A comparative study of Civil-Military Operations perspectives as they apply to peace support operations

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Authors
Haynes, John T.
Subjects
Advisors
Eyre, D.P.
Layne, Christopher
McNaughton, James C.
Date of Issue
1996-12
Date
December, 1996
Publisher
Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School
Language
en_US
Abstract
The post-Cold War world has been marked by the United Nations approval and participation in the intervention into the affairs of sovereign states, often labeling them Peace Support Operations. American interventions have been studied in terms of chain of command, firepower and rules of engagement problems, but Civil-Military Operations have not been analyzed in a comparative fashion. Given that future interventions are likely to occur, it is the responsibility of policy analysts and leaders to consider both the costs and benefits of democratic enlargement and the applicability of current doctrine. To do this, tools are needed. This study provides three such tools. First, case studies on the US interventions in Somalia and Haiti provide a view of some of the questions and problems involved with intervening in the affairs of states for humanitarian or democratic enlargement reasons. Second, the study pits contending theories against each other to see if one better explains the outcomes.
Type
Thesis
Description
Series/Report No
Department
Organization
Identifiers
NPS Report Number
Sponsors
Funder
Format
xvi, 201 p.
Citation
Distribution Statement
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
Rights
Collections