War and Crisis Management (PDF)

**Lesson 1 10.09** **WAR AND CRISIS MANAGEMENT: THE ROLE OF DEFENSE IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS** ** ** **National defense: how it works** - National defense is the sum of people and means that the governing authority of a sovereign state has at its disposal in order to implement the use of force in its foreign and domestic policy - Armed forces are tied to the government through a department of public administration usually called the Ministry or Department of Defense or War - Defense -\> a functional tool for the pursuit of specific foreign policy objectives of a state. Armed forces are the means of military diplomacy. Forms of war - Concerns the actors involved in a conflict International war - Dyadic: between two states - Between coalitions of different states Civil wars - Partisan war: two parties compete in a situation of state dissolution/complete absence of a central authority (China 1945/1949 -\> civil war in China after the end of the Japanese invasion) - Internationalized civil war : the fighting parties aim at the secession and foundation of new statal entities -\> there is already an internationally recognized or "legitimate" government ruling the country against which the fighting parties are fighting Ways or fighting - Regular wars: fought in accordance with common rules and shared with specialized military apparatus - Irregular wars: use of unusual means (mercenaries, guerrilla, chemical, biological and cyber warfare) - Conventional wars: fought with traditional arms and means - Non-conventional wars: one or both parties rely on research and technological innovation to win - Wars of movement: WW2 (quick war, combined used of planes, tanks and infantry corps) - Wars of position: WW1 Goals of war - Conquest or reconquest - Liberation (or independence) - Dynastic or succession - Religious - Revolutionary - Defensive Dimensions and elements of war Main criteria: - Violence (measured by the number of the deaths) - Number of states/actors involved - Battlegrounds' geographical extension - Duration Armed Forces Armed forces are used 1. To wage war or to defend against attacks or a possible enemy 2. To exercise power in international relations States exercise their power and influence over other international actors though economic, political-diplomatic, informational and even military means Armed forces pursue or safeguard specific national interests through a series of "non-combat" uses such as - Bilateral or multilateral operational cooperation - Joint training activities with other states' armed forces Armed forces and defense of a sovereign state are an instrument of military diplomacy Characteristics of the armed forces Fundamental elements of the armed forces - The **hierarchical pyramidal structure**, consisting of **troops** divided into **units** and **sub-units** with a **commander** leading each unit and the **commanders of the subunits** part, up to a **commander-in-chief** of the entire army - Discipline and obedience to orders as core values to which all soldiers must adhere - Usually, the armed forces are composed by 3 single services 1. The army, or the land component 2. The navy, or the maritime component 3. The air force, or the air component. In some state we can also find other Armed Forces (such as the Marines in the USA, the gendarmerie with military police functions, the Coast Guard, with police functions within territorial waters) and various paramilitary forces under the control of defense. We can consider carabinieri has a combined specialty , they have duties as "military police" like gendarmerie in France or Guardia Civil in Spain. Specialty of the army: infantry, artillery, aviation, communication and Carabinieri. In case of war or during missions carabinieri are considered military police. There are also inter-force organizations within defense that include elements belonging to more than one Armed Forces. In small states there may be only one armed force, or none at all. Organizational structure of Italian armed forces - Ministry of defense at the head of the hierarchical structure - Technical operative area : headed by the chief of joint armed forces, the head of the 4^ ^services of the Italian army (esercito, marina, aeronautica, carabinieri). - Technical administrative area: headed by the General Secretary of defense and the national director of armaments (deals with the administrative aspects of the army ex. pensions of retired soldiers, expanses, engineering, communications The 4 missions - **Homeland defense :** it is the most distinctive task and also the most tasking upon it. Aside from any consideration about the probability of such a scenario (that implies the intervention on a large scale of conventional forces) - **Defense of the euro-Atlantic and euro-Mediterranean areas**: Italian Armed Forces contribute to collective defense operations of the Atlantic alliance (art. 5 of the NATO treaty) and to operations aimed at the stabilization of the areas around the Mediterranean basin with the ultimate objective of protecting vital national interests and strategies. - **Contribution towards international peace and security: **operations for the prevention and management of crisis in order to maintain peace and security, international stability and legality as well as safeguard the fundamental human rights. - **Support to local authorities and disaster relief**: activities carried out by the armed forces to protect free institutions and specific tasks in case of national emergencies and other cases of extraordinary need and urgency. The only time in which art. 5 was involved it was after 9/11 by the US. Organizational structure of the armed forces Units: the smallest organizational structures able to operate autonomously, combining combat capabilities with logistical capabilities  **Army**: units can be the battalion or regiment - **Navy**: individual combat ships - **Air Force**: the Task Group Air - A unit is made up of elements that are homogeneous in terms of specialization of use (by the weapon they belong to: infantry, artillery) and has an internal structure to exercise administrative and command functions Team/squad: lower level within a unit Higher unit: a higher level than a unit - In the army "brigade", "division", or "corps", depending on its size Each unit or department is placed under the authority and responsibility of a commander, who is an officer or in lower-ranking departments, a non-commissioned officer (also in some cases also Permanent service volunteers). There is a general staff at the level of each armed force and usually also a defense general staff that ensures coordination between the various armed forces. The division of military personnel follows hierarchical criteria 3 categories - Offices - Non-commissioned officers - Troops RECRUITMENT It is the process of gathering, selecting and inserting new personnel, the recruits, into the armed forces. With recruitment, the soldier enters service and remains in service under discharge. Recruitment can be: 1. Compulsory (through conscription) 2. Voluntary - Personnel on permanent service  serves in the Armed Forces with a permanent contract, or with an obligation to serve for a fixed period of time - Recruitment of **permanent service **personnel is voluntary, while recruitment of **temporary service **personnel can be compulsory or voluntary - Peculiarity of military personnel (strike, politics, uniform, duties and sanctions, mil police and judges, - There are currently **15 states **that **do not have Armed Forces**: *Andorra, Vatican City, Dominica, Grenada, Marshall Islands, Solomon Islands, Kiribati, Lichtenstein, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Saint Lucia and Tuvalu* - Other states have very small nuclei of Armed Forces with limited capabilities or specific tasks: *Costa Rica, Iceland, Mauritius, Monaco, Panama and Vanuatu, Iceland* - Some neutral States have highly efficient and well-trained Armed Forces: *Austria *and* Switzerland *(which has just signed the contract to replace its Air Force\'s fleet of F-18 fighter jets with the ultra-modern F-35s) **Lesson 2 16.09** Industry, technology are changing, this implies a change of defense. How do you prepare as a government when you have needs on the defense side but technology is changing? Government needs to think outside the ordinary to fix the need for weapons, assistance... You also have procurers, at least 4 countries, 4 major industries and you have a project and you start... When you have data ai gives you knowledge, data transit with cables and are stored in a cloud. The basic technology that permits storage is cloud. Cloud is not only storage but also processing of information. This applies to every non- military use but also military use. What is one of the effects? Not having a boundary between military and non -military use. Why this boundary is no longer a boundary which keeps dual use? How do you block the export of a commercial drone? How do you block the use of a civil drone used for military purposes? Two sides of the coin. **Lesson 3 17.09** ***Operational domains*** **Operational Domains** are the distinct environments where military activities and capabilities are applied. These domains are shaped by the specific nature and context of the operations. Each domain has unique challenges and advantages. The **Operational Environment** is the broader context in which military operations occur. It\'s shaped by factors like geography, climate, the enemy\'s capabilities, and the nature of the conflict. In military terms, there are 5 domains: Land Sea Air Space new domain Cyber new domain Traditional domains (land,sea,air- until the 2^nd^ world war) The first domains were traditionally limited to land, sea, and air until World War II. There is debate about a **sixth domain**, the **undersea** domain, but traditionally, it's considered part of the maritime (sea) domain. It's a sub domain. Think about all the cables, pipelines... *Land domain* The land domain is highly variable and complex, forcing military forces to adapt to diverse terrains and conditions. Unlike the sea or air, land features---like mountains, cities, and forests---create significant obstacles. Examples include: - **Stalingrad**: Complex urban warfare in extreme cold. - **Grozny**: Mountains, limited infrastructure, and difficult weather. - **Afghanistan**: Varied terrain with high peaks and valleys, affecting movement. *Advantages of land domain compared to the other domains* Taking and holding ground: only with boots on the ground, you can devasted all the aircrafts, but you never are going to take that city without foots on the ground Seizing and holding ground: Despite air superiority, cities or key areas can only be truly controlled with forces on the ground. Destroying enemy forces in detail: Precision and close combat allow direct targeting of enemy forces, such as in urban conflicts. Gaza -destroying all the hamas warriors, Controlling and protecting populations: Ground forces directly interact with civilian populations, providing security and order. Deterrence: Visible military presence on the ground can deter enemy actions. Maneuvering: Ground forces can exploit natural cover and terrain to outmaneuver the enemy. Countering adversary maneuver and protect against adversary special operations forces soft activities Building partner capacity by training and advising: infos , training to enable the national soldiers Hardening, concealing, and dispersing their capabilities Networking with terrestrial links that are hard to access and disrupt Stockpile ammunition that can be protected Reloading, resupplying and fueling in theater and away from large, vulnerable bases Maneuvering in the absence of overhead intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance and global positioning sytem data with analog systems and target enemy forces Enabling operation in the other domains from ground positions Land forces also enable operations in other domains, from ground-based air defense to supplying logistical support for sea or air operations. *Examples of land military activities* Stability activities Defense support of civil authorities Foreign humanitarian assistance Recovery Non combatant evacuation *Peace operations* Countering weapons of mass distruction Chemical, biological,radiological and nuclear response Foreign internal defense Countr drug operations Combating terrorism Counterinsurgency Homeland defense Mass atrocity response Security cooperation Military engagement *Maritime domain* The **Maritime Domain** refers to the vast expanse of the world\'s oceans and seas, and is generally subdivided into two categories: 1. **Littoral (Coastal) Operations**: These are carried out in shallow waters near the coastlines and territorial waters of nations. Naval forces operating in this environment typically use smaller, agile vessels to navigate coastal areas and protect national interests. 2. **Open Ocean Operations**: These occur in deeper waters beyond national maritime boundaries. Naval forces here rely on larger, more heavily equipped ships designed for long-range missions and sustained operations in the high seas. The maritime domain shapes naval concepts of operations with tactics such as layered defense, forward presence and sea control. From ancient civilizations like the Egyptians and Greeks to the rise of the British Empire, maritime trade and naval power played a key role in the growth and expansion of these empires. Control over sea routes allowed them to project power, secure resources, and extend their influence. Today, over 90% of global commerce moves through international shipping lanes, and about 99% of international data is transmitted through approximately 200 undersea fiber optic cables, emphasizing the continued strategic importance of the maritime domain. Despite its significance, the vast distances and the relatively slow speed of ships create natural barriers, limiting the ability to quickly reposition naval forces when needed. For years, modern naval vessels have relied on radar and electronic support systems to detect and target enemy ships beyond the horizon. However, advancements like intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) satellites have improved the ability to monitor oceans more effectively. With the rise of electro-optical infrared radar and electronic intelligence systems, navies now have better coverage over vast ocean areas. Automatic Identification Systems (AIS) further help by providing real-time information on the location and identity of commercial vessels. The proliferation of ISR unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) is also transforming maritime surveillance, giving navies the ability to gather real-time intelligence and target information. However, large surface naval vessels still face challenges in concealing themselves in the open ocean, as modern surveillance technologies make it increasingly difficult to remain hidden. Radar and radio transmissions cannot be used to search for objects or to communicate with submerged submarines or other undersea platforms; limits the ability of submarines or other undersea platforms to communicate with ships, aircraft, land-based headquarters but also hide them from most advanced search techniques Differences tween the global maritime and land: vast majority of the 139.7 million square miles of oceans are international waters and not subject to any one nation's laws or control *The Littoral Coastal Defense Navy* The Littoral Coastal Defense Navy focuses on protecting a country\'s territorial waters and adjacent international waters. These vessels are generally smaller and less robust than blue-water ships and don't require the capacity to carry large supplies of fuel and ammunition. They are capable of operating in all weather conditions and are designed to navigate coastal areas, addressing high-risk security threats in shallow waters. *The Blue Water Global* In contrast, the Blue Water Global Open Ocean Navy engages in operations far from home ports, projecting power on a global scale. These vessels are larger and designed for sustained operations, requiring a significant crew to support continuous 24-hour missions. Speed is crucial for rapid deployment, while endurance allows them to operate for extended periods without returning to port. Blue-water ships are equipped for multiple mission types, including combat, logistics, and humanitarian efforts. Together, these naval forces ensure comprehensive maritime security, with littoral forces addressing immediate coastal threats and blue-water fleets enabling broader strategic reach. *Air domain* The air domain is interconnected with all other operational domains, providing significant flexibility and enabling access to virtually any location worldwide at any time. This domain's unique characteristics---such as speed, vantage, maneuverability, and range---have fundamentally transformed the nature of warfare. By exploiting the air domain, military forces can conduct combined arms maneuver warfare, which integrates various combat elements effectively. Air superiority extends the reach of naval fleets and shore defenses beyond the visibility of traditional observation and the range of naval surface fire, making air control essential for successful maritime operations. Additionally, the air domain allows for the rapid insertion and resupply of troops far from their supporting bases, facilitating quick responses to emerging threats. Air forces can maneuver over enemy lines rather than through them, enabling strategic advantages in both offensive and defensive operations. This flexibility is crucial for modern military strategies, allowing forces to adapt quickly to changing battlefield conditions. *The characteristics of air and the atmosphere make 5 modes of access to the air domain possible:* The air domain allows for access through five distinct modes: 1\. Lighter-than-air flight: This method involves trapping gases lighter than air, such as hydrogen or helium, or using heated air in a sealed casing, allowing for buoyancy. 2\. Heavier-than-air flight: This relies on aerodynamic forces to generate lift, enabling aircraft to fly by overcoming gravity. 3\. Missiles: These utilize the explosive force of burning gases from liquid or solid rocket engines to propel themselves into the air, overcoming gravitational pull. 4\. Ground-fired or sea-fired projectiles: These rely on controlled explosive charges or the momentum from a launching platform to temporarily counteract the effects of weight and drag. 5\. The electromagnetic spectrum: This mode facilitates air operations by enabling, disrupting, or denying access to the air domain through electronic means. Unlike the land and sea domains, where persistence involves holding territory or patrolling defined areas, persistence in the air is about the radius of action. This leverage of speed and vantage allows for broader operational reach. Defining the upper limits of the air domain can be challenging. Most military operations occur within the troposphere and lower stratosphere, with commercial aircraft flying up to 40,000 feet and military operations often reaching up to 60,000 feet. Controlled airspace typically ends around 65,000 feet, and operations above this altitude are sometimes referred to as \"near space.\" Three significant shifts are poised to change the air domain: 1\. Exploitation is increasingly not limited to traditional aircraft. 2\. The most crucial targets are often mobile, requiring adaptable strategies. 3\. Weapons in flight face greater risks due to evolving technologies and countermeasures. **Lesson 4 24.09** November 4 1918 day of the unity of Italian republic and day of the armed forces, commemorates the completion of the process of unification of Italy, end of ww1 The president of Italy and other important officers of the state pay homage to the Italian unknown soldier, buried in the altare della patria in rome. This year, at circo massimo there will be the defence village, with different displays of military equipment and means, heli and paratrooper, shows, drones... National Defence: Space, Cyber and Underwater Operational domains: the set of capabilities and activities that are applied on the battlefield in reference to the operational environment Operational environment: the context in which one operates. It is differentiated based on the prevailing nature and type of military operations conducted in it In military terms, there are 5 domains: 1) land; 2) sea; 3) air; 4) space; 5) cyber Immagine che contiene testo, schermata, Carattere, linea Descrizione generata automaticamente Space (1) -Space activities have concrete effects on the functioning of our societies -The military sector is strongly connected to and dependent on space assets, both in the case of Positioning, Navigation and Timing (PNT) and earth observation and satellite communication services -Access to space is of vital importance for Nations \- Lack of internationally accepted responsible space behaviors Space (2) Space includes the satellites in space, supporting ground infrastructure, and the information layer connecting ground and space Space assets have been directly involved in theaters of war  ground stations were attacked during the 1991 Gulf War and in the 2011 conflict in Libya A number of countries have developed kinetic capabilities  report of jamming of satellites for communications & GPS networks in numerous regions and theaters of conflict Defense departments  space as a key domain of warfare *Space X* Non-governmental organizations are crowding into the domain  commercial ventures (SpaceX) NATO Ministerial meeting (December 2019): space has been declared "Military Domain" (joining the others air, land) 3 camps on the role of defense space organizations: 1\) the space domain should not be militarized- not all the nations in the world belong to nato though 2\) space is an operational domain 3\) space has been a warfighting domain since the beginning of the space age Attempting to frame the space domain through concepts such 'operational and warfighting' hinders the effectiveness of defence space organisations' ability to foresee crises and avoid wars Space (4) 2 key tasks of military space organizations: 1\) to assure Defence forces' access to space by establishing resilient space capabilities 2\) to deter or prevent an adversary from using counterspace capabilities to deny access to space systems Many nations have developed peculiar Space military doctrines or even a new Service within the Armed Forces, i.e. the Space Force *Space Operations* Terrestrial facilities -- including launch, command and control (C2), continuity of operations (COOP) locations, and terrestrial based radars -- are essential to space operations Space operations are data intensive, relying on terrestrial communications links in addition to terrestrial-to-space /spaceto-terrestrial, and space-based communications links via the cyberspace domain Example: Russia (2020) test-launches of Direct Ascent AntiSatellite weapons *Underwater (1)* Much like space, underwater, as a dimension of the maritime domain, is becoming increasingly competitive, contested and congested The first underwater telegraph cable was laid in 1850 between UK and France, while the first underwater oil pipeline was laid down across the English Channel as part of "Operation PLUTO" in WW II, in order to support the Allied advance against Nazi Germany with a steady supply of oil Today, between 97 and 99 per cent of global internet traffic relies on over 400 fibre optic underwater cables, spanning a total of more than 1 million km Underwater (2) The underwater dimension is also where part of the extraction, processing, and transportation of oil and gas products occurs 30% of oil and gas globally is extracted by offshore fields September 2022, sabotage of the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines, built to transport gas from Russia to Germany through the Baltic Sea vulnerability of underwater critical infrastructures + difficulty in attributing the sabotage to one actor - NATO has acknowledged the sheer scale of the challenge by establishing a ne centre for the security of underwater critical infrastructures, embedded in nato maritime command in the uk. Directly tasked with mapping vulnerabilities coordinating efforts among nato allies and partner countries but also , the private sector and underwater critical infrastructure *Underwater (3)* Operating underwater requires mastering technological solutions to the high pressures that characterize deep water environments Submarines rely on inertial navigation systems to obtain acceptably-precise estimates of their location Only very low frequency and extremely low frequency radio waves can penetrate water for limited distances *Underwater --Russia* Among major naval powers, Russia appears to be the one to have invested the most in seabed warfare capabilities  strategic importance of these scenarios in Russian strategic thinking Moscow typically operates its seabed warfare capabilities under the Main Directorate for Deep Sea Research (GUGI) rather than the Navy -- a policy that potentially places their legal status within the grey zone spectrum *Underwater --* *Submarines* With the return of deterrence high on major powers' agendas, the territorialisation of the world's seas and oceans, the importance of Underwater Critical Infrastructures, and a growing sense of insecurity perceived globally, the submarine is experiencing a kind of renaissance both in terms of technological advancements and surging market demand submarines are unique asset in a navy's fleet as they provide unparalled stealth and survivability thanks to the capacity to operate under the cover of deep water for extended periods of time. Conventional and nuclear subs Underwater *Concluding Remarks* The physical nature of the underwater environment means that the defender will always be at a disadvantage in terms of Underwater Critical Infrastructure protection attacks are difficult to prevent over massive areas A new approach should be pursued: 1\) through redundancy where applicable, especially with regard to cables 2\) it may be useful to borrow and adapt the concept of "responsive space" from the space domain and apply it to the underwater dimension Experts usually identify 3 essential levels: 1\) the physical infrastructural level  machines (network architectures, computers, routers, etc.) 2\) the logical informational level  the volume of data managed by machines (database, files, but also software managed by the machines) 3\) the social cognitive level  the set of human relations and socio -cognitive characteristics that may constitute virtual identities (the e -mail address, the profile in social networks, the IP addresses of the machines). *Cyber attacks* From an environmental prospective, cyberspace appears as a virtual environment with no traditional physical boundaries, as an undefined space where there is not division between public and private, between the military and civil spheres. An environment where almost everything is dual and where everything can be used for both civil and military purposes As artificial domain, the cyber domain has \'vulnerabilities\' that may expose it to cyber threats it is a threat that is relevant, variable in its essential features, constantly evolving, fast in the target to attack and capable of producing destructive effects in all domains Cyber threats: asymmetrical nature difficult traceability of attacks *Cyber attacks* A varied range of actors is emerging, ranging from individual hackers ongoing for profit, to government apparatuses pursuing geopolitical or propaganda objectives. Therefore, in terms of dangers, we move from cyber vandalism to outright cyber warfare. Depending on the varying degree of offensiveness, cyber attacks are traditionally attributed to acts of cybercrime, cyber espionage, cyber terrorism and cyber war. -Cyber -warfare  the attack is carried out through cyberspace -Cyber -defense  the entire doctrine, organization and activities to prevent, detect, limit and counter the effects of attacks carried out through cyberspace \- Literature usually refers to the attack on Estonia in 2007 as the first case of cyber war  it is the first case in which a NATO member state has requested the applicability of Article 5 of the NATO Treaty. But NATO did not recognize the occurrence of an aggression "against the territorial integrity of a State", as defined by the UN Statute, so it did not follow up on the request to activate Article 5 *Cyber Warfare and Countermeasures* Definition and Importance: Cyber warfare involves the use of digital attacks to disrupt, damage, or manipulate information systems for strategic or military purposes. It's a critical aspect of modern conflict. Scope: Encompasses state-sponsored attacks, hacktivism, cyberterrorism, and cybercrime. Targets include governments, military, infrastructure, and private enterprises. Relevance: With the increasing reliance on digital systems, understanding cyber warfare is essential for national security and global stability. *Types of Cyber Warfare* -State-Sponsored Attacks: Governments conducting operations to infiltrate other nations' systems for intelligence or disruption. Hacktivism: Use of hacking to promote political ends, such as anonymous targeting organizations for ideological reasons. Cyberterrorism: Terrorists using cyber attacks to create fear and disruption, targeting critical infrastructure. Cybercrime: Criminal activities like theft, fraud and extortion conducted through digital means. *Notable Cyber Attacks* -Stuxnet (2010): A highly sophisticated worm developed by the US and Israel targeting Iran's nuclear facilities. Causing significant physical damage to centrigfuges. Attributed to the us and irael, it marked the first known instance of cyber warfare causing physical destruction Sony Pictures Hack (2014): Attributed to North Korea, this attack exposed sensitive company data and emails. The attackers leaked a vast amount of confidential data, including employee information and unreleased films Ukraine power grid attacks: cyber attacks on ukraines power grid, attributed to Attributed to Russian hacker group. Attacks highlighted the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to cyber sabotage WannaCry (2017): A ransomware attack that affected over 200.000 computers across 150 countries, causing widespread disruption. SolarWinds Attack (2020): A supply chain attack attributed to Russian state actors, compromising numerous US government agencies and corporations. -Colonial pipeline ransomware attack *Nature of cyber warfare* Espionage: stealing sensitive info, such as state secrets, military plans Sabotage: disrupting or damaging critical infrastructure,such as power grids, water supplies, and communication networks Denial of service Propaganda and psychological operations *Countermeasures and Defense Strategies to prevent a cyber attack* -Firewalls and Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS): Deploying robust firewalls and IDS to monitor and filter incoming and outgoing network traffic. Encryption: Using advanced encryption techniques to protect sensitive data both in transit and at rest. Cyber Threat Intelligence: Gathering and analyzing information about potential cyber threats to proactively defend against attacks. Security Awareness Training: Educating employees about cybersecurity best practices to prevent human errors that can lead to breaches. -offensive cyber capabilities: some nations develop offensive cyber capabilities as a deterrence strategy. By demonstrating the ability to launch retaliatory cyber attacks, they aim to dissuade adversaries from initiating cyber warfare *Future Trends in Cyber Warfare* AI and Machine Learning: Increased use of AI for bothoffensive and defensive cyber operations, enabling more sophisticated attacks and defenses. Quantum Computing: Potential to break current encryption methods, making current cybersecurity measures obsolete. Vulnerabilities: Growing number of connected devices presents new targets and challenges for cybersecurity. Cyber Resilience: Emphasis on building systems that can quickly recover from attacks, minimizing damage and downtime. *Italian Government Countermeasures* National Cybersecurity Agency (ANC): Established to coordinate national cybersecurity policies, response and defense mechanisms. Public-Private Partnerships: Collaborations with private sector entities to enhance cybersecurity capabilities and share threat intelligence. Legislation and Regulation: Implementation of laws such as the Cybersecurity Act to ensure compliance with EU standards and improve resilience. Investment in Cyber Education: Programs aimed at increasing cybersecurity expertise and awareness within public institutions and the general population *AISI and AISE: National Security Agencies* AISI (Internal Security and Intelligence Agency): Focuses on domestic threats and collaborates with other national entities to prevent and mitigate cyber attacks within Italy. AISE (External Security and Intelligence Agency): Handles international cyber threats, gathering intelligence on foreign actors and protecting Italian interests abroad. Cyber Defense Operations: Both agencies conduct cyber defense operations, utilizing advanced tools and techniques to identify and neutralize threats. Collaboration with International Partners: Work with global intelligence agencies and cybersecurity organizations to enhance Italy's cyber defense posture. *Cyber Concluding Remarks* In the field of international law, the question of whether a cyber-attack can be defined as an act of war governed by the relevant rules of international law is considered possible as long as the intensity and effects of the cyber aggression are comparable to those of an armed attack It remains difficult to identify the source of a cyber-attack and to define it clearly as a cyber war attack, given the state of technical and scientific knowledge **Lesson 30/09 (Ciocca)** scheme: what does private hands mean? different things: private in its strict sense (no listed companies). public (listed company, not governmental) or private. these firms will ordinarily be led by civil sector. what they do is also useful for the military side. if the company is not listed it can possibly be less recognizable. how to understand what they are doing? second point: info is always out there, the thing is how to get it. You have non public infos and it can be difficult to understand who they are, what they do... Public v. private. public: listed firms. A company listed on a stock exchange (you may have different levels of stock exchange). Listed company basically ask publicly for investments to the public, therefore they have to keep some information available that have to precise and punctual (financial reports, quarterly reports, you need to say to the market what happens in your company). When the company is private you do not have these infos (owned by private equities). The private equity firms are very important in eu. Youhave important part of the economy that maybe with significant stake controlled by private equity funds. How do I know what I want if the information is not public? If a gov is trying to understand info about a firm, what are the questions?  What are they doing? What is the supply chain? This last question is crucial for 1) scaling up possibilities (much about supply and demand) 2) security (when you scale up, how do you deal with security?). Financials (revenues, costs, equity -who is the owner- and debt -who pays-; keep in mind the intermediaries like bank and venture capitals). Clusters. Information is always available, but gov may have always means to get that information. The means are non-conventional sometimes. You may have a matrix: DIMEFIL - diplomacy, intelligence, military, economic, financial, information, loafer. Intelligence that is non-conventional, this is important because for example when you have some kind of firm there may be intelligence actions (in the financial system but for defence reasons). Also, some market actors can have information, like banks. When I'm listing on a stock exchange, I'm accompanied by a NOMAD (nominated advisor) and this advisor always knows everything about me. As this info is always out there, how can a government find them? Open question What structure should a government follow to find this info? Innovation tends to be where research and development are, universities. There you have a research, innovations, so where you have research then you have content and info. On some major groups you still have a significant stake by the gov, even if they are private. Why is a big industry group listed? Bc they look for financing. The government money will never be enough, you need more shareholders. This money brings transparency obligations, but by this obligations you may have other obligatiuon for example that the investment has to be ESG compliant (environmental standards, such as the European one). Information needs v. deterrence. When you have sensitive technology the gov has a power to control the ownership circulation. When a firm does sensitive activity (defence provider for example), when they change ownership then the gov may say something. It's not only for physical sensitive things, but also for data (sensible data). Government has some tools (intelligence, power on the ownership golden power rule). BUT does golden power rule on an enterprise actually help that enterprise? Sometimes not bc it limits the capacity of the firm to raise capitale, may reduce the value of the company on the market; at the same time from a gov perspective golden power may not always be the best way to obtain the info, bc when you use that power it's already late because it's a conventional tool. It's a deterrence tool, the principle is not to authorize the transfer of ownership, but to avoid it ex nunc. Scheme for work project. 1\) Try to understand the technical capabilities, but keep in mind the non-military and military ambivalence. 2\) What data do they gather? 3\) The military use of the product. 4\) Non-military things to understand: load, automation, finance, supply chain, who is the buyer. Try to understand the finance (equity, debt, if the deficit is bigger than the debt than the bank owns the firm). Try to understand the governance. Try to understand security issues (cyber security, market security, meaning: is the provider a monopolist? Are there many of them out? This makes a big difference). Scalability (defence purposes). Try to understand the flag (substantive not per forza the official flag, who really owns the firm). **Lesson 1.10** ***Terrorism & Hybrid Threats: The Global Security Risk of Non-state Actors*** Concepts of "hybrid warfare" and "terrorism" are as contested as popular It was first popularized by the US Marine Corps Colonel Frank Hoffman in his 2007 monograph Conflict in the21st Century: The Rise of Hybrid Wars. Nowadays, it is universally accepted that "terrorism" is part of the hybrid warfare ![Immagine che contiene testo, schermata, Carattere, design Descrizione generata automaticamente](media/image2.png) **Hybrid Warfare: Definition and Evolution** **Concept Introduction**: The term \"hybrid warfare\" was first introduced by Thomas Mockaitis in 1995 and was further developed by US Marine Corps Colonel Frank Hoffman in 2007. It encapsulates conflicts that do not fit neatly into conventional or irregular categories. **General Mattis** speech at defence forum in 2005: future threats will be a merger of different modes of warfare. They call this synthesis "hybrid warfare" without clearly defining it **Hoffman\'s Definition**: Hoffman defined hybrid warfare as incorporating a mix of conventional capabilities, irregular tactics, terrorist acts, criminal activities, and other non-kinetic methods (e.g., cyber-attacks and propaganda) to achieve strategic objectives. **Applications in the Post-Cold War Era**: The concept has become increasingly relevant as non-state actors (e.g., Hezbollah, Hamas, the Taliban, and ISIS) and state actors (e.g., Russia and Iran) have adopted hybrid tactics that blur the lines between traditional warfare and irregular forms of conflict. **Hybrid Warfare in Practice** **Non-State Actors**: Groups like Hezbollah have demonstrated hybrid warfare by using state-like military capabilities in conjunction with guerrilla tactics and terrorism. The 2006 war between Hezbollah and Israel is considered a textbook example of this approach, involving a combination of direct confrontations and the use of asymmetrical tactics. But also the taleban,hamas... **State Actors**: The document underscores that hybrid warfare is not exclusive to non-state actors. states like Russia have adopted hybrid warfare strategies. During the 2014 annexation of Crimea, Russia employed \"little green men\" (masked soldiers in unmarked uniforms) to conduct covert operations that allowed for plausible deniability. Iran\'s Quds Force is another example of a state entity engaging in hybrid tactics, supporting various non-state actors like Hezbollah and Shia militias across the Middle East. Iran's Quds Force: is one of five branches of Iran\'s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) specializing in unconventional warfare and military intelligence operations. U.S. Army\'s Iraq War General Stanley McChrystal describes the Quds Force as an organization analogous to a combination of the CIA and the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) in the United States. Responsible for the extraterritorial operations, the Quds Force supports non-state actors in many countries, including Hezbollah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Houthi movement, and Shia militias in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan. The Quds Force is \"a classic example of state-sponsored terrorism. *Expanded Analysis of Hybrid Warfare Theorists and Definitions* how different theorists and military analysts have approached the concept of hybrid warfare over time, adding depth to its understanding: 1\. Murray and Mansoor (2012): \"Hybrid Warfare: Fighting Complex Opponents from the Ancient World to the Present\" \- Definition and Historical Perspective: \- Williamson Murray and Peter Mansoor argue that the concept of hybrid warfare is not new. They view it as a recurring theme throughout military history, where conflicts have often involved a mix of conventional and irregular forces. \- They define hybrid warfare as "a conflict involving a combination of conventional military forces and irregulars (guerrillas, insurgents, and terrorists), which could include both state and non-state actors, aimed at achieving a common political purpose." \- The authors highlight that hybrid warfare has been a strategy used by both ancient and modern states and non-state entities to leverage the strengths of different warfare modes, making it a timeless element of warfare strategies. \- Examples from History: \- The document implies that many historical conflicts---such as guerrilla wars during colonial times, insurgencies, and revolts---have featured hybrid tactics even if they weren't labeled as such. Murray and Mansoor\'s analysis places hybrid warfare within a broader historical context, stressing its persistent presence in warfare. 2\. Views of Other Theorists on Hybrid Warfare \- McCuen (2008), Jordan (2008), Glenn (2009), Lasica (2009), McWilliams (2009), and Burbridge (2013): \- These theorists and researchers have contributed to shaping the modern understanding of hybrid warfare, each emphasizing the complexity and battlefield-centric nature of hybrid conflicts. \- They focus on how hybrid warfare operates within the tactical and operational levels of the battlefield, stressing that these conflicts cannot be understood through conventional military paradigms alone. \- Glenn (2009): \- Glenn offers a comprehensive definition of a "hybrid threat," describing it as "an adversary that simultaneously and adaptively employs some combination of (1) political, military, economic, social, and information means, and (2) conventional, irregular, catastrophic, terrorism, and disruptive/criminal warfare methods." \- Glenn's definition expands the scope of hybrid warfare by stressing the integration of non-kinetic means, such as economic pressure, political manipulation, and information warfare. This approach highlights the multifaceted nature of hybrid threats, where adversaries use diverse methods in a coordinated manner to create instability and confusion. 3\. Distinctions and Emphasis on Non-Kinetic Means \- Evolution of the Hybrid Warfare Concept: \- The key distinction between Glenn's definition and earlier versions is the emphasis on non-kinetic means and techniques. Non-kinetic methods include psychological operations, disinformation, and cyber-attacks, which have become central to hybrid strategies in the 21st century. \- This shift in emphasis reflects the changing nature of warfare, where information and cyber domains are increasingly leveraged to achieve strategic effects without the need for direct military engagement. \- Implications for Modern Warfare: \- Understanding hybrid warfare as a synthesis of both kinetic and non-kinetic elements allows for a more nuanced view of how modern conflicts are conducted. The use of these diverse tactics can destabilize societies, disrupt economies, and influence political outcomes without resorting to traditional military engagements. This in-depth analysis of hybrid warfare theorists and their definitions helps elucidate the complexity and adaptive nature of hybrid conflicts. By incorporating historical, tactical, and non-kinetic elements, these perspectives underscore the evolving challenges posed by hybrid threats in contemporary global security. *Hybrid Warfare in Ukraine: The Gerasimov Doctrine* After the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014, NATO preferred the term "hybrid warfare" to refer to Russia's "new" form of conflict in Ukraine  perhaps, this choice is the most crucial turning point in the evolution of the concept Russia employed a mix of non-kinetic tools  cyber-attacks, propaganda, disinformation, economic coercion, and diplomatic pressure + military methods  covert operations and empowering proxy warriors Russia systemically denied its involvement in Ukraine. So, Russia's so-called "hybrid warfare" in Ukraine did not only consist of a combination of regular and irregular elements or the combination of military and nonmilitary tools but also covert action and deception. The main defining characteristics of Russia's subversive campaign in Ukraine were creating ambiguity and enabling plausible deniability  the "hybrid model of warfare" is largely associated with the so-called "Gerasimov doctrine" that emphasizes the blurring distinctions between war and peace Russia's Strategy: The 2014 annexation of Crimea and subsequent conflict in Ukraine are pivotal examples of hybrid warfare. The \"Gerasimov Doctrine\" outlines Russia's approach to modern warfare, emphasizing the integration of non-military tools like cyber-attacks, disinformation campaigns, economic coercion, and diplomatic pressure with traditional military force. Plausible Deniability and Ambiguity: Russia\'s tactics in Ukraine created confusion and ambiguity, making it difficult for the international community to respond effectively. This strategy aimed to blur the lines between war and peace, keeping Russia's involvement ambiguous and complicating legal or military retaliation by other states. *Implications of Hybrid Warfare* The US Army has adopted Hoffman's definition of "hybrid warfare'  the US Army's Training Circular (TC) 7-100 codifies "hybrid threats" "as the diverse and dynamic combination of regular forces, irregular forces, and/or criminal elements all unified to achieve mutually benefitting effects" (The US Department of Army, 2010) NATO: Hybrid threats combine military and non-military as well as covert and overt means, including disinformation, cyber-attacks, economic pressure, deployment of irregular armed groups and use of regular forces. Hybrid methods are used to blur the lines between war and peace and attempt to sow doubt in the minds of target populations. They aim to destabilize and undermine societies EU's "Joint Framework on countering hybrid threats": The concept of hybrid threats aims to capture the mixture of conventional and unconventional, military and non-military, overt and covert actions that can be used in a coordinated manner by state or non-state actors to achieve specific objectives while remaining below the threshold of formally declared warfare (The European Commission 2016) The US Army has adopted Hoffman's definition of hybrid warfare in its Training Circular 7-100, which categorizes hybrid threats as diverse and dynamic combinations of regular forces, irregular forces, and criminal elements unified to achieve strategic goals. NATO's stance on hybrid threats encompasses military and non-military methods used to destabilize societies and blur the lines between war and peace. EU's Approach to Hybrid Threats: The European Union's "Joint Framework on Countering Hybrid Threats" (2016) captures a mixture of conventional and unconventional, military and non-military, overt and covert actions by state or non-state actors to achieve objectives while remaining below the threshold of formally declared warfare. *Conclusions on Hybrid Warfare* The concept of hybrid warfare (like 'terrorism') is a contested term in the strategic lexicon. Western policymakers and practitioners have mostly associated the term "hybrid warfare"' with non-violent destabilization operations. In this regard, alleged Russian interference in the 2016 United States election, Russia's cyber-attacks against Western institutions, and Belarus' weaponization have been labelled an act of "hybrid warfare" Eliminating such a conceptual haziness should be prioritized by Western policymakers and defense intellectuals *Terrorism* The complexities of defining terrorism, emphasizing that it is often viewed differently depending on the context. While one group may see certain acts as terrorism, another may perceive them as legitimate resistance or freedom fighting. This subjectivity has led to the creation of various terms like \"neo-terrorism,\" \"narcoterrorism,\" \"ecoterrorism,\" and \"cyberterrorism,\" each reflecting different aspects of modern terrorism. The attacks of September 11, 2001, fundamentally changed perceptions of terrorism, illustrating how individuals could carry out devastating attacks with mass effects. The document also notes that terrorism is no longer confined to non-state actors. It includes state-sponsored actions, where governments may support or use small groups for violent operations without direct involvement, further complicating its definition. Terrorism is now viewed as a form of warfare that operates with rationality and strategic intent, often ignoring normative constraints and focusing on achieving its goals, regardless of collateral damage. Features *Terrorism is characterized by the use of violence to achieve political or social objectives. It often involves actions meant to intimidate or coerce a larger audience beyond the immediate victims. While the direct targets of terrorist acts are usually civilians or non-combatants, the ultimate aim is to create a broader psychological impact.* *What sets terrorism apart from other violent acts is its emblematic nature. The violence against the victim is not just physical but also symbolic, designed to send a message to a wider audience. This makes intimidation and the creation of fear central elements of terrorism, where the primary intention is to influence or manipulate political, social, or ideological outcomes by exploiting the psychological effects of violence.* In this kind of irregular warfare, the enemy can be a state or a group using, in order to exploit one (or more) of the opponent's weaknesses or in order to overcome its owns', unusual methods, unconventional strategies or weapons Anyone can strike without being seen, vanish without leaving apparent traces  warfare loses its bilateral nature It is difficult to have a clear and shared categorization of terrorism (over 110 definitions of terrorism and more than 20 defining elements identified and classified recently) Defining terrorism remains contentious, with over 110 definitions and 20 defining elements. However, the document highlights common features: the use of violence for political or social purposes, targeting civilians and non-combatants, and creating an intimidating or coercive effect beyond the immediate victims. Recurring Features of Terrorism (1) Use of violence for political or social purposes Intimidating or blackmailing purpose The victims are generally civilians or noncombatants the fundamental factor that distinguishes terrorism from other forms of violence -- all characterized by two elements: aggressor and victim -- is the presence of an intimidating purpose. The violence against the victim must also have emblematic value for the terrorist, affecting others. *League of Nations' Viewpoint* Terrorism is defined as a global phenomenon encompassing acts such as assassinations of state officials, destruction of public property, and efforts to create chaos or subvert states. It was initially viewed through the lens of state-targeted violence and was later expanded to include actions by non-state groups. Terrorism is as a global phenomenon, and various forms are listed: it includes all \"criminal acts directed against a State and aimed at causing terror in certain individuals, groups of people, or the general population.\" The key Objectives to be achieved: Acts intentionally directed against the life, bodily integrity, health, or freedom of heads of state or public officials and their relatives Acts of intentionally destroying or damaging public property or property intended for public use Acts of intentionally endangering human lives to cause harm Acts to subvert the State in order to either create chaos or replace the legal regime Regional Case Study: Yemen and the Houthis Yemen\'s Context: Yemen, located on the southern tip of the Arabian Peninsula, has faced political instability and conflict for decades This conflict, primarily a civil war, has drawn in regional powers and international actors, making Yemen a focal point of geopolitical tension The roots of Yemen\'s current turmoil can be traced back to longstanding political, economic, and social challenges. The unification of North and South Yemen in 1990 was followed by decades of instability, marked by civil war in 1994 and continuous power struggles Houthis\' Origin: A Zaidi Shia-led political and religious movement originating from northern Yemen, formed in the 1990s Current Conflict: The Houthi movement, officially known as Ansar Allah, has been a significant player in Yemen\'s ongoing civil war since 2014. The Arab Spring in 2011 further destabilized Yemen, leading to the ousting of President Ali Abdullah Saleh and the election of Mansur Hadi. In September 2014, the Houthi movement, seized the Yemeni capital, Sana\'a, and later declared control over the government. The Houthis were initially aligned with former President Saleh. This alliance eventually dissolved, culminating in Saleh\'s assassination by the Houthis. The Houthi takeover forced President Hadi to flee to Saudi Arabia and prompted a military intervention by a Saudi-led coalition in March 2015, supported by Western nations such as the United States and the United Kingdom, aiming to restore Hadi\'s government. While the Houthis have maintained their Shia identity, their ideology has evolved over time, incorporating strong anti-imperialist and anti-Zionist rhetoric Iran has provided the Houthis with military aid, including weapons and training, which has helped them sustain their fight against the Saudi-led coalition. This support has led to accusations that the Houthis are Iranian proxies Background on the Houthi Movement: The Houthis, a Zaidi Shia-led political and religious movement, emerged in the 1990s and have been a major player in Yemen's civil war since 2014. The group's influence grew after seizing the Yemeni capital Sana'a, leading to a military intervention by a Saudi-led coalition. Iranian Support: The document outlines Iran's role in supporting the Houthis with military aid, training, and weaponry, positioning the group as an Iranian proxy in the broader geopolitical rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Strategic Importance of the Bab al-Mandab Strait Regionally, the Houthi movement has intensified the geopolitical rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran, with Yemen becoming a proxy battleground in this broader conflict. The Houthis have also conducted missile and drone attacks on Saudi territory, and on Bab al-Mandeb Strait, further escalating tensions and demonstrating their growing military capabilities. Geopolitical Significance: Connecting the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden, it is a vital maritime route for global trade, especially oil transport. Economic Impact: Approximately 8 million barrels of oil pass through the strait daily, making it a critical point for energy security. Security Concerns: Frequent target of Houthi attacks aiming to disrupt international shipping and leverage geopolitical influence. The Bab al-Mandab Strait is one of the world\'s most crucial maritime chokepoints. Its strategic importance is multifaceted: Energy Transport: A significant proportion of the world\'s oil and gas supplies transit through the Bab al-Mandab Strait. Disruptions can lead to global energy market volatility. Global Trade: The strait is part of the principal sea route linking Europe to Asia. Any blockage would necessitate longer, costlier detours around the southern tip of Africa (rerouting the chokepoint adds 10-14 days of travel to reach Europe from East Asia via the Cape of Good Hope) Military Considerations: Control over the strait provides substantial leverage in regional conflicts. Naval dominance in the area is critical for ensuring uninterrupted flow of goods and energy. Tactics and Methods: Houthis use a variety of tactics including missiles, drones, and explosive-laden boats to target vessels. **Geopolitical Significance**: The Bab al-Mandab Strait, located between Yemen and Djibouti, is a crucial maritime chokepoint linking the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden. Around 8 million barrels of oil pass through it daily, making it a critical point for global energy security. **Houthi Attacks**: The Houthis have targeted vessels in the strait using missiles, drones, and explosive-laden boats, escalating tensions and posing threats to international shipping. *Humanitarian Impact of the Yemen Conflict* Civilian Casualties: Thousands of civilians have been killed or injured since the conflict began, with many more displaced. Health Crisis: Severe shortages of medical supplies and facilities, exacerbating the suffering of the Yemeni population. Food Insecurity: Widespread famine and malnutrition, affecting millions of Yemenis, particularly children. The Houthis' maritime operations have added another layer to the humanitarian crisis by threatening not only the safety of commercial but also the aid vessels. This has discouraged humanitarian agencies from operating in the region, further isolating Yemen from essential supplies. International Community\'s Response Combination of diplomatic, economic, and military measures. Diplomatic Efforts: UN-led peace talks aim to bring conflicting parties to a resolution, although success has been limited. Sanctions have been imposed on Houthi leaders and entities to curb their military capabilities and pressure them into negotiations. Humanitarian Aid: Numerous international organizations are providing food, medical supplies, and other essential aid to Yemen through all the limitations and difficulties. Military Involvement: Coalition forces, particularly from USA, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, are engaged in military operations, such as naval patrols and convoy escort missions to secure maritime traffic in the region. Civilian Impact: The conflict has resulted in thousands of civilian casualties, widespread famine, malnutrition, and a severe health crisis. The Houthis' maritime operations have further isolated Yemen from essential aid, exacerbating the humanitarian crisis. International Responses: International organizations and coalitions, such as the European Union Naval Force and multinational military operations, have engaged in securing maritime routes, delivering humanitarian aid, and imposing sanctions on Houthi leaders to curb their military capabilities. EU Naval Military Operations European Union Naval Force Operation ATALANTA: In 2008, the EU launched its first maritime mission with the operational goal to contribute to the maritime security in the North Western Indian Ocean (somali pirates). Missions and Operations \| EEAS (europa.eu) Operation IRINI (Greek for \"peace\") : Launched in 2020, the operation aims to enforce the UN arms embargo on Libya, prevent illegal oil exports, and disrupt human trafficking. EU Naval Force Operation Aspides (Greek for \"shield\") : The European Union, this year, has launched a naval mission (the 4 th: Agenor - Strait of Hormuz - ended on july '24 and handed over to Aspides) to protect cargo ships in the Red Sea from attacks from Yemen's Houthi rebels. Strategic Objectives: Ensuring maritime security, stabilizing regional conflicts, and supporting humanitarian efforts. From Atalanta to Aspides: Old and New Challenges for EU Maritime Operations (iai.it) E Implications on the Hamas-Israel Conflict The Red Sea crisis began on 19 October 2023, when the Iranbacked Ansar Allah Houthi movement in Yemen launched missiles and armed drones at Israel, demanding an end to the invasion of the Gaza Strip. USA Secretary of Defense on December 2023 announced the multinational security Op "Prosperity guardian". On the 12th Jan 2024, the US and UK attacked Houthi command and control nodes, munitions depots, launching systems, production facilities, and air defence radar systems. Security Measures: Enhanced security protocols and military presence to prevent arms smuggling and support peacekeeping efforts. Diplomatic Efforts: EU\'s and UN's role in mediating and supporting diplomatic resolutions to reduce hostilities and promote stability, along with local and regional cooperation engagement of local stakeholders and regional powers. I *Modern Conflicts* Modern wars are now characterized by the simultaneous use of military and non-military tools, kinetic and non-kinetic means, and overt and covert actions. This blend creates a complex security environment where traditional rules of war are challenged. Future Warfare: The document concludes by stressing the need for clearer definitions and conceptual frameworks for hybrid warfare and terrorism to enable better responses by policymakers and military strategists. Western countries need to eliminate conceptual haziness and refine their strategies to effectively address these evolving threats. Paper *From Atalanta to Aspides: Old and New Challenges for EU Maritime Operations* The document titled \"From Atalanta to Aspides: Old and New Challenges for EU Maritime Operations\" explores the evolving role of the European Union (EU) in maritime security. It begins by discussing Operation Atalanta, launched in 2008 to combat Somali piracy and secure maritime routes. The mission succeeded in drastically reducing piracy incidents, protecting commercial routes, and promoting a rules-based international order. Atalanta also contributed to capacity-building efforts in the region, supported by two other EU missions---EUTM and EUCAP Somalia---focused on regional maritime security. However, the paper emphasizes that despite Atalanta's success in suppressing piracy, the mission did not address the root causes of piracy, such as the instability in Somalia. Recent reductions in naval assets focused on piracy have led to its resurgence, highlighting the mission's limitations in achieving long-term stability in the region. The focus then shifts to Operation Aspides, the latest EU naval operation, launched in response to the Houthi rebel group\'s attacks on merchant vessels in the Red Sea and the North-West Indian Ocean (NWIO). The Houthis, backed by Iran, have targeted ships as part of a broader strategy connected to the conflict in Gaza. Unlike the pirates Atalanta targeted, the Houthis aim to destroy vessels rather than board them, posing a more sophisticated and politically motivated threat with advanced weaponry like anti-ship missiles and drones. Aspides represents a major shift in EU naval strategy. The mission is defensive, tasked with protecting merchant ships from attacks, but it operates in a far more complex geopolitical environment. Its success will depend on the EU's ability to counter high-tech threats like drones and anti-ship missiles, a significant escalation from anti-piracy operations. The operation also reflects the EU's strategic desire for autonomy, as it is separate from U.S.-led missions in the region like Prosperity Guardian. Greece and Italy are leading the operation, with Greece providing overall strategic command and Italy contributing the Force Commander. This reflects an ad hoc approach to EU military command structures, which, while flexible, risks duplication of efforts and operational inefficiencies. The paper also highlights several challenges that lie ahead for Aspides. First, the mission could escalate the conflict with the Houthis, potentially dragging the EU into broader regional conflicts. Second, Aspides faces coordination issues with other missions like Atalanta, Agenor, and Prosperity Guardian, which operate in the same region with overlapping mandates but limited assets. Finally, the EU's broader geopolitical context---its support for Ukraine and efforts at internal rearmament---adds complexity to its maritime ambitions. In conclusion, the document illustrates how Aspides marks a new chapter in EU maritime operations, representing both an opportunity and a challenge. While the EU seeks to assert itself as a global maritime security provider, the mission\'s success will depend on its ability to navigate the complex and dangerous environment of the Red Sea and NWIO. Paper 2 *Conflict in the 21st Century: The Rise of Hybrid Wars\"* by Frank G. Hoffman, The document \*\"Conflict in the 21st Century: The Rise of Hybrid Wars\"\* by Frank G. Hoffman is a comprehensive analysis of the evolving nature of warfare, particularly focusing on the emergence of \"Hybrid Wars.\" Hoffman introduces the concept as a complex blend of conventional warfare, irregular tactics, terrorism, and even criminal behavior, all conducted simultaneously in the same battlespace. The work critiques traditional military doctrines and urges adaptation to a rapidly changing global conflict environment, where traditional distinctions between forms of warfare are increasingly blurred. 1\. Introduction: \- Hoffman begins by noting that the post-Cold War era has brought significant changes in how conflicts are fought. He argues that conflicts today can no longer be classified strictly as conventional or irregular. Instead, adversaries are using a mixture of both, often simultaneously, to exploit vulnerabilities in modern military forces. This combination of warfare methods, which Hoffman terms "Hybrid Warfare," reflects a growing complexity in the nature of modern conflicts. 2\. The Rise of Hybrid Warfare: \- Hoffman explains the origins and development of hybrid warfare, arguing that it has emerged as a result of changes in the global political and technological landscape. Globalization has enabled non-state actors to gain access to advanced technology and weapons, blurring the lines between state and non-state actors in warfare. This fusion of capabilities allows hybrid forces to challenge superior conventional military forces by using both high-tech capabilities and low-tech, irregular tactics. \- He highlights how hybrid warfare incorporates a variety of tactics and modes, including traditional military operations, irregular warfare, terrorism, and criminal activities. These tactics are often employed by the same forces in the same battlespace, maximizing their impact through synergy. 3\. Hybrid Warfare Defined: \- Hoffman offers a precise definition of hybrid warfare, emphasizing its multi-modal nature. Hybrid warfare includes conventional military capabilities, irregular tactics (such as insurgencies or guerrilla warfare), terrorist actions (such as suicide bombings or indiscriminate violence), and criminal disorder (like smuggling or human trafficking). These different forms of conflict are orchestrated and tactically integrated to achieve a unified strategic goal. \- Hybrid warfare can be employed by both state and non-state actors, which Hoffman sees as a critical evolution in warfare. The ability of non-state actors to adopt state-like military capabilities, as well as the increasing willingness of states to use irregular tactics, has created a more complex and unpredictable security environment. 4\. The Evolution of Conflict: \- The report delves into the historical evolution of warfare, tracing how irregular and hybrid strategies have been employed in various forms throughout history. Hoffman argues that many conflicts in the 21st century will no longer follow the pattern of large-scale, state-on-state conventional wars like those seen in World War II. Instead, future conflicts are more likely to involve a mix of conventional military engagements and irregular warfare tactics, reflecting a blending of war types. \- The concept of hybrid warfare, Hoffman argues, is not entirely new. Historically, irregular tactics have often been employed alongside conventional military operations. However, what makes hybrid warfare distinct in the modern context is the integration and synchronization of these tactics, often with the added complication of high-tech weapons and advanced communications technologies. 5\. Hezbollah as a Prototype: \- A significant case study in the document is Hezbollah\'s 2006 conflict with Israel. Hoffman identifies Hezbollah as a prototype of a modern hybrid force. During this conflict, Hezbollah demonstrated the ability to blend conventional military capabilities (such as the use of rockets and missiles) with irregular tactics, such as guerrilla warfare and terrorism. Hezbollah's forces were decentralized, but they were tactically and operationally integrated to inflict substantial damage on the more conventionally superior Israeli military. \- Hezbollah's ability to exploit the urban environment, its use of decentralized cells, and its effective integration of various tactics---ranging from insurgent ambushes to missile strikes---illustrates the potency of hybrid warfare. Hoffman warns that Hezbollah's relative success in this conflict has provided a model for other non-state actors and insurgent groups around the world, increasing the likelihood that future conflicts will resemble this hybrid model. 6\. Challenges for the United States and Western Militaries: \- Hoffman argues that the U.S. and Western militaries have been slow to adapt to the realities of hybrid warfare. The conventional military thinking that prioritizes large-scale battles against uniformed enemies is no longer adequate for modern conflicts, where adversaries do not fight in traditional ways. He contends that the U.S. must move beyond its preference for conventional warfare and prepare for the full spectrum of conflict, which includes irregular and hybrid threats. \- One of the central challenges posed by hybrid warfare is that it targets the strategic cultural weaknesses of the U.S. military. For instance, conventional military forces are typically designed to engage in large-scale, decisive battles. However, hybrid adversaries avoid direct confrontation, instead using tactics like terrorism, guerrilla warfare, and cyber-attacks to prolong the conflict, increase costs, and undermine public support for the war effort. \- Hybrid wars also pose a significant threat to civilian populations, as they often blur the lines between combatants and non-combatants. This complicates efforts to protect civilians and maintain public order, particularly in densely populated urban environments where hybrid forces can hide among civilians and use them as shields. 7\. Strategic Implications: \- The strategic implications of hybrid warfare are significant. Hoffman stresses the need for Western militaries to rethink their defense strategies, force structures, and investment priorities. Preparing for hybrid conflicts will require more flexible and adaptable forces that can operate effectively in both conventional and irregular warfare environments. \- He recommends several changes to military planning and operations. These include enhancing the ability to conduct urban warfare, improving counterinsurgency capabilities, and integrating non-military tools, such as cyber warfare and information operations, into broader military strategies. Hoffman also calls for greater coordination between military and civilian agencies, as hybrid warfare often involves not just military combat but also economic, political, and social destabilization. \- Hoffman emphasizes that hybrid warfare is not just a military problem. It requires a whole-of-government approach, with military, political, economic, and social resources being employed together to counter hybrid threats. This approach is necessary because hybrid adversaries exploit weaknesses in governance, using criminal activities, terrorism, and social unrest to undermine state authority and legitimacy. 8\. The Future of Warfare: \- Hoffman concludes by warning that hybrid warfare is likely to be a dominant form of conflict in the 21st century. As globalization continues and technological advances make it easier for non-state actors to acquire sophisticated weapons, the line between state and non-state actors will continue to blur. \- He argues that future conflicts will involve not only state actors but also powerful non-state groups, such as insurgents, terrorist organizations, and criminal networks, which can exploit global communications, technology, and financial systems to wage war on multiple fronts. \- Hoffman highlights the importance of adapting military doctrines and training programs to prepare for these new types of threats. He calls for more investment in intelligence gathering, cyber defense, and urban warfare capabilities, as well as the development of more flexible, expeditionary forces that can respond quickly to hybrid threats in a variety of environments. Conclusion: Hoffman's \"Conflict in the 21st Century: The Rise of Hybrid Wars\" presents a compelling argument that modern warfare is becoming increasingly complex, with adversaries blending conventional, irregular, and criminal tactics to exploit weaknesses in conventional military forces. Hybrid wars challenge traditional military doctrines and require new strategies, force structures, and technologies to counter them effectively. The U.S. and its allies must adapt to this new reality, preparing for conflicts that are not only fought on the battlefield but also in cyberspace, in cities, and through economic and political means. The future of warfare, Hoffman concludes, will be defined by its complexity, its unpredictability, and its ability to blur the lines between war and peace, combatants and civilians, and military and civilian targets. **Lesson 8.10** **THE ROLE OF THE UN (Cannizzaro)** - Modern era è Nations felt the need to have international mandatory rules to govern relations in common areas of interest and among themselves - Some examples: the International Telecommunication Union (1865); the Universal Postal Union (1874); the Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes (1899) and the Permanent Court of Arbitration (which began to work in 1902) - After WW I (1919)èthe League of Nations - The League failed when WWII broke out **The Path Towards the Creation of the United Nations (1)** **12 June 1941**: the representatives of Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the Union of South Africa and of the exiled governments of Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Greece, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Yugoslavia and France signed a **declaration **which stated their willing to cooperate in order **to establish an enduring international peace** **August 1941**: Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill held a secret meeting where they discussed the possibility of starting an international peace effort They came out with a document called **the Atlantic Charter **expressed the need to establish a wider and permanent system of general security + paved the way for the development of the UN **The Path Towards the Creation of the United Nations (2)** - **January 1942**: representatives from 26 Allied nations at war with the Axis powers met in Washington, D.C. to sign the "**Declaration of the United Nations**"èdescribed the war objectives of the Allied powers - December 1943: the Teheran Conference è President Roosevelt, Prime Minister Churchill and the Premier Joseph Stalin recognized *"the supreme responsibility resting upon us and all the United Nations to make a peace which will command the goodwill of the overwhelming mass of the peoples of the world and banish the menace and terror of war for many generations"* **The United Nations Conference on International Organization, San Francisco (April 25th, 1945)** - The 46 States participating in the Conference were the Nations which had declared war on Germany and Japan and had subscribed to the Declaration of the United Nations - It was **one of the most important conferences in history **and, perhaps, the largest international gathering ever (2.500 press, radio and newsreel representatives and observers from many societies and organizations) **Voting procedure**: every part of the Charter had to be passed by a two-thirds majority **October 24, 1945**: the official UN Charter was ratified by 51 members after two months of very intensive and hard work. **The UN Charter** The UN 4 main purposes are to: - **maintain international peace and security** - **develop friendly relations among nations** - **achieve international cooperation in solving international problems** - **be a center for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends** The most of the successful results achieved by UN are the outcome of the wise and effective action by the second Secretary General, the Swedish **Dag Hammarskjöld. **He was able to develop an effective and constructive international organization capable of giving life to the principles and aims expressed in the Charter **The UN comprises 193 member States** Main bodies: - the General Assembly - the Security Council - the Secretariat - the Economic and Social Council - the Trusteeship Council - the International Court of Justice These bodies can make use of several UN specialized agencies, funds and programs that all together represent the so-called "UN System" **The UNSC** - It is **the most relevant UN body in the field of maintenance of international peace and security** - It has 15 Members (5 permanent -- US, UK, France, China and Russia -- and 10 non-permanent members) - Permanent members have a special voting power called the "**right of VETO**" (they can deny the approval of a resolution) - **Each Member has one vote** - All Member States are **obligated to comply **with Council decisions - It takes the lead in **determining the existence of a threat to** **the peace or act of aggression** - It calls upon the parties to a dispute to settle it by peaceful means and recommends methods of adjustment or terms of settlement - In some cases, it can resort to imposing sanctions or even authorize the use of force to maintain or restore international peace and security - The Presidency rotates every month **Collective security** It is the main role of the UN in the international arena. It is based on a **general prohibition of the use of armed force**, as stated in **Article 2 **of the *Charter "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations*". It is the main role of the UN in the international arena It is based on a **general prohibition of the use of armed force**, as stated in **Article 2 **of the Charter* "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations".* The system of collective security establishes not only normative but also political and military prerequisites for the Organization in contemporary context to be able to prevent threats or use of force and acts of aggression. Security Council plays a significant role in the global collective security by deciding whether force may be used against other states. The council can adopt a range of measures depicted and legitimized in Chapter VI, Chapter VII and Chapter VIII of the UN Charter. **Chapter VI** ***Pacific Settlement of Disputes (1)*** *An important Chapter of the Charter is Chapter VI which deals with peaceful settlement of disputes. Many peacekeeping operations initially were run under this Chapter and they were not working due to the lack of power.* **Chapter VI** ***Pacific Settlement of Disputes (2)*** **Article 33: ***"The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice"* ***Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggression *(1)** - **Under Chapter VII, the Security Council can take enforcement actions to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such measures range from economic sanctions to military interventions** - **Article 39 **"***The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression **and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security*" \- *The range of situations which the Council determined as giving rise to threats to the peace includes country specific situations, such inter or intra State conflicts or internal conflicts with a regional or sub-regional dimension* *Furthermore the Council can identify potential or generic threats to international peace and security (terrorist acts, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction or illicit trafficking of small arms and light weapons)* *After a decision under Article 39 the Security Council can order States to undertake provisional measures under article 40 (**recommendations**), measure under article 41 (**sanctions**) and article 42 (**military action**) against the identity responsible for the threat or breach of the peace* **Article 40**: *In order to prevent an aggravation of the situation, the Security Council may, before making the recommendations or deciding upon the measures provided for in Article 39, call upon the parties concerned to comply with such provisional measures as it deems necessary or desirable. Such provisional measures shall be without prejudice to the rights, claims, or position of the parties concerned. The Security Council shall duly take account of failure to comply with such provisional measures* **Article 41**: *The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations* **Article 42**: *Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations.* This Chapter provides for the involvement of regional arrangements and agencies in the maintenance of international peace and security provided such activities are consistent with the purposes and principles outlined in Chapter I **The failure to establish a military force under the control of the Security Council (Article 43) has led the Council to the practice of authorizing Member States to use force, acting both individually and within regional international organizations** The Security Council can use regional arrangements to enforce decisions it has taken relating to the maintenance or restoration of peace, as stated in **Article 53** In this manner, several peacekeeping operations have been "**subcontracted**" by the UN to some regional organizations such as **NATO in former Yugoslavia**, **the Africa Union in Liberia **and **Sudan **and **the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OCSE) in Chechnya**. By the way, according to Chapter VII of the UN Chapter **regional organizations may not take coercitive action whithout the prior authorization of the UN Security Council.** **Chapter VIII** ***Regional Arrangements*** In this manner, several peacekeeping operations have been "**subcontracted**" by the UN to some regional organizations such as **NATO in former Yugoslavia**, **the Africa Union in Liberia **and **Sudan **and **the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OCSE) in Chechnya**. By the way, according to Chapter VII of the UN Chapter **regional organizations may not take coercitive action whithout the prior authorization of the UN Security Council.** **UN Peacekeeping Missions (1)** - The term UN peacekeeping operations does not exist in the UN Charter. Dag Hammarskjöld referred to it as" Chapter VI and a half", placing it between Chapter VI & Chapter VII - May 1948: 1st UN peacekeeping mission è the Security Council authorized the deployment of a small number of UN military observers to the Middle East to form the **United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) **to monitor the **Armistice Agreement between Israel and its Arab neighbors.** **End of the Cold War precipitated a dramatic shift in UN and multilateral peacekeeping **The Security Council established larger and more complex UN peacekeeping missions, often to help implement comprehensive peace agreements between belligerents in intra-State conflicts and civil wars. Peacekeeping came to involve more and more non-military elements that ensured the proper functioning of civic functions, such as elections. **Limits of the UN** 1. **Enforcement mechanisms è a recurring criticism of the UN is its inability to effectively enforce mandates** 2. **Security Council inaction è the Security Council is tasked with taking action to maintain international peace and security, however the veto poses an obstacle to action** 3. **Western domination of UN institutions è despite** its mission emphasizing inclusion and representation, the UN is typically viewed as a Western-oriented organization **Conclusion\ What Can Be Done to Restore the Original Purpose of the** 87.000 men and women serve in 11 conflict areas in Africa (Western Sahara, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, Abyei Area, Republic of South Sudan), Asia (Lebanon, Israel, Syria, India/Pakistan), Europe (Kosovo, Cyprus) Where we operate \| United Nations Peacekeeping **There is a long list of countries that have returned to a reasonable** **degree of stability with the support of UN peacekeeping** **But UN institutional shortcomings produced several times failures **with reflections in inability to intervene in a timely manner (Rwanda, Somalia, Bosnia and Kosovo) The veto system is paralyzing the effectiveness of the UN peacekeeping: for example, in the current Russian war against Ukraine **Paper : UN peace keeping operations** The 2008 document \*United Nations Peacekeeping Operations: Principles and Guidelines\* provides an in-depth look into the evolution, objectives, and operational framework of UN peacekeeping efforts over six decades. The text captures the cumulative experience gained from over 60 peacekeeping missions since 1948, offering guidance to practitioners in the field and policymakers involved in planning and implementing peacekeeping operations. UN peacekeeping has transformed from its early role of simply monitoring ceasefires and facilitating the separation of forces to becoming a complex, multi-dimensional undertaking. Today's peacekeeping operations often take place in highly volatile environments where traditional state structures have collapsed, leaving the UN to address a variety of challenges simultaneously. These include protecting civilians, supporting national political dialogue and reconciliation, assisting in disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) of combatants, and overseeing democratic elections. The document begins by laying out the normative framework for peacekeeping operations, grounding their legality in the UN Charter, specifically Chapters VI, VII, and VIII, which allow for different forms of intervention ranging from the peaceful settlement of disputes to more coercive measures, such as peace enforcement when required by the situation. The document makes clear that while peacekeeping operations may utilize force tactically under certain circumstances, their primary role is not enforcement but maintaining and building peace. Importantly, this guidance distinguishes between "robust peacekeeping," which involves the use of force at a tactical level, and peace enforcement, which does not require the consent of the parties involved in a conflict. The key principles underpinning all UN peacekeeping operations---consent of the parties, impartiality, and the non-use of force except in self-defense or defense of the mandate---are central to the success of any mission. These principles guide how peacekeepers interact with local actors, build trust, and ensure the legitimacy of the mission. However, the document also notes that maintaining consent can be challenging, particularly in fragmented societies where there may be multiple armed factions, spoilers, or local groups that do not align with national-level agreements. UN peacekeepers must be aware of these dynamics and continuously work to maintain consent while also pursuing their mandate impartially. The document highlights the expanding scope of peacekeeping, particularly in the post-Cold War era, when intra-state conflicts became more common than inter-state wars. These conflicts often occur in regions marked by poverty, weak governance, and economic motivations for war. As a result, UN peacekeeping has increasingly involved civilian and police components alongside traditional military functions to address the root causes of conflict and assist in post-conflict recovery and governance. A significant portion of the guidelines is dedicated to explaining the practical aspects of planning and managing peacekeeping missions. This includes how the UN Security Council determines the need for peacekeeping, the roles of contributing countries, and how missions are supported logistically and administratively. The guidelines emphasize the importance of an integrated mission planning process (IMPP), ensuring that peacekeeping operations are part of a broader, coherent international response. This integrated approach also extends to coordination with humanitarian and development actors, whose activities must align with the peacekeeping effort to ensure long-term stability. In addition to traditional tasks like ceasefire monitoring and buffer zone management, peacekeepers today are often tasked with more active roles, such as creating security conditions for elections, protecting civilians under imminent threat, or assisting in the reconstruction of government institutions. Missions may also involve complex activities like security sector reform (SSR), legal reform, and strengthening the rule of law, reflecting the increasing recognition that without robust governance structures, peace cannot be sustained. The document also underscores the importance of peacebuilding activities, which are often integral to the success of a peacekeeping mission. These include supporting elections, helping establish legitimate political institutions, promoting human rights, and facilitating economic recovery. The guidelines acknowledge that peacekeeping missions often have to initiate or support these processes due to the limited capacity of the host nation or other actors in the early stages of post-conflict recovery. However, the UN's role is seen as temporary, with the goal of quickly transferring responsibilities to local authorities and international development partners. The final sections of the document discuss how peacekeeping operations exit, emphasizing the need for careful transition planning and the importance of building local capacity to ensure that peace can be sustained without the continuous presence of international forces. The guidelines emphasize that missions should aim for national ownership of the peace process, meaning that the local population and its leaders must take charge of their future once the security situation has stabilized. This comprehensive approach underscores that modern UN peacekeeping is not simply a military exercise but a multifaceted process that integrates political, security, humanitarian, and development efforts. It recognizes the limits of military force in resolving conflicts and emphasizes the need for peacekeepers to be adaptable, flexible, and closely coordinated with other international actors to address the full spectrum of post-conflict challenges. The document remains a foundational guide for those involved in peacekeeping, reflecting lessons learned over 60 years and adapting to the increasingly complex demands of maintaining peace in today's world. The evolving nature of conflicts, the need for robust peace enforcement in certain contexts, and the growing importance of post-conflict reconstruction make these guidelines essential for UN personnel and Member States engaged in peacekeeping efforts. **Lesson 15.10** **Transnational Governance of Defence War and Crisis Management: The Role of Defence in International Relations** Introduction Globalization has altered the social, economic and ecological relations between people no state can address transnational issues unilaterally The defense sector tends to be one of the last bastions of national control and self-determination, but not even this area can escape the logic of globalization Various forms of cooperation in the defense sector are possible, in order to rationalize the development of a certain military capability The deeper the integration, the more military capabilities it provides access to but national freedom of action is limited **Military Alliances** Military alliances: formal or informal agreements that provide a security guarantee and involve commitments in mutual supporting and protecting in case of an event, threats, usually during a war or in case of an attack from an enemy They can be bilateral or multilateral Examples of Informal military alliances: US & Taiwan, US & Israel or US & Saudi Arabia **Strategic Partnerships** A broader definition of military alliances includes those that do not imply a security guarantee  "strategic partnerships" They include the recognition of common security interests and provisions for strong military cooperation to various degrees Recent examples: the partnership between Israel & India, Pakistan & Saudi Arabia, China & Georgia **Defense Pacts** Defense pacts: treaties in which the signatories promise to support each other militarily and to defend each other Non-aggression pacts (also called non belligerency treaties or treaties of friendship): the parties agree not to attack each other or engage in military offensive actions Ententes: parties agree procedures or policies to follow in a specified case and agree to consult and collaborate (less binding than an alliance) **Transnational Governance** Nowadays the need to contain costs and deter effectively are pushing states towards forms of transnational governance of the defence sector Dilemma: which degree of limitation to national sovereignty a state can accept, adhering to a transnational governance, in order to better protect some national interest? In the last 50 years there has been a significant decrease in the number of wars, compared to the past. At the same time, there has been a substantial increase in the number of military alliances per country and the stability of those alliances Alliances, albeit troubled by internal difficulties, still are a powerful tool **Transnational Governance of Defence:** The Role of N

War and Crisis Management (PDF)

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue