NATO’s sub-conventional deterrence: The case of Russian violations of the Estonian airspace

IF 4 1区社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

Contemporary Security Policy Pub Date : 2022-01-19 DOI:10.1080/13523260.2022.2028464

Matus Halas

引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT The question of how to deter sub-conventional activities—characterized by a limited role for the use of force—is one of the biggest puzzles in security studies. A way forward might be to use an enduring rivalry conflict management framework and to focus on findings from criminology. As the case study of 56 Estonian airspace violations suggests, executing sub-conventional deterrence is not an easy task to achieve. NATO’s deterrence success remains elusive, because there is no consistency in responding to these violations and no meaningful punishment. Yet many changes in frequency, intensity, and volatility of Russian intrusions over the last two decades indicate that a successful dissuasion, if not de-escalation, is still possible. To achieve that, NATO needs to improve information transmission, define its deterrence goals more narrowly, impose group-level costs, and implement dynamic deterrence mechanisms offering alternative modes of behavior.

查看原文本刊更多论文

北约的次常规威慑:俄罗斯侵犯爱沙尼亚领空的案例

摘要如何遏制以使用武力作用有限为特征的亚常规活动是安全研究中最大的难题之一。前进的道路可能是使用一个持久的竞争冲突管理框架，并关注犯罪学的研究结果。正如对56起爱沙尼亚侵犯领空事件的案例研究所表明的那样，执行次常规威慑并非易事。北约的威慑成功仍然难以捉摸，因为对这些违规行为的反应没有一致性，也没有有意义的惩罚。然而，在过去二十年中，俄罗斯入侵的频率、强度和波动性发生了许多变化，这表明，如果不缓和局势，成功的劝阻仍然是可能的。为了实现这一目标，北约需要改进信息传输，更狭义地定义其威慑目标，施加集团层面的成本，并实施提供替代行为模式的动态威慑机制。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Contemporary Security Policy Multiple-

CiteScore

14.60

自引率

6.80%

发文量

期刊介绍： One of the oldest peer-reviewed journals in international conflict and security, Contemporary Security Policy promotes theoretically-based research on policy problems of armed conflict, intervention and conflict resolution. Since it first appeared in 1980, CSP has established its unique place as a meeting ground for research at the nexus of theory and policy. Spanning the gap between academic and policy approaches, CSP offers policy analysts a place to pursue fundamental issues, and academic writers a venue for addressing policy. Major fields of concern include: War and armed conflict Peacekeeping Conflict resolution Arms control and disarmament Defense policy Strategic culture International institutions. CSP is committed to a broad range of intellectual perspectives. Articles promote new analytical approaches, iconoclastic interpretations and previously overlooked perspectives. Its pages encourage novel contributions and outlooks, not particular methodologies or policy goals. Its geographical scope is worldwide and includes security challenges in Europe, Africa, the Middle-East and Asia. Authors are encouraged to examine established priorities in innovative ways and to apply traditional methods to new problems.