IW and Stability Operations - in your own words - what is the difference?

[Rob Thornton]

Lots of terms moving about these days. Two of them that have some weight are "Irregular Warfare" and "Stability Operations". At the SWC we have a pretty good group that is confident, well read, inter-active and interested to expend grey matter in pursuit of getting it right. So lets open up a discussion on the matter. I suspect that if this thread does take off, it will go in some unexpected directions. No need to limit yourself to IW and SO - there seem to be many other terms out there that conflict, parallel or intersect at points. I'd also say it is worthwhile to consider what the implications are for favoring one term over another.

Another good reason to do it here is our diversity - as definitions build, they may use other terms or contain ideas which seem out of context to particular disciplines or cultures - this is one of those cases where the discussion is probably worth more then the definition itself.

Not to avoid initiating the discussion while avoiding any “published” doctrinal definitions in order to consider the nature of the words:

For myself, I'm suffering from the component of the terms themselves - IW contains the term "warfare", which to me means a "way" or manner of waging war. E.G. – “irregular” could mean something out of character to the norm - which could mean everything from the type of means used to wage the war that then drive irregular tactics, operations and strategy, or just an "irregular" use of the "regular" means to wage war.

Stability Operations sort of hits me the same way - the key word being "operations" which to me indicate a type of undertaking to achieve an objective - in this case "stability" of something - a state, an area, a group, a problem, etc.


I recently read a definition of a "term" that because it used other like terms in its definition limited the utility of the term it was defining to a point that put the original term at odds where it has been used elsewhere in the greater lexicon.

While there is goodness in defining things, I think the real value in this case is probably the discussion about how they are perceived. Its not too hard to find out discussions or speeches where the multiple terms are used to describe the same things, and others where the same terms are used in ways that put them outside the context of an accepted definition.

Best, Rob