{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

(Week 3) Robert J. Art - Coercive diplomacy

(Week 3) Robert J. Art - Coercive diplomacy - Summary of...

Info icon This preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Summary of the text “Coercive Diplomacy” by Robert J. Art, p. 163 What is coercive diplomacy? An attempt to persuade a state, group(s), or non-state actor to change his behavior by a threat to use force by using limited force It can include inducement (transfer of resources or other things that would benefict the target) : those are proven to work better. “intented to be an al alternative to war” promises big results for a low cost (for the state that is coercing, the coercer) very dangerous way of “using” military force because if it fails, only two options are left: back down = state lose face/humiliation/lose bargaining power in the future war = ... well, lifes lost and possibility of military defeat ! Conclusion: it's important beign careful when using it --------------------------------------------------------------------- Coercive diplomacy vs Coercive attempts threat of military use (but can include, with the latter, other coercive measures) No threat of miliatary use. Instead, for example, it could be economic sanctions. (Greater success rate) Compellence and detterence Coercive diplomasy is a form of compellence (as opposed to deterrence), i.e intend to make an adversary do something On the other hand, detterence is to intend to keep the adversary to do something. Extended detterence : when a state tries to protect another state from the attack of a thirds party. Detterence is easier than compellence.
Image of page 1

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Conference and deterrence can become tied to each other when parties contest the legitimacy of status quo : Detterer Target 1) wants to keep the status quo (try to keep target to start something) 2) tries to overthrow status quo 3)View the attempt of detterer to maintain status quo as compellence: “You are trying to force me to accept a situation that benefits you but not me”. BUT 4) If target attempt to alter the status quo... 5) Deterrer will see that attempt as compellence: “You want to coerce me to stop defending the status quo and make me accept a situation that is not good for me. Detterence and compellence are now intermingled Compellence can have three forms (doses) : 1) diplomatic use (making threats) 2) demonstrative use (limited uses of force) – demonstrate resolution to protect one's interests and to establish credibility But what does “limited use of force” mean anyway ? It is very hard to say. because it depends on each party's goal and military capabilities. However, demonstrative use includes: Exemplary use: model and warning : “look what I could do...”
Image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}