What Barriers Commonly Impede The Successful Implementation Of Strategic Coercion Today?

Table of Contents

Introduction1

Discussion1

Deterrence and coercion2

Strategic Coercion3

Barriers Impeding Successful Implementation of Strategic Coercion7

Barrier 1: Political Influence7

Barrier 2: Adversary's Military Power12

Barrier 3: Brute Force Solution or Attacks14

Barrier 4: Transformations16

Conclusion21

End Notes23

What Barriers Commonly Impede The Successful Implementation Of Strategic Coercion Today?

Introduction

The main emphasis of this essay will be on the identification of barriers that usually slow down the successful implementation of strategic coercion. Major tool of U.S. foreign policy, the strategy of coercion stands both deterrent (for the purpose it serves) and pre-emption (by means and its effects continued). This humble and short note seeks to lay down concepts of coercion and deterrent before indulging into the barriers impeding implementation of strategic coercion and also give some reminders or to ask a few questions to understand the nature and barriers in the successful implementation of strategic coercion strategies.

Discussion

Strategic coercion is diplomacy through the means or instruments of power available for states to coerce other states/nation states for national objectives. It is different from Deterrence. There are several examples in the history of successful coercion in the past for certain reasons and other examples of unsuccessful coercion. Consideration should be given to the factors and circumstances of global changes on the levels of within states, interstates and globally. Unlike deterrence that aims to maintain a status quo, coercion seeks to change it. There is therefore no question of a simple material balance of power, or even the need for a battle. This last point is often the reason why coercion is sometimes classified in the diplomatic field (especially when it takes the form of economic sanctions, financial or business) but rarely in that of the war itself (except to speak of coercion punitive reprisal as imagined by theorists of strategic bombing).

Deterrence and coercion

Deterrence and coercion overlap to such an extent that it becomes quite difficult to determine the accurate process of persuasion for the implementation, and it is not uncommon that the two should be used together. Like deterrence, coercion is suitable at all levels of conflict. Deterrence and coercion are the reasons for the military, but neither necessarily requires the use of lethal force. Therefore, deterrence and coercion are tools which are used to persuade an opponent to behave in a manner consistent with state's interests and are, therefore, a corollary of the other instruments of national power. The ability to deter or coerce effectively is the essence of the utility of the military instrument of national power. Credibility and the ability to turn a threat into action are vital foundations of deterrence and coercion. Coercion at times turns out to be the pressure on someone to force their will or behaviour. But it is not unique to totalitarian governments. Democratic states also have coercive power to enforce laws e.g. a strike that prohibiting persons who are not making the strike, the right to travel freely throughout the territory etc.

Deterrence can be used at all levels of conflict in the defence ...