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.

<p>Kriget i Afghanistan som startade 2001 har bidragit till att många civila skadats och fått sätta livet till. En av anledningarna till detta är det ökade användandet av flygstridskrafter för att skydda egen marktrupp. Flygattacker är på många sätt en bra metod för att snabbt kunna bekämpa fientliga individer samt med stor eldkraft kunna verka över stora ytor. Baksidan av att använda flygbombningar är att det i flera fall drabbar dem som inte är det utpekade målet. Kan detta vara en bidragande faktor till ett ökat missnöje mot koalitionen i Afghanistan och en direkt ökning för stödet till rebellerna? Syftet med arbetet är att undersöka om det finns ett samband mellan koalitionens flygbombningar i Afghanistan och ett ökat stöd till talibanerna från civilbefolkningen. Den hypotes som jag utgår ifrån i mitt arbete är att flygbombningar som leder till civila förluster ökar stödet tilltalibanerna i Afghanistan. För att få ett svar på min hypotes använder jag mig av statistik över antalet civila dödsfall i flygattacker mellan åren 2006-2008. Statistiken kopplas ihop med statistik över det ökade antalet rebellattacker under samma period för att se om det finns en korrelation mellan dem. Därefter presenteras ett urval av intervjuer med människor som drabbats av flygbombningar gjorda av olika nyhetsbolag samt uttalanden från utomstående personer för att styrka indikationerna från statistiken om att fler civila dödsoffer leder till ökat stöd för talibanerna. Resultatet av undersökningen verifierar min hypotes. En slutsats av undersökningen är att koalitionens användningav flygbombningar måste ändras för att minska de civila dödsoffren och på så sätt inte vända befolkningen emot dem.</p> / <p>The war in Afghanistan that started in 2001 has contributed to numerous civilians that have been injured and killed. One reason for this is the increased use of air power to protect ground troops. Airstrikes can be a good way to quickly strike against individuals and to operate across vast areas with great firepower. But the drawback of aerial bombing is that it in many cases affects those who are not the designated target. Could this be a contributing factor to increased dissatisfaction with the Coalition forces in Afghanistan and a direct increase in support to the rebels? The purpose of this study is to investigate whether there is a connection between the coalition air campaign in Afghanistan and the increased support for the Taliban from civilians. The hypothesis which I test in my work is that air campaign, leading to civilian casualties increases support for the Taliban in Afghanistan. To get an answer to my hypothesis, I use statistics on the number of civilian deaths in air strikes between the years 2006 to 2008. As well as on the increasing number of insurgent attacks during the same period to see if there is a correlation between them. I also present support from secondary sources, including interviews with people affected by air bombardments and expert comments that indicate that the number of civilian casualties results in increased support for the rebels. The results validate my hypothesis. One conclusion of the study is that the coalition's use of the air campaigns must be modified to reduce the civilian deaths in order not to turn the population against them.</p>

Kriget i Afghanistan som startade 2001 har bidragit till att många civila skadats och fått sätta livet till. En av anledningarna till detta är det ökade användandet av flygstridskrafter för att skydda egen marktrupp. Flygattacker är på många sätt en bra metod för att snabbt kunna bekämpa fientliga individer samt med stor eldkraft kunna verka över stora ytor. Baksidan av att använda flygbombningar är att det i flera fall drabbar dem som inte är det utpekade målet. Kan detta vara en bidragande faktor till ett ökat missnöje mot koalitionen i Afghanistan och en direkt ökning för stödet till rebellerna? Syftet med arbetet är att undersöka om det finns ett samband mellan koalitionens flygbombningar i Afghanistan och ett ökat stöd till talibanerna från civilbefolkningen. Den hypotes som jag utgår ifrån i mitt arbete är att flygbombningar som leder till civila förluster ökar stödet tilltalibanerna i Afghanistan. För att få ett svar på min hypotes använder jag mig av statistik över antalet civila dödsfall i flygattacker mellan åren 2006-2008. Statistiken kopplas ihop med statistik över det ökade antalet rebellattacker under samma period för att se om det finns en korrelation mellan dem. Därefter presenteras ett urval av intervjuer med människor som drabbats av flygbombningar gjorda av olika nyhetsbolag samt uttalanden från utomstående personer för att styrka indikationerna från statistiken om att fler civila dödsoffer leder till ökat stöd för talibanerna. Resultatet av undersökningen verifierar min hypotes. En slutsats av undersökningen är att koalitionens användningav flygbombningar måste ändras för att minska de civila dödsoffren och på så sätt inte vända befolkningen emot dem. / The war in Afghanistan that started in 2001 has contributed to numerous civilians that have been injured and killed. One reason for this is the increased use of air power to protect ground troops. Airstrikes can be a good way to quickly strike against individuals and to operate across vast areas with great firepower. But the drawback of aerial bombing is that it in many cases affects those who are not the designated target. Could this be a contributing factor to increased dissatisfaction with the Coalition forces in Afghanistan and a direct increase in support to the rebels? The purpose of this study is to investigate whether there is a connection between the coalition air campaign in Afghanistan and the increased support for the Taliban from civilians. The hypothesis which I test in my work is that air campaign, leading to civilian casualties increases support for the Taliban in Afghanistan. To get an answer to my hypothesis, I use statistics on the number of civilian deaths in air strikes between the years 2006 to 2008. As well as on the increasing number of insurgent attacks during the same period to see if there is a correlation between them. I also present support from secondary sources, including interviews with people affected by air bombardments and expert comments that indicate that the number of civilian casualties results in increased support for the rebels. The results validate my hypothesis. One conclusion of the study is that the coalition's use of the air campaigns must be modified to reduce the civilian deaths in order not to turn the population against them.

A paper submitted to the Faculty of the Naval War College in partial satisfaction of the requirements of the Department of Joint Maritime Operations. / "Final Report."--Rept. document page. "4 February 2002"--P. ii. Description based on title screen as viewed on Aug. 18, 2003. Includes bibliographical references (p. 23-25). Also available in print.

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.

Thesis (Master of Military Studies)-Marine Corps Command and Staff College, 2008. / Title from title page of PDF document (viewed on: Jan 5, 2010). Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of California, San Diego, 2008. / Title from first page of PDF file (viewed July 3, 2008). Available via ProQuest Digital Dissertations. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 397-409).

Thesis (M.S. in Defense Analysis)--Naval Postgraduate School, June 2005. / Thesis Advisor(s): Kalev Sepp. Includes bibliographical references (p. 173-185). Also available online.

Insurgency has two main strategies, guerrilla warfare and terrorism, which should be treated as linked, but distinct, strategies. This thesis examines the role of incumbent violence in leading insurgents to select one, or both, of these strategies. It argues that incumbent violence can create support for insurgency by causing fear and a desire for revenge and reshaping the social structures of a community. It also argues that incumbent violence increases popular support for terrorism in particular by creating outbidding incentives and desires to respond in kind to civilian deaths and as a way of punishing norm violations against attacking civilians on the part of the incumbent. The paper tests this theory with a qualitative case study of the conflict in Northern Ireland during the 1970s and a quantitative analysis of insurgent violence in the Kirkuk, Diyala, Babylon, and Salah al Din provinces during the 2003-2009 Iraq conflict

No description available.