OPINION Vol.1, No.1 June 2013 - National Defence University

to coerce Pakistan in 2001 failed due to these factors. A weaker nation can coerce a stronger nation if it can
exploit the coercer nation’s vulnerabilities and sensitivities. Pakistan successfully did so following the
Salala attack; getting a bargain that better served its interests.
Factors Shaping Future Coercive Modalities
FUTURE OF COERCIVE MODALITIES
Multistate Associations. It is becoming increasingly rare for states to act unilaterally, due to the
steady increase in inter-state treaties, associations and understandings. Many states belong to
several key organizations that will shape and constrain relations with third party states. This means
that any coercive strategy is more likely to need the international support or be multilateral and
coalition based. However, the need for multilateral support may have exceptions, not least when
there are advantages to not having it. US coercion against Iraq prior to 2003 is one example.
Inter-State Conventional War. The likelihood of conventional inter-state wars is decreasing.
Although the UN has limited power, states increasingly recognize the need for a UN mandate.
Even powerful states, such as the USA, have seen the consequences of not obtaining such a
mandate (e.g. in the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq). This implies that threatening war is more
likely to be a hollow threat, as the coerced state will be able to gauge international support for such
a threat.
Proxy Wars. Concerns about the impact of terrorism are increasing. Not least because of
concerns about how deadly terrorist actions could become: in extremis, a credible concern that
terrorists could obtain a Weapon of Mass Destruction 29 . Recent history has shown that fighting a
proxy war by supporting militant organizations is a dangerous game. Support for the Mujahedeen
against the Soviets led to the problems the Taliban are now causing across the region. In many
cases, support from external powers of militant groups for short-term gains has led to the spawning
of terrorist groups that subsequently become a threat to the sponsoring state.
International Finance as a Coercion Tool. It is becoming more possible for powerful states to
use financial power as an effective way of coercing weaker states. This new tool has been used by
the US against North Korea and is an expansion of traditional economic sanctions through the
addition of a more precise economic weapon. 30
Worldwide Information Explosion. A key statecraft skill was to know everything about your
adversary’s intentions while making sure they knew nothing about yours. The worldwide
explosion in information availability, such as Wiki Leaks, has made the former easier but the latter
increasingly difficult. There is therefore a trend towards more transparent diplomacy as anything
less will have little credibility.
Resource Security. While states have used coercion in the past largely for political reasons, to
ensure territorial security, or to increase material wealth, future coercion is more likely to be about
resource security.
Stability Maintenance. Globalization makes it harder for states to isolate themselves from
shocks, such as economic failure, in other states. There is therefore a greater willingness to
prevent states failing. Another side to stability maintenance is that, in general, as states become
more powerful, they become less popular with and more of a concern to neighbours. It is likely
that the international community will increasingly work towards constraining both the US and
China.
A Future Coercion Framework based on Contemporary Analysis
Several authors on contemporary coercive statecraft have identified these trends. It is possible to
construct a framework for developing future coercive statecraft by blending these trends with elements of
previous coercive assessment theories. For the basic framework, Alexander George’s classic model, as
explained by Major Mc Murphy, 31 has been used as the starting point, with the 4 tasks becoming 4 steps:-
Step One: Selection of the Aim
• Decide the demands/ objectives.
• Determine the time pressure.
OPINION Vol.1 No.1 28 June 2013