Advertisement

Deterrence: Concepts and Approaches for Current and Emerging Threats

  • Anastasia FilippidouEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications book series (ASTSA)

Abstract

By exploring and analysing the complexities associated with the development and application of the concept of deterrence in resolving conflicts, this chapter sets the context of the book. Deterrence has to do with maintaining the status quo by convincing an opponent or ally that the cost of an unwanted action is greater than the rewards. Deterrence, on the one hand can act as a delaying mechanism in dealing effectively with opponents, in which case the aim would be to contain a conflict and the focus is zero-sum and more short term. On the other, deterrence can have the role of a proactive mechanism, where the focus is longer term. To be able however, to make shifts from zero-sum to a positive-sum the deterring party needs to be aware of context specific variables such as the opponent’s values’ system, the mind-set, and decision making processes. Routinely, mirror-imaging influences decision making leading states to develop deterrence policies with limited impact and effectiveness, as deterrence requires an understanding of the other’s as well as one’s own motives, objectives, and decision-making processes. Mirror-imaging leads to questionable assumptions about opponents’ values and how they will behave under pressure.

References

  1. Adler E (2009) Complex deterrence in the asymmetric era. In: Paul TV et al (eds) Complex deterrence: strategy in the global age. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  2. Barry B (1976) Power: an economic analysis. In: Barry B (ed) Power and political theory: some European perspectives. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Berejikian J (2002) A cognitive theory of deterrence. J Peace Res 2(39):167–173Google Scholar
  4. Byman D, Waxman MC (2002) The dynamics of coercion: American foreign policy and the limits of military might. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Freedman L (2004) Deterrence. Polity Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  6. Freedman L (2008) The evolution of strategic thought. Adelphi Papers: The International Institute of Strategic StudiesGoogle Scholar
  7. Gearson J (2012) Deterring conventional terrorism: from punishment to denial and resilience. Contemp Secur Policy 1(33):171–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. George A, Smoke R (1974) Deterrence in American foreign policy. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. George A, Hall D, Simons WR (eds) (1971) The limits of coercive diplomacy. Little Brown, BostonGoogle Scholar
  10. Jervis R (2009) Complex deterrence in the asymmetric era. In: Paul TV et al (eds) Complex deterrence: strategy in the global age. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  11. Johnson G (2004) Introduction: the foreign office and British diplomacy in the twentieth century. Contemp Br Hist 18(3):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Johnston AC, Warkentin M, Siponen MT (2015) An enhanced fear appeal rhetorical framework: leveraging threats to the human asset through sanctioning rhetoric. MIS Q 39(1):113–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Knopf JW (2010) The fourth wave in deterrence research. Contemp Secur Policy 1(31):1–33Google Scholar
  14. Kroeing M, Pavel B (2012) How to deter terrorism. Wash Q 2(35):21–36. http://www.matthewkroenig.com/Kroenig_How%20to%20Deter%20Terrorism.pdf. Accessed 18 May 2019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Luttwak E (1974) The political uses of sea power. The John Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  16. Luttwak E (1987) Strategy: the logic of war and peace. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  17. Lupovici A (2016) The power of deterrence: emotions, identity, American and Israeli wars of resolve. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Marighella C (1969) Minimanual of the urban guerrilla. Praetorian Press, SeattleGoogle Scholar
  19. Miskimmon A, O’Loughlin B, Roselle L (2013) Strategic narratives: communication power and the new world order. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Morgan P (2003) Deterrence now. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Morgan P, Wirtz J, Paul TV (2009) Complex deterrence: strategy in the global age. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  22. Neumann PR, Smith MLR (2008) The strategy of terrorism: how it works and why it fails. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Nye J (2009) Get smart: combining hard and soft power. Foreign Aff 88(4):160. (July/August 2009)Google Scholar
  24. Nye J (2011) The future of power. Public Affairs, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Paul TV, Morgan PM, Wirtz JJ (eds) (2009) Complex deterrence: strategy in the global age. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  26. Plato (2005) The laws. Penguin Classics, LondonGoogle Scholar
  27. Richardson L (2006) What terrorists want. Random, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Schelling TC (1960) The strategy of conflict. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, p 9Google Scholar
  29. Schelling TC (1966) Arms and influence. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  30. Schelling TC (1977) Arms and influence, 2nd edn. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  31. Schelling TC (1982) Thinking about nuclear terrorism. Int Secur 6(4):61. (Spring 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schwartz NA, Kirk TR (2009) Policy and purpose: the economy of deterrence. Strateg Stud Q 3(1):11–30Google Scholar
  33. Snyder GH (1961) Deterrence and defense. Princeton University Press, PrincetonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Vegetius (2012) De Re Militari (Concerning military affairs): the classic treatise on warfare at the Pinnacle of the Roman Empire’s Power. LeonaurGoogle Scholar
  35. Von Clausewitz C (1976) On war trans. Michael Howard and Peter Paret. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  36. Wilner AS (2011) Deterring the undeterrable: coercion, denial, and delegitimisation in counterterrorism. J Strateg Stud 1(34):3–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cranfield Forensic InstituteCranfield UniversityUK

Personalised recommendations