Don't shoot the messenger
Quote:
Originally Posted by
John T. Fishel
How do civil war and insurgency differ? Mike, the objective of an insurgency is to overturn the existing order. The objective of a civil war is also to overturn the existing order. Insurgencies take place within a community (writ large or small ie El Salvador, the US, the "global community"), so, too, civil wars. Insurgencies use all types of tactics, operations, strategy from terrorism to conventional force on force conflict; so, too, civil wars. For example, what was Mao's revolution? An insurgency? A civil war? The answer is, "yes." To me, this is a distiction without substance (with all due respect to Hy Rothstein whom I've known since El Salvador days.).
John,
I just wanted to let everyone know about the book. Your question was one of the biggest debates we had, and I'm curious to see how well they address that topic in the book. Personally, I'm a fan of Ken White's description of small, medium, and big wars depending on scope, intensity, and duration.
Mike
Not shoot the messenger????
What's the world coming to???:eek:
Mike, I didn't mean to come across as taking a shot at the messenger or the authors (I really thought Hy was one of the sharpest of the OPATT's I met in El Sal) but rahter at the notion that this was a useful distinction. How they define the terms will determine whther the ideas are useful. Will their definitions advance or constrain the conversation?
Best
JohnT
Legal or military concepts ?
My thought about the trailer that Mike posted keeps coming back into my skull as I've returned to this thread a couple of times.
The thought is: are the authors seeking to define "war" in legal terms or military terms; or are they creating some awful hybrid of legal and military mishmash ? Not having the book, I can't really say; but the trailer seems to point in the latter direction.
The terms "intra-state war [or inter-state war], civil war, and insurgency" are certainly terms used in I Law and LOAC to define certain situations, as to which different legal rules apply. I'll spare you the legal stuff for now.
What I fail to see is how legal terms can be transferred with any ulitility to the military realm without creating confusion. The concept of "small, medium, and big wars" (realizing that those terms are segments of a "violence" spectrum; and also realizing that a concomitant political struggle exists alongside the military struggle) seems a more useful construct. It also does not mix legal apples and military oranges - small, medium, and big wars are all armed conflicts legally, no more and no less.
Regards
Mike
Difference between civil war and insurgency
Quote:
Originally Posted by
John T. Fishel
How do civil war and insurgency differ?
I found this in my personal notes from studying Mao's 3 phases and Vietcong's strategy. This is how I describe the difference. I haven't seen any academic literature or military doctrine that counters it.
Phase Zero: Ideological/Revolutionary Movement
Phase One: Insurgency
Phase Two: Insurgency/Civil War
Phase Three: Civil War
I never figured out what 2.5 or the tipping point from insurgency to civil war is.
Any thoughts?