Michael C. Horowitz, Shahryar Pasandideh, A. Gilli, Mauro Gilli
{"title":"Correspondence: Military-Technological Imitation and Rising Powers","authors":"Michael C. Horowitz, Shahryar Pasandideh, A. Gilli, Mauro Gilli","doi":"10.1162/isec_c_00363","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Andrea Gilli and Mauro Gilli should be lauded for making clear how the growing complexity of capital-intensive military platforms such as aghter jets hinders states, such as China, seeking to mimic the United States.1 Gilli and Gilli join a long line of thinkers, myself included, who argue that military technology does not always diffuse easily and that the characteristics of technologies matter in driving how those technologies spread and inouence international politics.2 Although there is much to like about Gilli and Gilli’s article, their analysis has some theoretical limitations with implications for policymaking. First, because Gilli and Gilli evaluate only military technology adoption, they miss the broader ways that human capital, tacit knowledge, and organizational practices shape military power. Gilli and Gilli’s unit of analysis is military-technological superiority (p. 145), suggesting a technologically determinist view of military power. Technology, however, is only a subset of how states generate military power. More important for victory and defeat, on average, is how states develop and employ their capabilities on the battleaeld.3 Gilli and Gilli’s ignoring of the organizational component of military power is relevant because another reason why a country such as China might struggle to adopt some of today’s key military capabilities involves a lack of tacit organizational and Correspondence: Military-Technological Imitation","PeriodicalId":48667,"journal":{"name":"International Security","volume":"53 1","pages":"185-192"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Security","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_c_00363","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Andrea Gilli and Mauro Gilli should be lauded for making clear how the growing complexity of capital-intensive military platforms such as aghter jets hinders states, such as China, seeking to mimic the United States.1 Gilli and Gilli join a long line of thinkers, myself included, who argue that military technology does not always diffuse easily and that the characteristics of technologies matter in driving how those technologies spread and inouence international politics.2 Although there is much to like about Gilli and Gilli’s article, their analysis has some theoretical limitations with implications for policymaking. First, because Gilli and Gilli evaluate only military technology adoption, they miss the broader ways that human capital, tacit knowledge, and organizational practices shape military power. Gilli and Gilli’s unit of analysis is military-technological superiority (p. 145), suggesting a technologically determinist view of military power. Technology, however, is only a subset of how states generate military power. More important for victory and defeat, on average, is how states develop and employ their capabilities on the battleaeld.3 Gilli and Gilli’s ignoring of the organizational component of military power is relevant because another reason why a country such as China might struggle to adopt some of today’s key military capabilities involves a lack of tacit organizational and Correspondence: Military-Technological Imitation
期刊介绍:
International Security publishes lucid, well-documented essays on the full range of contemporary security issues. Its articles address traditional topics of war and peace, as well as more recent dimensions of security, including environmental, demographic, and humanitarian issues, transnational networks, and emerging technologies.
International Security has defined the debate on US national security policy and set the agenda for scholarship on international security affairs for more than forty years. The journal values scholarship that challenges the conventional wisdom, examines policy, engages theory, illuminates history, and discovers new trends.
Readers of IS discover new developments in:
The causes and prevention of war
U.S.-China relations
Great power politics
Ethnic conflict and intra-state war
Terrorism and insurgency
Regional security in Africa, Asia, Europe, and Latin America
U.S. foreign and defense policy
International relations theory
Diplomatic and military history
Cybersecurity and defense technology
Political economy, business, and security
Nuclear proliferation.