The ultimate aim of any successful counterinsurgency approach is to defeat the insurgency and establish peace for the host country. In order for the counterinsurgent to achieve this aim, there are two approaches to adopt; simply through heavy use of force or through winning hearts and minds of the local population. This paper deals with the US Counterinsurgency approach, which is depicted as a kinder or gentle warfare, arguing that the adaptation of a people-centric approach and of Human Terrain System (HTS), merely cover up the high-impact war-fighting; somehow, the military is deployed to carry out commands in a kinder light, and high impact war fighting is an inherent part of the current counterinsurgency doctrine.

Studies of democratization have developed and have become increasingly more sophisticated across the past 20 years as a result of new datasets being completed and shared. Scholars have written widely on the subject and have offered explanations of transitions to democracy, but some of these explanations are incoherent with others. This paper offers a discussion of a variety of conditions which provide fertile soil for transitions to democracy, ranging from military rule and religion to economic development. Addressing this contestation, the paper argues that there is no single explanation for the transition to democracy and that it requires very sophisticated thinking to determine the conditions for democratization.