Essay topic
Is it possible to defeat a relatively weaker opponent who uses unconventional “asymmetric” tactics?
Introductory Paragraph
‘The conventional army loses if it does not win. The guerrilla wins if he does not lose’ (Kissinger, 1969) claims Henry A. Kissinger. Whereas the famous revolutionary Ernesto Che Guevara claimed that ‘Guerrilla warfare is used by the side which is supported by a majority but which possesses a much smaller number of arms for use in defence against oppression’ (Guevara, 2006, p. 16). The latest armed conflicts taking place around world have only reinforced these statements. In other words, the asymmetric warfare has become the tactics or ‘weapon of choice’ which is being extensively used by the weaker against …show more content…
Recently the phrase ‘David and Goliath’ has changed its initial meaning to the modern one and is ‘used to describe a situation in which a small or weak person or organization tries to defeat another much larger or stronger opponent’ (Dictionary, 2016).
The natural question to this arises, why discussions about such tactics should be important to the Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, popularly known as the three Baltic states? And indeed to analyse this topic in depth, the overarching subject is the threat for the security of the three Baltic states. What is the question which truly unites the three Baltic states? Some people may answer that this common history, some may say this is common culture, some may add the geographical disposition of the states. As the member of the Eastern Europe …show more content…
There are dozens of sources describing the asymmetric warfare. In this paper I will use the definition of Asymmetric Warfare provided by the Britannica:
‘Asymmetrical warfare, unconventional strategies and tactics adopted by a force when the military capabilities of belligerent powers are not simply unequal but are so significantly different that they cannot make the same sorts of attacks on each other’ (Sexton, 2016).
Before discussing the importance of Asymmetric warfare we need to take a short glance on Ivan Arreguin-Toft’s article analysing ‘How the small win the wars’, figure 1. It shows, that there is an evident tendency of a weak actor defeating a strong one if the Asymmetric warfare model is used. The diagram shows that in the last fifty-year period weak actor’s chances to achieve victory have overbalanced strong actor (Toft, 2001). Figure 1. Percentage of Asymmetric Conflict Victories by Type of Actor (Toft,
Is it possible to defeat a relatively weaker opponent who uses unconventional “asymmetric” tactics?
Introductory Paragraph
‘The conventional army loses if it does not win. The guerrilla wins if he does not lose’ (Kissinger, 1969) claims Henry A. Kissinger. Whereas the famous revolutionary Ernesto Che Guevara claimed that ‘Guerrilla warfare is used by the side which is supported by a majority but which possesses a much smaller number of arms for use in defence against oppression’ (Guevara, 2006, p. 16). The latest armed conflicts taking place around world have only reinforced these statements. In other words, the asymmetric warfare has become the tactics or ‘weapon of choice’ which is being extensively used by the weaker against …show more content…
Recently the phrase ‘David and Goliath’ has changed its initial meaning to the modern one and is ‘used to describe a situation in which a small or weak person or organization tries to defeat another much larger or stronger opponent’ (Dictionary, 2016).
The natural question to this arises, why discussions about such tactics should be important to the Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, popularly known as the three Baltic states? And indeed to analyse this topic in depth, the overarching subject is the threat for the security of the three Baltic states. What is the question which truly unites the three Baltic states? Some people may answer that this common history, some may say this is common culture, some may add the geographical disposition of the states. As the member of the Eastern Europe …show more content…
There are dozens of sources describing the asymmetric warfare. In this paper I will use the definition of Asymmetric Warfare provided by the Britannica:
‘Asymmetrical warfare, unconventional strategies and tactics adopted by a force when the military capabilities of belligerent powers are not simply unequal but are so significantly different that they cannot make the same sorts of attacks on each other’ (Sexton, 2016).
Before discussing the importance of Asymmetric warfare we need to take a short glance on Ivan Arreguin-Toft’s article analysing ‘How the small win the wars’, figure 1. It shows, that there is an evident tendency of a weak actor defeating a strong one if the Asymmetric warfare model is used. The diagram shows that in the last fifty-year period weak actor’s chances to achieve victory have overbalanced strong actor (Toft, 2001). Figure 1. Percentage of Asymmetric Conflict Victories by Type of Actor (Toft,