Military strategy in the 21st century

Bibliography

• Angstrom, Jan and Magnus Petersson, ‘Theorizing Weak-Party Escalation in Asymmetric Conflicts’, (this issue).
   Google Scholar
• Baylis, John and J. Wirtz James, ‘Introduction’, in John Baylis, James Wirtz, Eliot Cohen, and Colin Gray (eds.), Strategy in the Contemporary World: An Introduction to Strategic Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2002), 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Baylis, John, James Wirtz, Eliot Cohen, and Colin Gray, (eds.), Strategy in the Contemporary World: An Introduction to Strategic Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2002).
   Google Scholar
• Bellamy, Alexander J., ‘Lessons Unlearned: Why Coercive Diplomacy Failed at Rambouillet’, International Peacekeeping, 7/2 (2000), 95–114.
   Google Scholar
• Betts, Richard K., ‘Should Strategic Studies Survive?’ World Politics, 50 (1997), 7–33. doi:10.1017/S0043887100014702
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Betts, Richard K., ‘Is Strategy an Illusion?’ International Security, 25/2 (2002), 5–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bird, Tim and Alex Marshall, Afghanistan: How the West Lost Its Way (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press 2011).
   Google Scholar
• Boutellis, Arthur J., ‘From Crisis to Reform: Peacekeeping Strategies for the Protection of Civilians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo’, Stability: International Journal of Security and Development, 2/3 (2013), 1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Brodie, Bernard, ‘Strategy as a Science’, World Politics, 1/4 (1949), 467–88. doi:10.2307/2008833
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brodie, Bernard, Escalation and the Nuclear Option (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press 1966).
   Google Scholar
• Brodie, Bernard, War and Politics (New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing 1973).
   Google Scholar
• Brooks, Risa, Shaping Strategy: The Civil-Military Politics of Strategic Assessment (Princeton: Princeton University Press 2008).
   Google Scholar
• Buzan, Barry and Lene Hansen, The Evolution of International Security Studies (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2012).
   Google Scholar
• Byman, Daniel and Matthew Waxman, The Dynamics of Coercion: American Foreign Policy and the Limits of Military Might (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2002).
   Google Scholar
• Cavalery, Jonathan D., ‘The Myth of Military Myopia: Democracy, Small Wars, and Vietnam’, International Security, 34/3 (2009/2010), 119–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clausewitz, Carl von, On War translated and edited by Michel Howard and Peter Paret (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press 1976).
   Google Scholar
• Duyvesteyn, Isabelle and James E. Worrall, ‘Global Strategic Studies: A Manifesto’, Journal of Strategic Studies, 40/3 (2017), 347–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Earle, Edward Mead, ‘Introduction’, in Edward Mead Earle (ed.), Makers of Modern Strategy: Military Thought from Machiavelli to Hitler (Princeton: Princeton University Press 1944), vii–xi.
   Google Scholar
• Finlan, Alastair, Contemporary Military Strategy and the Global War on Terror: US and UK Armed Forces in Afghanistan and Iraq 2001-2012 (London: Bloomsbury Academic 2014).
   Google Scholar
• Fischerkeller, Michael, ‘Incorporating Offensive Cyber Operations into Conventional Deterrence Strategies’, Survival, 59/1 (2017), 103–34. doi:10.1080/00396338.2017.1282679
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fravel, M. Taylor, ‘Shifts in Warfare and Party Unity: Explaining China’s Changes in Military Strategy’, International Security, 42/3 (2017/2018), 37–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freedman, Lawrence, Deterrence (Cambridge: Polity Press 2004).
   Google Scholar
• George, Alexander L., Forceful Persuasion: Coercive Diplomacy as an Alternative to War (Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press 1991).
   Google Scholar
• George, Alexander L., Bridging the Gap: Theory and Practice in Foreign Policy (Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press 1993).
   Google Scholar
• Jakobsen, Peter Viggo, Western Use of Coercive Diplomacy after the Cold War: A Challenge for Theory and Practice (Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Macmillan Press 1998).
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, Ben, Brandon Valeriano, and Ryan Maness, ‘Fancy Bears and Digital Trolls: Cyber Strategy with a Russian Twist’, (this issue).
   Google Scholar
• Junio, Timothy J., ‘How Probable Is Cyber War? Bringing IR Theory Back in to the Cyber Conflict Debate’, Journal of Strategic Studies, 36/1 (2013), 125–33. doi:10.1080/01402390.2012.739561
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahn, Herman, On Escalation: Metaphors and Scenarios (Baltimore, MD: Penguin 1965).
   Google Scholar
• Kane, Thomas M. and David J. Lonsdale, Understanding Contemporary Strategy (London: Routledge 2012).
   Google Scholar
• Kier, Elizabeth, Imagining War: French and British Military Doctrine between the Wars (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press 1997).
   Google Scholar
• Kiszely, John, ‘The Political-Military Dynamic in the Conduct of Strategy’, Journal of Strategic Studies, (this issue), 1–24. doi:10.1080/01402390.2018.1497488
   Google Scholar
• Kjeksrud, Stian, ‘The Utility of Force for Protecting Civilians’, in Haidi Willmot, Ralph Mamiya, Scott Scheeran, and Marc Weller (eds.), Protection of Civilians (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2016), 329–49.
   Google Scholar
• Krause, Keith and Michael C. Williams, ‘From Strategy to Security: Foundations of Critical Security Studies’, in Keith Krause and Michael C. Williams (eds.), Critical Security Studies: Concepts and Cases (London: Routledge 1997), 33–59.
   Google Scholar
• Krulak, Charles C., ‘The Strategic Corporal: Leadership in the Three Block War’, Marines Magazine (January 1999).
   Google Scholar
• Larsdotter, Kersti, ‘Military Strategy and Peacekeeping: An Unholy Alliance?’ (this issue).
   Google Scholar
• Liff, Adam, ‘Cyberwar: A New “Absolute Weapon”? the Proliferation of Cyberwarfare Capabilities and Interstate War’, Journal of Strategic Studies, 35/3 (2012), 401–28. doi:10.1080/01402390.2012.663252
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindsay, Jon R. and Erik Gartzke, ‘Coercion through Cyberspace: The Stability-Instability Paradox Revisited’, in Kelly M. Greenhill and Peter Krause (eds.), Coercion: The Power to Hurt in International Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2018), 179–203.
   Google Scholar
• Mahnken, Thomas G. and Joseph A. Maiolo, (eds.), Strategic Studies: A Reader (London: Routledge 2008).
   Google Scholar
• Mayer, Michael, ‘Trigger Happy: The Foundations of US Military Interventions’, (this issue).
   Google Scholar
• Mazanec, Brian M. and Bradley A. Thayer, Deterring Cyber Warfare: Bolstering Strategic Stability in Cyberspace (Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan 2015).
   Google Scholar
• Meiser, Jeffrey W., ‘Ends + Ways + Means = (Bad) Strategy’, Parameters, 46/4 (2016/2017), 81–91.
   Google Scholar
• Nagl, John A., Eating Soup with a Knife: Counterinsurgency Lessons from Malaya and Vietnam (Chicago: University of Chicago Press 2005).
   Google Scholar
• Nye, Joseph S., ‘Bridging the Gap between Theory and Policy’, Political Psychology, 29/4 (2008), 593–603.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ohnishi, Ken, ‘Coercive Diplomacy and Peace Operations: Intervention in East Timor’, NIDS Journal of Defense and Security, 13 (2012), 53–77.
   Google Scholar
• Posen, Barry R., The Sources of Military Doctrine: France, Britain, and Germany between the World Wars (Ithaca: Cornell University Press 1984).
   Google Scholar
• Posen, Barry R., Inadvert Escalation: Conventional War and Nuclear Risks (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press 1991).
   Google Scholar
• Rid, Thomas, ‘Cyber War Will Not Take Place’, Journal of Strategic Studies, 35/1 (2012), 5–32. doi:10.1080/01402390.2011.608939
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rid, Thomas, Cyber War Will Not Take Place (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2013).
   Google Scholar
• Ruffa, Chiara, ‘Christopher Dandeker and Pascal Vennesson, ‘Soldiers Drawn into Politics? The Influence of Tactics in Civil-Military Relations’’, Small Wars & Insurgencies, 24/2 (2013), 322–34. doi:10.1080/09592318.2013.778035
   Google Scholar
• Saltzman, Ilai, ‘Cyber Posturing and the Offense-Defense Balance’, Contemporary Security Policy, 34/1 (2013), 40–63. doi:10.1080/13523260.2013.771031
   Google Scholar
• Schelling, Thomas C., Arms and Influence (New Haven: Yale University Press 2008).
   Google Scholar
• Sharp, Travis, ‘Theorizing Cyber Coercion: The 2014 North Korean Operation against Sony’, Journal of Strategic Studies, 40/7 (2017), 898–926. doi:10.1080/01402390.2017.1307741
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slayton, Rebecca, ‘What Is the Cyber Offense-Defense Balance? Conceptions, Causes, and Assessment’, International Security, 41/3 (2016/2017), 72–109.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sloan, Elinor C., Modern Military Strategy: An Introduction (London: Routledge 2017).
   Google Scholar
• Smoke, Richard, War: Controlling Escalation (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1977).
   Google Scholar
• Snyder, Glenn H., Deterrence and Defense: Toward a Theory of National Security (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press 1961).
   Google Scholar
• Snyder, Jack, The Ideology of the Offensive: Military Decision Making and the Disasters of 1914 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press 1984).
   Google Scholar
• Strachan, Hew, ‘Strategy or Alibi? Obama, McChrystal and the Operational Level of War’, Survival, 52/5 (2010), 157–82. doi:10.1080/00396338.2010.522104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strachan, Hew, ‘Strategy in Theory; Strategy in Practice’, (this issue).
   Google Scholar
• Tor, Uri, ‘“Cumulative Deterrence” as a New Paradigm for Cyber Deterrence’, Journal of Strategic Studies, 40/1–2 (2017), 92–117. doi:10.1080/01402390.2015.1115975
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valeriano, Brandon and Ryan C. Maness, ‘The Dynamics of Cyber Conflict between Rival Antagonists’, Journal of Peace Research, 51/3 (2014), 347–60. doi:10.1177/0022343313518940
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valeriano, Brandon and Ryan C. Maness, Cyber War versus Cyber Realities: Cyber Conflict in the International System (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2015).
   Google Scholar
• Vennesson, Pascal, ‘Is Strategic Studies Narrow? Critical Security and the Misunderstood Scope of Strategy’, Journal of Strategic Studies, 40/3 (2017), 358–91. doi:10.1080/01402390.2017.1288108
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, Paul D., Enhancing Civilian Protection in Peace Operations: Insights from Africa (Washington, DC: Africa Center for Strategic Studies 2010).
   Google Scholar