The Politics of Coercion : Toward a Theory of Coercive Airpower for Post-Cold War Conflict

By Ellwood P. "Skip" Hinman

Book Id: WPLBN0002170410
Format Type: PDF eBook:
File Size: 0.3 MB
Reproduction Date: 10/15/2012

Title:	The Politics of Coercion : Toward a Theory of Coercive Airpower for Post-Cold War Conflict
Author:	Ellwood P. "Skip" Hinman
Volume:
Language:	English
Subject:	Non Fiction, Political Science, Airpower
Collections:	Politics, Political Sociology, Science Fiction Collection, Political Science, Authors Community, Military Science, Bibliography, Naval Science, Social Sciences, History, Literature, Most Popular Books in China, Law
Historic Publication Date:
Publisher:	Air University Press

Member Page:	Air University Press
Citation APA MLA Chicago P. "Skip" Hinma, B. E. (n.d.). The Politics of Coercion : Toward a Theory of Coercive Airpower for Post-Cold War Conflict. Retrieved from http://gutenberg.cc/

Description
In The Politics of Coercion: Toward a Theory of Coercive Airpower for Post–Cold War Conflict, Lt Col Ellwood P. “Skip” Hinman IV confronts an issue of high interest to airmen and policy makers alike: What does coercion theory suggest about the use of airpower in the early twenty-first century? More specifically, Colonel Hinman seeks to determine whether any of the existing theories of coercion can stand alone as a coherent, substantive, and codified approach to airpower employment. Framing his analysis on three key attributes of conflict in the post–Cold War era—limited, nonprotracted war; political re-straint; and the importance of a better state of peace—Hinman examines the contemporary applicability of the four major theories of coercive airpower: punishment, risk, decapitation, and denial.

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 What Is a Theory of Coercive Airpower? . . . . 2 The Attributes of Post–Cold War Conflict . . .4 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2 COERCION THEORY AND THE POST–COLD WAR ERA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 Punishment-Based Coercion: A Theory for Total War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Risk-Based Coercion: A Theory for Limited War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 Decapitation-Based Coercion: Echoes of the Past . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Denial-Based Coercion: Too Much of a Good Thing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 3 A NEW THEORY FOR A NEW ERA . . . . . . . .31 Phase One . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Phase Two . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36 Phase Three . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Limited, Nonprotracted War and the Coercion Hybrid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 The Coercion Hybrid and the Politically Restrained Nature of Post–Cold War Conflict . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39 The Coercion Hybrid and the Better State of Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41 The Escalatory Nature of the Coercion Hybrid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 4 THE COERCION HYBRID AND POST–COLD WAR CONFLICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Operation Desert Storm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Operation Deliberate Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Operation Allied Force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54 5 POLITICS, DOCTRINE, AND THE FUTURE OF AMERICAN AIRPOWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65