Contents and Abstracts
1Introduction: The Study's Central Thrust
chapter abstract
This chapter presents the analytical focus, scope of concern, and key
definitions involved in analyzing state-initiated brute force. The
analytical focus is on major twenty-first-century state-initiated internal
and external applications of brute force. The scope of concern is global,
covering both wartime and peacetime as well as human security, state
security, and regional and global security, including both short-run and
long-run military and political, economic, and social impacts. The key
definitions are of brute force, force success, force effectiveness, and
force legitimacy.
2Modern Coercion Conundrum
chapter abstract
In the twenty-first century, global system transformation and national
might misperception have led to a modern coercion conundrum. The global
system setting sets the tone for acceptable tolerance norms, common
practices, and constraints and opportunities surrounding brute
force-political leaders who decide whether to apply force do not do so in a
vacuum. Within this setting, these leaders often develop distorted views of
confrontations, involving overblown expectations about coercive benefits.
The modern coercion conundrum consists of five paradoxes: perplexing
persistence, eroding effectiveness, military maladjustment, lessening
legitimacy, and chaotic consequence.
3Cases of State External Brute Force Use
chapter abstract
This chapter examines major twenty-first-century external state-initiated
brute force incorporating political stability threats. The ten cases are
the American drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen, American killing of Osama
bin Laden, American invasion of Afghanistan, American invasion of Iraq,
French intervention in Mali, Israeli destruction of a Syrian nuclear
facility, Israeli invasion of Lebanon, NATO coercion in Libya, North Korean
sinking of a South Korean ship, and Russian invasion of Georgia. Major
powers (except North Korea) have tended to project force internationally.
Each case includes the description of the force use, the purpose and
rationale of force initiators and targets, force effectiveness, force
legitimacy, and future prospects.
4Cases of State Internal Brute Force Use
chapter abstract
This chapter examines major twenty-first-century internal state-initiated
brute force incorporating political stability threats. The ten cases of
internal state force use are the Bahraini crackdown on dissidents, Chinese
repression of dissidents, Egyptian repression of dissidents, Greek
repression of dissidents, Indian repression of Kashmir separatists, Mexican
coercion against drug lords, Myanmar repression of dissidents, Sudanese
repression of dissidents, Syrian repression of rebels, and Thai repression
of dissidents. Weaker governments (the strongest of which are China,
Greece, and India) tend to use force domestically. Each case explicitly
includes the description of the force use, the purpose and rationale of
force initiators and force targets, force effectiveness, force legitimacy,
and future prospects.
5Brute Force Security Impact Patterns
chapter abstract
Carefully examining the state-initiated brute force case study outcomes
reveals persistent patterns of success and failure. After flagging security
dangers from overuse and underuse of force, this chapter identifies the
conditions under which state-initiated brute force works best, highlighting
standards from which deviations could be measured and comparatively
evaluated to determine the wisdom of force use. Identified initiator and
target attributes linking to successful outcomes merit much higher policy
priority than common but low-impact force legitimacy concerns.
6Conclusion: Promising Security Paths
chapter abstract
This chapter translates case patterns into policy advice for managing brute
force. Broad guidelines emerge regarding brute force prior to its
application: (1) considering broad implications, situating it within a
wider range of influence instruments, and evaluating the full security
repercussions of its application; (2) identifying coercive limitations,
expanding open discussion about the restricted value of brute force, and
framing it as a transitional local military solution; and (3) acquiring
wide acceptance, pursuing when feasible multilateral approval and
cooperation, and forestalling deterioration of regional and global state
and human security. Specific recommendations emerge regarding brute force
during its use, linked to force initiator attributes associating with
success involving attainable purpose, credible commitment, unified resolve,
and forward thinking. Brute force is situated in a very different place
today than in the past, involving a far-from-ideal setting, a messy current
global security challenge, and a resulting shrinking brute force role.
