2011
DOI: 10.21236/ada543044
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Finding the Balance: U.S. Military and Future Operations (PKSOI Papers)

Abstract: Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and R… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 1 publication
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Critical observers argue that the US military’s development activities are dangerous, not least because they disguise the USA’s real security interests, namely, counter-terrorism (Besteman, 2009; Keenan, 2009). On the other hand, US military analysts have taken counterinsurgency thinking and practice to non-war spaces, arguing that future military engagement in the context of so-called ungoverned spaces will have to be less kinetic, more preventative, and concentrate on the population (Flavin, 2011; Taw, 2012; United States Institute for Peace and US Army Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute (USIP/PKSOI)). Both sides would argue that the military’s new modus operandi results in the redrawing of the boundary between civilian and military responsibilities.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Critical observers argue that the US military’s development activities are dangerous, not least because they disguise the USA’s real security interests, namely, counter-terrorism (Besteman, 2009; Keenan, 2009). On the other hand, US military analysts have taken counterinsurgency thinking and practice to non-war spaces, arguing that future military engagement in the context of so-called ungoverned spaces will have to be less kinetic, more preventative, and concentrate on the population (Flavin, 2011; Taw, 2012; United States Institute for Peace and US Army Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute (USIP/PKSOI)). Both sides would argue that the military’s new modus operandi results in the redrawing of the boundary between civilian and military responsibilities.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%