causes for crisis escalation. We also argue and demonstrate through two quantitative models of crisis escalation that some variables, particularly related to domestic politics, can do well in explaining why some disputes tip into crisis and others do not. As we illustrate with reference to the 1995–1996 Third Taiwan Straits Crisis, qualitative approaches that analyze the processes by which leaders and foreign policy institutions make decisions add needed explanatory power to purely quantitative models of the potential for near crises to tip into crisis.

How do drones affect escalation dynamics? The emerging consensus from scholarship on drones highlights increased conflict initiation when drones allow decisionmakers to avoid the risks of deploying inhabited platforms, but far less attention has been paid to understanding how drones affect conflict escalation. Limited theorization and empirical testing have left debates unresolved. I unpack the underlying mechanisms influencing escalation decisions involving drones by proposing a logic of remote-controlled restraint: drones limit escalation in ways not possible when inhabited assets are used. To test this logic and explore its instrumental and emotional microfoundations, I field "comparative wargames." I immerse national security professionals in crisis scenarios that vary whether a drone or inhabited aircraft is shot down. I validate wargame findings using a survey experiment. The wargames shed light on the microfoundations of escalation, highlight limits of existing theories, and demonstrate the utility of comparative wargaming as an IR research tool.

Migrant crisis which escalated in 2015 represents humanitarian and security challenge for European Union (EU) member states. Protection of the EU outer borders, as well as national one, has become priority task for all EU member states in order to preserve their political and cultural identity. This paper analyses the Croatian Navy (CN) capabilities in case of the migrant crisis escalation at sea, in order to protect national waters. The expected effect is to indicate that, considering their capabilities and experience, the Croatian Navy is capable of fulfilling the mission. Authors of the article investigated potential security threats in the area of responsibility of the Croatian Navy. This paper presents the possibility of an efficient response to possible challenges.

Migrant crisis which escalated in 2015 represents humanitarian and security challenge for European Union (EU) member states. Protection of the EU outer borders, as well as national one, has become priority task for all EU member states in order to preserve their political and cultural identity. This paper analyses the Croatian Navy (CN) capabilities in case of the migrant crisis escalation at sea, in order to protect national waters. The expected effect is to indicate that, considering their capabilities and experience, the Croatian Navy is capable of fulfilling the mission. Authors of the article investigated potential security threats in the area of responsibility of the Croatian Navy. This paper presents the possibility of an efficient response to possible challenges.

Narratives provide the storylines of conflict and in doing so become an arena of conflict themselves. When states mount information campaigns against each other, they are trying to change the narrative. The digital platforms of the new information environment have been identified by various analysts as a significant factor in contemporary strategy and crisis management. But while social media is noisier and more chaotic than traditional media, and unprecedented in its immediacy and accessibility, has it thus far been a game changer in strategic affairs? In this Adelphi book, Sir Lawrence Freedman and Heather Williams examine the impact of state-led digital information - or disinformation - campaigns in four contexts: the India-Pakistan crisis over Kashmir in 2019; the heightened tensions between the United States and Iran following the assassination of Qasem Soleimani in 2020; China's messaging in response to the COVID-19 pandemic from 2020-22; and the Russia-Ukraine crisis from 2013-23. While noting the meaningful consequences of digital information campaigns, in each case the authors call for a sense of perspective. Such campaigns are only one aspect of wider political struggles. They are also difficult for their initiators to control, and less likely to influence foreign audiences than domestic ones. Overall, the authors argue, there is little evidence so far to suggest such campaigns will have as much influence over contemporary crises as the classical instruments of military and economic power.

This study uses a visualization technique, systemism, to integrate ICB Project findings about crisis, escalation and war in particular. The domain of the analysis, 1999–2017, is the period following the authoritative review of research in Michael Brecher (1999; International studies in the twentieth century and beyond: Flawed dichotomies, syntheses, cumulation, International Studies Quarterly 43: 213–264) up to the present. Systemism is used to combine, in graphic form, substantively significant results from ICB Project research. Insights about cause and effect for escalation processes are obtained that would not readily be available in the absence of graphic representation. This learning is made possible through application of systemism, a visualization technique, to convey a network of variables leading into war.