Tutorial Summary HIR101: Tutorial 9, ‘Old and New Security Challenges.’
Student: Heidi
Robert Art, 'The Four Functions of Force' (in) Art, Robert J. and Robert Jervis:
International Politics: Enduring Concepts and Contemporary Issues, 11th edn. Pearson,
2012. pp. 164-171.
Introduction: There are four general purposes for using force: defence, deterrence,
compellence and swagger. Although they are distinguished in this context, the reading
suggests that in practice it can be difficult to determine which purpose a state has employed.
The key issue being that the very nature of statecraft makes it difficult to clearly determine
the motives of a state. Further, state A and B might differ in their view of what classifies as a
legitimate motive. See reading (p.170) for a case example of Germany in 1914, which shows
how different opinions of Germany's motives, elicit different interpretations regarding the
purpose of its use of force.
1. Defence: deployment of military power to a) ward off an attack b) minimise damage
to oneself if attacked
Most common purpose for the use of force
Can be physical or peaceful
Takes the form of repellent (second) and offensive (first) strikes
Also common are pre-emptive and preventative strikes
Certainty of war motivates decision to act early
"The best defence is a good offence."
2. Deterrence: the threat of retaliation to prevent something undesirable from happening
Directed at population or industrial infrastructure of the adversary
Success based on the ability to prove that you possess the will and power to punish
the adversary if they do not comply
Peaceful - said to have failed if the threat has to be implemented
Achievement difficult to demonstrate
Defence and Deterrence
Both intended to protect state or allies of state from physical attack
Both intended to dissuade i.e. persuade others not to take harmful action against you
Tutorial Summary HIR101: Tutorial 9, ‘Old and New Security Challenges.’
Student: Heidi
Defence and deterrence do not always go 'hand-in-hand'. A state which has the means
for defence often does not develop the wherewithal to deter. A state which cannot
defend against forces must attempt to develop systems of deterrence
Success of both depends on a) quantitative balance of forces between state and
adversary b) qualitative balance of forces i.e. does the states military technology
favour defence or offense
3. Compellence: deployment of military power to a) stop an adversary from continuing
an action b) influence an adversary to undertake a new action
Can be physical or peaceful
Success measured by the adversaries closeness and speed of compliance to the wishes
of the state
Deterrence and Compellence
Distinguished by active/passive use of force
Deterrence, passive use of force ensures behaviour of adversary does not change
Compellence, active use of force changes behaviour of adversary
For both, the adversary often encounters difficulty in regards to clearly defining the
desired objectives of states
Compellence is harder to achieve than deterrence. One reason provided is that
compliance under intense pressure is more humiliating and debilitating. Therefore
compellence elicits greater resistance from the adversary
4. Swaggering: deployment of military power for reasons other than defence, deterrence
or compellence. Most often in order to increase the prestige of a state
Peaceful in most cases
Actions such as possession of prestigious weapons and display of military might at
national events in order to increase the prestige or 'swagger' of a nation on the world
stage
No specific purpose but serves a number of ends in projecting image that a state is
powerful and should therefore be respected
Long term gains, short term losses