As someone in the final throes of a 'COIN/IW' PhD I commend Steve Metz's advice to you.
If you have a prospective school/ supervisor in mind you should have a lengthy conversation with them - there is no point in having a research topic that cannot or will not be taken on..
With respect to the 'COIN' is dead nonsense - it is exactly that, nonsense. I will bet London to a brick that the world will still see men and women who rebel against their state next year, next decade and well into the next millenium. It has always been the case. And if, as invariably happens, that state fights back in some way, there will be counterinsurgency.
If anything, the 'demonstration effect' of what Iraq and Afghanistan has done to / for the US, NATO and other allies will only serve to signpost the possiblities of insurgency to those who are aggrieved but relatively weak.
Those who claim 'COIN is dead, period' fail in one of the fundamentals of critical thought - realisation of context and perspective. Others who make claims for the adherence to or 'supremacy' of a particular COIN paradigm or future suffer a similar failure of critical thought.
Do not confuse the highly transient passions of the Western punditocracy or the eternal enthusiams and preferences of Western militaries (and their supporting industries and political stakeholders) for 'good old fashion westphalian warfare' for meaning that we have either seen the last of COIN in general, or that we (the west) will not fight such wars again. Of course, if you do believe that, I also have a nice bridge down on the Harbour (or an Opera House..) in my home town that I can sell you...
A concluding note, if you are interested in the doctrine angle for you research, have a look at the PhD Alex Alderson submitted at Cranfield (UK) :Alderson, Alexander. "The Validity of British Army Counterinsurgency Doctrine after the War in Iraq, 2003-2009." Unpublished PhD thesis, Cranfield, 2009.
regards,
Mark
Bookmarks