Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.advisorLang, Anthony F.
dc.contributor.advisorBoyle, Michael
dc.contributor.authorBerger, Michael Andrew
dc.coverage.spatial324en_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-06-03T09:34:43Z
dc.date.available2010-06-03T09:34:43Z
dc.date.issued2010-06
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10023/889
dc.description.abstractThe following dissertation develops a theoretical framework for guiding the strategy of democratic states in successfully countering the hostilities of nationalistic substate terrorist organizations (NSTOs), and effectively manipulating the terrorist group’s (and its supporting elements’) decision-making calculus. In particular, the theory of strategic coercion has been chosen as a basis for formulating this framework, based upon: 1) the invaluable guidance it offers in dynamically drawing upon all instruments of national power—economic, diplomatic, military, etc.—to accomplish politico-strategic objectives; and 2) the unique insights it provides into making strategic moves aimed at influencing the choices taken by an adversary. However, strategic coercion theory as it currently stands is inadequate for applications against substate terrorist organizations. As a quintessential cornerstone for prescriptive policy in strategic studies, such a looming deficiency vis-à-vis one the most important security threats of the modern age is unacceptable. The new theoretical framework established in this dissertation—entitled the Balance Theory of strategic coercion—addresses this deficiency. The Balance Theory stresses that three key coercive elements of strategic coercion are fundamentally important for successfully ending the hostilities posed by NSTOs, being: A) Isolation of external/international support; B) Denial; and C) Isolation of popular support. It posits that these three aspects of strategic coercion serve as the sine qua non for success in countering an NSTO’s campaign of violence and effectively manipulating its decision-making process. Implementation of these three elements, moreover, must be pursued in tandem, taking care so as not to sacrifice one aspect for the other. The Balance Theory is tested through the employment of case-study analysis. In pursuing this end, both cross-case and within-case analyses are performed, accompanied by the utilization of the methods of focused, structured comparison. The cases examined are those of: 1) The United Kingdom versus Republican NSTOs (1969-2007); and 2) Israel versus Palestinian NSTOs (1967-present). The dissertation concludes with an examination of how the Balance Theory may provide insights for the formulation of counter-terrorism strategy against Al Qaeda in the current "War on Terror".en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherUniversity of St Andrews
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/
dc.subjectTerrorismen_US
dc.subjectTerroren_US
dc.subjectCounter-terrorismen_US
dc.subjectCounter-terroren_US
dc.subjectCoercionen_US
dc.subjectStrategic coercionen_US
dc.subjectCounterterrorismen_US
dc.subjectStrategic studiesen_US
dc.subjectStrategyen_US
dc.subjectAl Qaedaen_US
dc.subjectAl Qa'idaen_US
dc.subjectSubstate threaten_US
dc.subjectInsurgencyen_US
dc.subjectCounter-insurgencyen_US
dc.subjectCoercive diplomacyen_US
dc.subjectMilitary coercionen_US
dc.subjectIRAen_US
dc.subjectNorthern Irelanden_US
dc.subjectPalestinian Territoriesen_US
dc.subjectIsraelen_US
dc.subjectHamasen_US
dc.subjectFatahen_US
dc.subjectTerroristsen_US
dc.subjectInsurgentsen_US
dc.subjectWar on terroren_US
dc.subjectNationalistic terrorist organizationen_US
dc.subjectDeterrenceen_US
dc.subjectGrand strategyen_US
dc.subjectPopular supporten_US
dc.subjectPolicyen_US
dc.subjectGovernment policyen_US
dc.subjectNational defenseen_US
dc.subjectDefenceen_US
dc.subjectUnited Kingdomen_US
dc.subjectAmericanen_US
dc.subjectUnited Statesen_US
dc.subjectDemocraciesen_US
dc.subject.lccHV6431.B464
dc.subject.lcshTerrorismen_US
dc.subject.lcshTerrorism--Prevention--Government policyen_US
dc.subject.lcshTerrorism--Prevention--Government policy--Great Britainen_US
dc.subject.lcshTerrorism--Prevention--Government policy--Israelen_US
dc.subject.lcshNational securityen_US
dc.subject.lcshCivil defenseen_US
dc.subject.lcshStrategic cultureen_US
dc.subject.lcshGreat Britain--Foreign relations--Irelanden_US
dc.subject.lcshIsrael--Foreign relations--Palestineen_US
dc.titleHow resisting democracies can defeat substate terrorism : formulating a theoretical framework for strategic coercion against nationalistic substate terrorist organizationsen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.type.qualificationlevelDoctoralen_US
dc.type.qualificationnamePhD Doctor of Philosophyen_US
dc.publisher.institutionThe University of St Andrewsen_US


The following license files are associated with this item:

  • Creative Commons

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported
Except where otherwise noted within the work, this item's license for re-use is described as Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported