Doctor of Philosophy (Economics) / This dissertation asks how foreign assistance to one or both sides in a civil war affects the dynamics of the conflict. This overarching question is subsequently divided into two further questions: 1) how does foreign intervention affect the capabilities of the recipient, and 2) how does this affect the nature of the warfare. The puzzle for the first is that the impact of foreign intervention on combat effectiveness frequently varies significantly between recipients. This variation is explained by recipients’ different abilities to convert the inputs of foreign intervention into the outputs of fighting capability. The nature of the warfare in civil war will change in line with the balance of military capabilities between the belligerents. The balance of capabilities will be responsible for the form of warfare at a particular place and time whether it be conventional, irregular or guerrilla/counter-guerrilla. The argument is then illustrated with two extensive case studies, of civil wars in Angola and Afghanistan, where temporal and spatial variation in the type of warfare is shown to correlate with the type, degree, and direction of foreign intervention.

Doctor of Philosophy (Economics) / This dissertation asks how foreign assistance to one or both sides in a civil war affects the dynamics of the conflict. This overarching question is subsequently divided into two further questions: 1) how does foreign intervention affect the capabilities of the recipient, and 2) how does this affect the nature of the warfare. The puzzle for the first is that the impact of foreign intervention on combat effectiveness frequently varies significantly between recipients. This variation is explained by recipients’ different abilities to convert the inputs of foreign intervention into the outputs of fighting capability. The nature of the warfare in civil war will change in line with the balance of military capabilities between the belligerents. The balance of capabilities will be responsible for the form of warfare at a particular place and time whether it be conventional, irregular or guerrilla/counter-guerrilla. The argument is then illustrated with two extensive case studies, of civil wars in Angola and Afghanistan, where temporal and spatial variation in the type of warfare is shown to correlate with the type, degree, and direction of foreign intervention.

The thesis "The lightening of arsenals and implications for conventional warfare" examines the trend of equipping national ground forces with only light armaments and possible effects, that this trend might have on conventional clashes. The thesis works with hypothesis, that lighter ground forces are inherently disadvantaged, when they clash with heavier ground forces. While the thinkers of Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) count on light ground forces to serve in concert with air power, the air superiority needed might not always be available. To determine possible outcomes of clashes between light and heavy forces, the paper examines seven historical case studies of clashes between opponents with great armament disparity, looking for importance of armament disparity inside the cases, as well as comparing them between the cases. The set of case studies largely confirmed the hypothesis, proving the value of heavy ground forces in combat. However, it also found that other effects, primarily air support and use of terrain, can mitigate or completely counter the effect of armament disparity. The role of technological advancement also changed the balance between the forces with infantry anti- armor weapons. The development of protective measures is though constantly keeping up with development of these weapons.

The use of heavy weaponry - such as tanks - in recent and current military conflicts has been overlooked, as were the principles of conventional warfare in general. With relation to armed conflict, attention has been given especially to the questions of conflict prevention and deconfliction. The thesis focuses on the ongoing conventional conflict in Syria, with the emphasis on the tactics of use of heavy armoured vehicles by non-state actors. The thesis takes advantage of volume of accessible primary sources concerning the topic to establish distinct modes of use of heavy weapons - the patterns of deployment, to analyse how the heavy weapons itself and the environment affecting their usage. On the two chosen case studies, these patterns of deployment are operationalised into an independent variable to assess whether the use of heavy armoured vehicles by insurgents in north-western Syria could be causally link with the outcome of military operations.

<p>Konvensjonell krigføring er ikke avleggs. Erfaringer fra fem-dagers krigen i Georgia i august 2008 viser at dette fortsatt er mulig og derfor høyst reelt. Men, det siste tiårets transformasjon av vestlige militære styrker og innsats mot opprørere verden over, har betydelig begrenset de fleste nasjoners evne til å utkjempe en konvensjonell krig.</p><p>Flere erfaringer kan trekkes fra den georgiske hærens kamp mot en sjokkerende og overveldende russisk aggresjon. Fra norsk landmakts perspektiv bør de mest sentrale være viktigheten av kombinerte effekter og robuste brigade strukturer, og virkningen av adekvat luftvern, indirekte ildstøtte og panservernsystemer i kamp mot en mekanisert motstander støttet av luftstyrker.<strong></strong></p><p>Som følge av en endret verdenssituasjon er realismen igjen på fremmarsj og kan anvendes til å forklare og anta fremtidige utfordringer. Vi kan ikke eksakt predikere fremtiden, men fremtiden vil høyst sannsynlig bringe med seg elementer fra historien. Mens NATO strever med å finne sin plass i en endret globalisert verden, samtidig som den utkjemper en hybrid krig i Afghanistan, reiser stormaktsrivalisering seg igjen på samme måte som den gjorde på begynnelsen av forrige århundre.</p><p>For å kunne ivareta nasjonale interesser og opprettholde nasjonal suverenitet, hviler fortsatt en militær evne på robuste og balanserte militære styrker. Landkrig spiller en sentral rolle i alle former for selvforsvar og avskrekking. En styrkning av Norges landmakt vil være nødvendig for å nå denne ambisjonen.</p> / <p>Conventional warfare is not obsolete. Lessons from the five-day war in Georgia in August 2008, shows that this possibility is still valid and very much alive. However, last decade’s transformation of western military and counterinsurgency efforts around the globe has severely restricted most nations’ capability to wage conventional warfare.</p><p>Several lessons can be identified from the Georgian Army’s struggle against a shocking and overwhelming Russian aggression. From a Norwegian Land forces perspective, the most important should be the importance of combined arms and robust brigade size units, the impact of adequate air defence capabilities, indirect fire and anti-armour systems against a mechanized opponent supported by sufficient airpower.</p><p>Due to a changing world order, realism is charging ground and can be used to explain and foresee future challenges. We can not precisely predict the future; however the future will certainly hold elements of the past.</p><p>As NATO is trying to find its place in a changing globalized world, simultaneously as it is waging a protracted hybrid war in Afghanistan, great power rivalry is again rising amongst the nations like it did in the beginning of the 20^th century.</p><p>In order to support national interest and maintain national sovereignty, military capability still depends on robust and well balanced conventional military forces. Land warfare plays an important role in any kind of self defence and deterrence. Strengthening of Norway’s land forces would certainly be needed in order to achieve this aim.</p>

Konvensjonell krigføring er ikke avleggs. Erfaringer fra fem-dagers krigen i Georgia i august 2008 viser at dette fortsatt er mulig og derfor høyst reelt. Men, det siste tiårets transformasjon av vestlige militære styrker og innsats mot opprørere verden over, har betydelig begrenset de fleste nasjoners evne til å utkjempe en konvensjonell krig. Flere erfaringer kan trekkes fra den georgiske hærens kamp mot en sjokkerende og overveldende russisk aggresjon. Fra norsk landmakts perspektiv bør de mest sentrale være viktigheten av kombinerte effekter og robuste brigade strukturer, og virkningen av adekvat luftvern, indirekte ildstøtte og panservernsystemer i kamp mot en mekanisert motstander støttet av luftstyrker. Som følge av en endret verdenssituasjon er realismen igjen på fremmarsj og kan anvendes til å forklare og anta fremtidige utfordringer. Vi kan ikke eksakt predikere fremtiden, men fremtiden vil høyst sannsynlig bringe med seg elementer fra historien. Mens NATO strever med å finne sin plass i en endret globalisert verden, samtidig som den utkjemper en hybrid krig i Afghanistan, reiser stormaktsrivalisering seg igjen på samme måte som den gjorde på begynnelsen av forrige århundre. For å kunne ivareta nasjonale interesser og opprettholde nasjonal suverenitet, hviler fortsatt en militær evne på robuste og balanserte militære styrker. Landkrig spiller en sentral rolle i alle former for selvforsvar og avskrekking. En styrkning av Norges landmakt vil være nødvendig for å nå denne ambisjonen. / Conventional warfare is not obsolete. Lessons from the five-day war in Georgia in August 2008, shows that this possibility is still valid and very much alive. However, last decade’s transformation of western military and counterinsurgency efforts around the globe has severely restricted most nations’ capability to wage conventional warfare. Several lessons can be identified from the Georgian Army’s struggle against a shocking and overwhelming Russian aggression. From a Norwegian Land forces perspective, the most important should be the importance of combined arms and robust brigade size units, the impact of adequate air defence capabilities, indirect fire and anti-armour systems against a mechanized opponent supported by sufficient airpower. Due to a changing world order, realism is charging ground and can be used to explain and foresee future challenges. We can not precisely predict the future; however the future will certainly hold elements of the past. As NATO is trying to find its place in a changing globalized world, simultaneously as it is waging a protracted hybrid war in Afghanistan, great power rivalry is again rising amongst the nations like it did in the beginning of the 20th century. In order to support national interest and maintain national sovereignty, military capability still depends on robust and well balanced conventional military forces. Land warfare plays an important role in any kind of self defence and deterrence. Strengthening of Norway’s land forces would certainly be needed in order to achieve this aim.

The objective of this study is to assess the growing role of Special Forces in modern warfare, with specific reference to the United States of America. The main question that the study seeks to address is what are the implications of the growing role of Special Forces in modern warfare? The study also seeks to ascertain why exactly this growth is occurring and whether or not this will have a bearing on the future of not only the manner in which the US conducts conflict but also global conflict as a whole. In order to address these issues the study will look at conventional and unconventional warfare and forces; the roles and missions of Special Forces and the composition of US Special Forces; the role of US Special Forces in modern warfare prior to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks; and the role of the US Special Forces in the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan. An analysis of conventional and unconventional warfare as concepts, as well as the forces that constitute conventional and unconventional forces was first done in order to provide some perspective into what these concepts and forces are and more specifically, what differentiates them. Specific reference was made here to the United States’ approach to warfare from the days of the American Revolution up to and including the end of the Cold War. Emphasis is placed on the growing role of US Special Forces throughout the study and this is achieved through the use of four major case studies, namely the 1991 Gulf War; Somalia (1992-1993); the Balkans (1995-2001); and the 2001 ‘Special Forces war’ in Afghanistan. The case studies that dealt with the 1991 Gulf War, Somalia and the Balkans elucidated the growing role of both unconventional warfare and specifically US Special Forces and Special Mission Units since the end of the Cold War. The case study of the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan provided the culmination of the shift from conventional to unconventional warfare and the execution of the campaign as a ‘Special Forces war.’ The study demonstrates that since the end of the Cold War in the 1990’s, unconventional warfare has increasingly become more ubiquitous and can be said to be replacing, or at least equalling in stature, conventional warfare. This has the possibility of dramatically affecting how warfare is executed both currently and more importantly, in the future. The study went on to show that unconventional warfare is not akin to conventional warfare, especially with regard to the forces needed to respond to such conflicts and that Special Forces are the forces most applicable and most effective in dealing with unconventional warfare. The study confirms that Special Forces are the solution to the growing prominence of unconventional warfare and that countries, and specifically the United States can more effectively counter the threat of unconventional warfare and unconventional forces by shifting Special Forces from a supporting component to conventional forces to a supported component. This would require a massive shift in alignment both for the United States as well as other major states’ militaries but as the study has shown, this is pertinent given that unconventional warfare and forces will most likely remain the primary threat that states and militaries will now face / Dissertation (MSS)--University of Pretoria, 2010. / Political Sciences / unrestricted