DOCSLIB.ORG

The EU Defence Market: Balancing Effectiveness with Responsibility

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The EU Defence Market: Balancing Effectiveness with Responsibility The EU defence market: balancing effectiveness with responsibility Edited by Alyson JK Bailes & Sara Depauw Conference Report COLOPHON Authors Jocelyn Mawdsley Herbert Wulf Santiago Secades Mark Bromley Cédric Poitevin Quentin Michel Hans Ingels Sara Depauw Tomas Baum Alyson JK Bailes Editors Alyson JK Bailes Sara Depauw Tomas Baum Lay-out Gramma nv Printed by Drukkerij Artoos Brussels, 15 September 2011 ISBN 9789078864455 Disclaimer Although the Flemish Peace Institute exercised the utmost care in the drafting of this report, it cannot be held or made liable for potential inaccuracies or omissions. No form of liability will be accepted for any use that a reader makes of this report. Table of Contents ABOUT THE AUTHORS 2 INTRODUCTION 4 SECTION 1: THE RATIONALE FOR A COMMON DEFENCE MARKET REVISITED: POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC ASPECTS 9 Jocelyn Mawdsley Towards a Merger of the European Defence and Security Markets? 11 Herbert Wulf Will the European Defence Market strengthen or weaken the EU’s Foreign and Security Policy? 21 Santiago Secades Openness in the European defence market and company competitiveness 29 SECTION 2: ARMS EXPORT CONTROL: EUROPEAN AND NATIONAL POLICIES 37 Mark Bromley The EU common position on arms exports and national export control policies 39 Cédric Poitevin A European export control regime: balancing effectiveness and responsibility 47 Quentin Michel The EU as a watchdog for responsibility in the field of arms control 53 SECTION 3: THE EUROPEAN DIRECTIVE ON INTRA-EU TRADE IN DEFENCE EQUIPMENT AND THE CHALLENGE OF CONTROL 59 Hans Ingels The intra-EU defence trade directive: positive goals 61 Sara Depauw Risks of the ICT-directive in terms of transparency and export control 67 CONCLUDING REMARKS: EFFECTIVE SECURITY AND RESPONSIBLE TRADE 75 Tomas Baum AFTERWORD: WHAT’S NEXT? 81 Alyson JK Bailes THE EU DEFENCE MARKET: BALANCING EFFECTIVENESS WITH RESPONSIBILITY P1 About the authors Alyson J.K. Bailes (°1949) is a Visiting Professor at the University of Iceland in Reykjavik and at the College of Europe in Bruges, teaching on general security topics and on Nordic and European security. From 2002-2007 she was Director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). Her former career was spent largely in the British Diplomatic Service. Professor Bailes has published widely on topics of general security policy development, European security and defence, regional security cooperation and arms control issues. Tomas Baum (°1972) studied philosophy, applied ethics and international politics. He is direc- tor and research coordinator of the Flemish Peace Institute. He has an interest in strategic trade control, public policy research and examines the relation between democracy and peace. He translates the work from the ‘Arms trade and arms production’ programme of the Flemish Peace Institute to various levels of policymaking, media and other fora. Mark Bromley (°1977) has a BA in Social and Political Sciences from St John’s College, Cambridge and an MA in War Studies from King’s College London. He has worked at SIPRI since 2003 and is currently a Senior Researcher with the Arms Transfers Programme. His areas of research include the arms export policies of EU member states, EU engagement in arms export policies and the illicit trade in SALW. He is the author of 'The Impact on Domestic Policy of the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports: The Czech Republic, the Netherlands and Spain', SIPRI Policy Paper no. 21 (May 2008). Sara Depauw (°1978) studied Political and Social Sciences and holds a European Master’s Degree in Human Rights and Democratisation (EIUC). In May 2006 she joined the Flemish Peace Institute where she conducts research and prepares policy advises. Within the research programme on arms trade and arms production she concentrates on the (sub)national, European and interna- tional juridical framework of external trade in strategic goods. Hans Ingels (°1964) is the deputy head of the Internal Market and Enforcement Unit in the Enterprise and Industry DG of the European Commission. He joined the European Commission in 1995. He holds a law degree and a degree in notarial studies, a degree in Company Law, and a degree European and International Law. Jocelyn Mawdsley (°1974) studied European Studies at the Universities of Bradford and Bonn. She also holds an MA and PhD in political science from Newcastle University. Since September 2005 she has been a lecturer in European Politics at the Newcastle University. Her research concentrates on the political economy of defence and security in Europe and its relationship to defence, security and science policy. Quentin Michel (°1968) is Professor in European Studies at Department of Political Science at the University of Liege. Since 2007, he is also in charge of the Presidency of this Department. He has worked as an “Expert National Détaché” for the EU Commission (DG Trade Unit E4 Dual-Use Export Control) and regularly advises National and International Organizations on export con- trol regimes. His current fields of research concentrate on the decision-making process of EU institutions, in particular the role of informal governance; dual-use items export control regimes; EU sustainable development and nuclear regulation policies. A new publication “In search of THE EU DEFENCE MARKET: BALANCING EFFECTIVENESS WITH RESPONSIBILITY P2 coherence: the European Union nuclear trade control regime” being a comprehensive analysis of nuclear trade control regime will be published in 2011. Cédric Poitevin (°1979) is the Head of the “Arms Transfers and Small Arms” Project with the GRIP (Group for Research and Information on Peace and Security), a Belgian independent research centre. His work focuses on small arms and light weapons transfer controls (mark- ing and tracing, post-export controls, etc.). His most recent publications focus on the national systems to control arms transfers in French-speaking States in Sub-Saharan Africa, as well as the management of land borders and the fight against SALW illicit trafficking. Prof. Dr. Herbert Wulf (°1939) is the former director of the Bonn International Center for Conversion (BICC) and is now adjunct senior researcher at the Institute for Development and Peace (INEF), University of Duisburg/Essen. He has researched and published extensively on arms control, arms production and exports, the state monopoly of force, the military in develop- ing countries, and development cooperation. THE EU DEFENCE MARKET: BALANCING EFFECTIVENESS WITH RESPONSIBILITY P3 Introduction 2009 was a milestone in the creation of a European defence market. European member states adopted the EU defence package which is meant to open up national defence markets in the EU in order to create a European level playing field. At the same time, the EU is strengthening its common policy to control trade in dual-use items and conventional weapons, in order to prevent arms trans- fers that might fuel armed conflicts and terrorism. On the occasion of the Belgian EU presidency during the second half of 2010, a conference was organised in the Flemish Parliament to evaluate recent developments in the field of arms trade and arms production. The central question of the conference was to what extent an economic-oriented policy – aimed to promote Europe’s competi- tive stake in defence production, trade and high technology – is or ought to be combined with a preventive arms export control policy. Can the EU pursue a rationalised defence market without undermining its goals and legitimacy related to conflict prevention? In search of a healthy balance between effectiveness and responsibility, this conference report aims to contribute to the current debate on the development of a European defence market and the EU’s armaments policy. Traditionally, the control of arms production and arms trade is closely linked to national sovereignty. States have developed national defence industries to provide the state with defence material and avoid reliance on other states for armament supplies. Reflecting a shared interest in controlling trade in strategic goods (dual-use items and military equipment), however, national authorities have agreed in international fora on common export control policies.1 The role of the EU used to be limited in this policy area, but its influence has gradually increased. The first initiatives of the EU to set up a harmonised export control policy for trade in both military and dual-use items were taken in 1991-1992.2 For military equipment, a European arms export control regime was developed as part of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). EU policy on trade in dual-use items related to Weapons of Mass Destruction, on the other hand, formed part of the EU’s common trade policy. While limiting intra-EU trade in dual-use items was deemed to be inconsistent with the principles of the common market, a common export control policy was considered necessary to reconcile this approach with the important dictates of non-proliferation. Thus the EU now regulates both intra- and extra-EU trade in such products and technology by means of a directly applicable regulation.3 As to conventional weapons, under CFSP the European Union has taken a series of steps culminating in a common position on arms exports, whereby common guidelines are applied and information exchanged, but national governments remain competent for adopting and executing the relevant legislation.4 By mid-2009, member states had also agreed on EU directives that bring intra-EU trade in military equipment increasingly, if not totally, within the sphere of Community competence and the Single Market.5 1 See international control regimes such as the Wassenaar Arrangement, Nuclear Suppliers Group, Zangger Committee, Australia Group, Missile Technology Control Regime, initiatives of the UN, OSCE, a.o. 2 Conclusions of the Luxembourg European Council (28 and 29 June 1991), DOC/91/2, RAPID database, 29/06/1991. 3 Council Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 of 5 May 2009 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports, transfer, brokering and transit of dual-use items, Official Journal of the European Union L 134, 25 May 2009, p.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • On Strategy: a Primer Edited by Nathan K. Finney
    Cover design by Dale E. Cordes, Army University Press On Strategy: A Primer Edited by Nathan K. Finney Combat Studies Institute Press Fort Leavenworth, Kansas An imprint of The Army University Press Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Finney, Nathan K., editor. | U.S. Army Combined Arms Cen- ter, issuing body. Title: On strategy : a primer / edited by Nathan K. Finney. Other titles: On strategy (U.S. Army Combined Arms Center) Description: Fort Leavenworth, Kansas : Combat Studies Institute Press, US Army Combined Arms Center, 2020. | “An imprint of The Army University Press.” | Includes bibliographical references. Identifiers: LCCN 2020020512 (print) | LCCN 2020020513 (ebook) | ISBN 9781940804811 (paperback) | ISBN 9781940804811 (Adobe PDF) Subjects: LCSH: Strategy. | Strategy--History. Classification: LCC U162 .O5 2020 (print) | LCC U162 (ebook) | DDC 355.02--dc23 | SUDOC D 110.2:ST 8. LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020020512. LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020020513. 2020 Combat Studies Institute Press publications cover a wide variety of military topics. The views ex- pressed in this CSI Press publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the Depart- ment of the Army or the Department of Defense. A full list of digital CSI Press publications is available at https://www.armyu- press.army.mil/Books/combat-studies-institute. The seal of the Combat Studies Institute authenticates this document as an of- ficial publication of the CSI Press. It is prohibited to use the CSI’s official seal on any republication without the express written permission of the director. Editors Diane R.
    [Show full text]
  • The Citadel, MA in Military History, CAAL, 05/15/2018 – Page 1 CAAL 05/15/2018 Agenda Item 5K
    CAAL 05/15/2018 Agenda Item 5k New Program Proposal Master of Arts in Military History The Citadel Executive Summary The Citadel requests approval to offer a program leading to the Master of Arts in Military History, to be implemented in Fall 2019. The proposed program is to be offered through online instruction. The chart below outlines the stages of approval for the proposed program. The Advisory Committee on Academic Programs (ACAP) voted to recommend approval of the proposal. The full program proposal is attached. Stages of Date Comments Consideration Program Proposal 2/1/18 Not Applicable Received ACAP Consideration 3/29/18 The Citadel representatives discussed the need for the program, explaining that the program is combined with leadership theory and targets military officers. The College of Charleston representative noted The Citadel and the College of Charleston offer a joint master’s degree in History and the proposed program is separate from that program. Members also commented on the financial support chart and inquired whether it accurately presents the costs and sources of financing of the program. The Citadel representative agreed to revise the chart. Following remaining discussion about the proposal, ACAP members voted to recommend the program proposal. Staff transmitted remaining questions for additional clarity. Comments, questions, 4/3/18 Staff requested revisions to address the following questions as and suggestions from discussed at ACAP or transmitted afterward: CHE staff sent to the • Explain why CIP Code 290201
    [Show full text]
  • The Strange Death of the Counter-Insurgency Era
    2 April 2015 The Strange Death of the Counter-insurgency Era What lessons can we learn from the counter-insurgency era that spanned the US-led interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq? As M L R Smith and D M Jones see it, COIN was more of a narrative than an empirical concept, it concealed ideologically-tainted modernization projects that worked at cross purposes with actual needs, and much more. By MLR Smith and David Martin Jones for ISN The notion of counter-insurgency is an elusive idea that in general terms simply denotes the attempt to confront a challenge to established authority, but which came to function as a synonym for long-term external armed interventions by Western states, most notably in Iraq and Afghanistan. In the mid-2000s, ‘COIN’ was elevated to a position of explicit importance in defence thinking and became a source of endless fascination in analytical circles. The ‘classical’ thinkers of counter-insurgency were resurrected from a largely forgotten past and became an object of reverence. COIN became the defining military practice of the age. Since 2011 Western forces have been withdrawn from major theatres of operation. In 2014 Western nations ended their major combat roles in Afghanistan. Once heralded as an almost universal formula for success in complex interventions, the costs, consequences, and controversies associated with the counter-insurgency era have left an ambiguous and unfulfilled legacy. Analytical opinion has already moved on. The occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan that once loomed large in political life have already begun to fade from view, displaced by new and different crises on the world stage.
    [Show full text]
  • War Studies Course Guide 2014/5
    FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES BA(Hons) WAR STUDIES COURSE GUIDE 2014/5 1 About this guide Welcome Course Management and Staff Involved with the Course Student Voice Student Charter Engagement The Wolverhampton Graduate About the Course Contact Hours External Examiners Academic Regulations Course information Academic Misconduct Anonymous Marking Support for Students Course Structure University Academic Calendar Timetables Where to Get Help with your Course Extensions, Extenuating Circumstances and Leave of Absence Health and Safety Issues Health and Wellbeing whilst using your computer Progression for Further Study Alumni 2 About this guide This Course Guide has been designed to help you plan your course. You are encouraged to read this Guide through now. It will be a considerable advantage to you to be familiar from the outset with the various aspects of your studies that are described. It may be that the relevance of some of the sections will not be immediately obvious. Keep it somewhere accessible, so that you can refer to it as needed. Obviously even in a document like this we have not covered every query and problem that you might have about the course. The Course Guide should be read in conjunction with the Undergraduate Student Guide / Postgraduate Student Guide; the Student Charter; the University’s Policies and Regulations and the University Assessment Handbook documents should provide you with all the basic information that we think you will need for your period of study here. If you find that there is something you need to know, please contact your Academic Faculty Office or local Student Centre on the details included below.
    [Show full text]
  • Master of Arts in Military History Commanding Officer Or Employer Will Be Accepted
    a former professor. A recommendation from a Master of Arts in Military History commanding officer or employer will be accepted. The letter should be as specific as possible in analyzing the Department of History applicant’s writing, research, and analytical skills and 843-953-5073 potential for success in the program. 5. Resume or C.V. www.citadel.edu/military-history Program Requirements Dr. David Preston Program Director In consultation with an advisor, each degree candidate will [email protected] develop a course of study, define a particular track for completion of the Capstone Experience, and establish a potential field or topic Mission Statement of interest if the student is writing a master’s thesis. Students pursuing a master’s thesis are encouraged to begin research and The Citadel’s Online Master of Arts in Military History discussion with their advisor at an early date. provides advanced historical study of the theory and practice of warfare, the institutions and operations of military forces, and GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS (non-credit bearing) the impact of militaries and warfare on societies. The degree • Darkness to Light Training equips graduates with a holistic understanding of the history • The Citadel Principled Leadership Seminar – LDRS 500 and evolution of warfare—from the strategic to the operational and tactical levels. The Citadel’s History Department and The distribution of course requirements follows affiliated fellows bring together award-winning and this general scheme: experienced scholars in the fields of war studies and military • Introduction to Military History (2 courses/6 hours) history. The M.A. in Military History advances The Citadel’s • Foundations in Military History (3 courses/9 hours) central institutional mission of educating and commissioning • Conflict Studies (2 courses/6 hours) officers into the United States Armed Forces.
    [Show full text]
  • Power, Profit, Or Prudence? US Arms Sales Since 9/11 A
    STRATEGIC STUDIES QUARTERLY - PERSPECTIVE Power, Profit, or Prudence? US Arms Sales since 9/11 A. TREVOR THRALL JORDAN COHEN CAROLINE DORMINEY Abstract By law and executive branch policy, every decision to sell American weapons abroad must reflect an assessment of strategic interests, economic considerations, and risk. Little work, however, has been done to determine how much relative influence each of these factors has on such decisions. This article evaluates arms sales in the post-9/11 era and finds evidence that strategic interests and economic considerations significantly impact arms sales but no evidence that risk assessment does so. It concludes with suggestions about how to better incorporate risk assessment by making the cost/benefit trade- offs more explicit in the arms sales decision process.* ***** rom 2002 through 2018 the United States sold over $200 billion in major conventional weapons to 169 countries. Thirty-one of those countries purchased at least $1 billion in arms.1 By 2018 the United FStates extended its dominance as the leading exporter of weapons with a 36 percent share of the global market compared to 21 percent for Russia and 6.8 percent for France, the second- and third- ranked exporters.2 Previous research into US arms sales finds that they are driven mainly by strategic and economic factors.3 The conventional view among inter- national relations scholars is that strategic considerations loom largest. Writing about American decisions whether to provide alliance commit- ments or arms sales to client states, for example, Keren Yahri-Milo, Alex- ander Lanoszka, and Zack Cooper argue that “U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case for Campaign Analysis: a Method for Studying Military Operations
    The Case for Campaign Analysis: A Method for Studying Military Operations Rachel Tecott Andrew Halterman 30 September 2020 Abstract Understanding military operations, from armored warfare to nuclear counterforce strikes to humanitarian response, is fundamental to international relations theory and practice. Although scholars have studied military operations for decades, there is little methodological guidance to direct their analysis or to help them leverage analysis to ad- dress broader theoretical questions. Campaign analysis is a method that involves the use of a model and techniques for managing uncertainty to answer questions about military operations. In this article, we define campaign analysis, standardize the method, provide methodological guidance, and illustrate the promise of the method for academic theory. We identify six core steps of the method: 1) question selection, 2) scenario development, 3) model construction, 4) value assignment, 5) sensitivity analysis, and 6) interpretation and presentation of results. Additionally, we recommend that scholars elevate the mod- els they build in their analyses as a central contribution of their work, and we recommend a new technique for propagating uncertainty in inputs through to a model’s output. We then conduct replications and extensions of two existing campaign analyses in order to illustrate the six steps of campaign analysis, the value of the two recommendations, and the promise of campaign analysis as a technique for improved measurement of variables central to international relations theories. Rachel Tecott is a PhD Candidate in Political Science at MIT and a member of MIT’s Security Studies Program. For the 2020-2021 academic year, she is a pre-doctoral fellow at the Institute for Security and Conflict Studies (ISCS) at the Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington University.
    [Show full text]
  • NL ARMS Netherlands Annual Review of Military Studies 2020 Deterrence in the 21St Century—Insights from Theory and Practice
    NL ARMS Netherlands Annual Review of Military Studies 2020 Deterrence in the 21st Century—Insights from Theory and Practice Frans Osinga Tim Sweijs Editors NL ARMS Netherlands Annual Review of Military Studies Editor-in-Chief Patrick Oonincx, Breda, The Netherlands This peer-reviewed series offers an overview of cutting-edge scientific research on military sciences drawing on scholarship from researchers at the Faculty of Military Sciences (FMS) of the Netherlands Defence Academy and colleagues around the world. Research at the Faculty is military-relevant and typically multi-disciplinary in nature. It is concerned with themes including but not limited to: - The conduct of contemporary war - Military strategy - Leadership and ethics - Military law and history - Command and control in military operations - Cyber security - Operational analysis - Navigation - Combat systems With NL ARMS the Netherlands Defence Academy seeks to contribute to a growing body of international comparative research in military sciences. Editorial Office Faculty of Military Sciences Netherlands Defence Academy P.O. Box 90 002 4800 PA Breda The Netherlands More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/13908 Frans Osinga • Tim Sweijs Editors NL ARMS Netherlands Annual Review of Military Studies 2020 Deterrence in the 21st Century—Insights from Theory and Practice 123 Editors Frans Osinga Tim Sweijs Faculty of Military Sciences Faculty of Military Sciences Netherlands Defence Academy Netherlands Defence Academy Breda, The Netherlands Breda, The Netherlands ISSN 1387-8050 ISSN 2452-235X (electronic) NL ARMS ISBN 978-94-6265-418-1 ISBN 978-94-6265-419-8 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-419-8 Published by T.M.C.
    [Show full text]
  • WAF0066 Written Evidence Submitted by Anthony King, Chair of War
    WAF0066 Written evidence submitted by Anthony King, Chair of War Studies, Warwick University The Female Combat Soldier: The challenges and opportunities of integration 1.Background: I am Professor Anthony King, Chair of War Studies at the University of Warwick. I have been studying the armed forces for nearly two decades, including dedicated research into female integration into the infantry. I have advised and mentored the British Armed Forces and NATO throughout that time, including on the issue of female integration. I present a brief summary of my research findings for your consideration. 2. Introduction: Female integration into the combat arms Females have been steadily integrated into more and more branches of the UK Armed Forces since the 1980s. However, along with the US, the UK resisted pressure to allow females to serve in ground combat units. Canada, with a different civil and military culture and alternate force posture, integrated women fully in 1989. By contrast, the UK was the last NATO force to change its ruling on female accession to the Royal Marines, the infantry, and the armoured corps in 2017. There are very small numbers of females currently now serving in the armoured corps. This statement outlines the challenges of integration and provides some recommendations of how they might be minimised in order to maximise the success of accession. There have been – and remain – two debates about female integration into the ground combat role: 3. Physical: The ground combat role, especially, the infantry is the most demanding military task. It involves extreme physicality. Combat soldiers must march and fight in often appalling conditions with carrying heavy loads, with inadequate food, water and sleep.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rule of Law and the Role of Strategy in U.S. Nuclear Doctrine
    Law and Strategy in U.S. Nuclear Doctrine The Rule of Law and Scott D. Sagan and the Role of Strategy in Allen S. Weiner U.S. Nuclear Doctrine During the Cold War, the United States’ nuclear doctrine focused primarily on the twin tasks of deterring a large-scale conventional attack on European or Asian allies through the threat of nuclear ªrst-use and of deterring a nuclear at- tack through the threat of nuclear retaliation. U.S. nuclear doctrine still Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/isec/article-pdf/45/4/126/1910598/isec_a_00407.pdf by guest on 22 April 2021 retains these objectives. Three important developments, however, have funda- mentally transformed the challenges faced by U.S. nuclear strategists. Meeting these challenges will require signiªcant rethinking of U.S. nuclear doctrine and deterrence policy. The ªrst development is that the proliferation of nuclear weapons to an in- creasing number of states and the threat posed by other weapons capable of inºicting massive harm against civilian populations—including chemical, bio- logical, and cyberweapons—have created new and diverse strategic threats. Questions regarding the potential use of U.S. nuclear weapons now arise in an array of scenarios distinctly different from the Warsaw Pact tank assault across the Fulda Gap or a bolt-from-the-blue surprise Soviet nuclear attack. U.S. mili- tary planners must now focus on both potential adversaries with very small nuclear arsenals, such as North Korea, and one with a very large nuclear arse- nal, Russia. Moreover, in an era of U.S. conventional superiority, it is U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Civilians Under Siege from Sarajevo to Troy
    Civilians Under Siege from Sarajevo to Troy “From frst-hand oral accounts of the sieges of Sarajevo and Leningrad, from a great range of documentary evidence, and from literary works imagining the sack of Troy, this volume studies warfare at its very darkest: the devastation of cities and their civilian populations. The techniques of siege may have changed beyond recognition over the millennia, but the objective of capturing or destroy- ing entire communities or states has remained a constant feature of warfare, and the human and material cost has always been extraordinarily high. The detailed case studies assembled here offer fascinating and disturbing insights into the poli- tics, economics, ethics and psychology of siege warfare, starting less than 30 and ending more than 3000 years ago.” —Hans van Wees, University College London, UK Alex Dowdall · John Horne Editors Civilians Under Siege from Sarajevo to Troy Editors Alex Dowdall John Horne University of Manchester Trinity College Dublin Manchester, UK Dublin, Ireland ISBN 978-1-137-58531-8 ISBN 978-1-137-58532-5 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-58532-5 Library of Congress Control Number: 2017947179 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2018 Chapter 2 is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). For further details see license information in the chapter. The author(s) has/have asserted their right(s) to be identifed as the author(s) of this work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Principles of Cyber Warfare Using Corbett to Understand War in the Early Twenty–First Century
    Corbett Paper No 19 Some Principles of Cyber Warfare Using Corbett to Understand War in the Early Twenty–First Century Richard M. Crowell The Corbett Centre for Maritime Policy Studies January 2017 Some Principles of Cyber Warfare Using Corbett to Understand War in the Early Twenty–First Century Richard M. Crowell Key Points: Corbett’s theory of maritime warfare is used to illustrate how forces that move through cyberspace, content and code, have similar characteristics to forces moving through the maritime domain: fluidity of movement, omni–directional avenues of approach and the necessity to make shore (reach a human or machine destination) to be useable. • The relationship between the information environment (IE) and cyberspace as a key part of information-age war is described with a particular focus on how decision- making and control of machines takes place at the nexus of the dimensions of the IE. • The use, and rapid adaptation of, cyber force to influence human decision-making and compel machines to work independent of their owner’s intent is explored. • Cyberspace and cyber warfare are defined in ways that provide commanders, subordinates, and political leaders with a common framework. • Principles of cyber warfare are presented with examples from recent conflicts to illustrate the concepts of cyber control, cyber denial, and disputed cyber control. Dick Crowell is an associate professor in the Joint Military Operations Department at the US Naval War College. He specializes in information operations and cyberspace operations. A retired US Navy pilot, he served at sea and ashore for thirty years. He is a senior associate of the Center on Irregular Warfare and Armed Groups (CIWAG) and founding member of the Center for Cyber Conflict Studies (C3S).
    [Show full text]