The debate amongst theorists on how to best utilize airpower is still ongoing. There is some consensus among scholars that attacking military targets directly is an effective strategy, one of those theorists is Robert A. Pape. Most research on the subject only examine historical cases and does not factor in more contemporary difficulties. The purpose of this study is to examine Robert A. Pape’s airpower theory of denial in a comparative case study. The two cases, Operation Odyssey Dawn and Enduring Freedom, are succesful contemporary operations where airpower played a major role in a military intervention with the intent to examine which part of Pape’s theory is still curant in modern and dynamic conflicts. The results show that the denial strategy contributed to the success in both cases for the most part by providing air support to ground troops. The effect of operational interventions differed between the cases and the reasons why may have several explanations. Strategic intervention had neither effect nor occurrence in either case which may be due to the operations reaching objectives in a short amount of time and to restrictions on collateral damage. Further research is required to cement the conclusions.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:fhs-9213 |
| Date | January 2020 |
| Creators | Wiborn, Jonas |
| Publisher | Försvarshögskolan |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0018 seconds