IPAC 5300 Final

IPAC 5300 December 6, 2023 IPAC 5300 Final Israel and Hamas are engaged in a messy “asymmetric” war. Given the nature of this type of war, what factors are the most critical for a successful outcome? (you may address either, or both sides in terms of success) Introduction: An asymmetric war is a type of conflict in which the two opposing sides differ significantly in relative military power, strategy, and/or tactics. Typically, in these types of wars, one side is far larger, organized, and has access to materials that are beneficial to succeeding in a war while the other side is not. The side that is disadvantaged frequently involves insurgents, resistance movement militias, and unlawful combatants. However, if we look at the teachings of Sun Tzu, it could be argued that all wars are asymmetric due to enemies exploiting one another's strengths while simultaneously attacking their weaknesses. 1 With that being said, it is still customary to look at an asymmetric war as one side being far weaker than the other. There is an equation for asymmetrical warfare that follows as: AW=AT+AO+CA+AC. Translated, this means Asymmetric Warfare is equal to the Asymmetric Threat ( T errorism + I nsurgency + I nformation O perations + D isruptive threats + U nknown threats) plus Asymmetric Oppositions (( A symmetric Tw ist x ( D iplomacy + I nformation + M ilitary + E conomic) + L everaging A symmetric A dvantage)) plus Cultural Asymmetry ( A symmetry of V alues + A of N orms, A of R ules + U nderstanding T arget P opulation + I nformation O peration) plus Asymmetric Cost ( A ssets A t S take + C osts of D efense + C osts of U ndertaking A ction + 1 Brian Colwell, “What Is Asymmetrical Warfare?,” Brian D. Colwell, February 1, 2020, https://briandcolwell.com/what-is-asymmetrical-warfare/.

I nformation O peration). 2 From this equation, we can see the factors that go into the success of an asymmetric war. With that being said, it is my argument that the factors that are most critical for the successful outcome of an asymmetric war are instruments of war, international dimensions, and social dimensions. Factors for Successful Outcome of an Asymmetric War Instruments of War: Instruments of war generate the success of an asymmetric war if they are used effectively to suit the unique challenges that are posed by the conflict in question. Adaptability and flexibility have to be taken into account when fighting an asymmetric war, as weapons are only as useful as well as they can be adapted to the challenges of conflict. During these types of wars, there are often limited resources (especially for the weaker side), so efficient and cost-effective weapons are vital to the war effort, as they must make the most out of available resources in order to sustain a prolonged conflict. For example, during the Revolutionary War, instruments of war were one of the crucial factors for America being able to defeat Great Britain. Under the leadership of George Washington, American revolutionary fighters used guerrilla warfare tactics against the British. Through the utilization of their knowledge of the local terrain, they were able to engage in hit-and-run tactics, ambushes, and use the terrain for cover, which the British were not able to do. 3 Despite the British Army being one of the most powerful military forces at the time, the weaker, smaller, American Army was still able to defeat them. Although Operation Desert Storm was not an asymmetrical war, there were asymmetrical elements that were used by the Iraqi forces against the Coalition forces using instruments of war 3 J.F.C Fuller, A Military History of the Western World , vol. 2 (Minerva Press, 1955), 283. 2 Colwell.

Social Dimensions: Social dimensions are intricately linked to the success of asymmetric wars. Understanding and addressing the social factors at play is essential for devising effective strategies, gaining local support, and achieving sustainable outcomes in complex conflicts such as these. Public support and perception can influence the success of non-state actors in an asymmetric war. For example, the support that France gave to the United States during the Revolutionary War was one of the largest turning points that gave America the upper hand to win the war and claim their independence from colonial Britain. Additionally, cultural and ethnic dynamics should be understood during these conflicts as addressing the underlying factors of historical grievances and identity-based tensions can be the deciding factor between success and failure. When it comes to America during the Revolutionary War, the social dimension played a significant role in their success. Throughout the colonies, the sense of patriotic spirit and a call for commitment to the cause of independence was strong. This sense of patriotism and commitment led hundreds of colonists to join local militias that would respond to threats, engage in guerrilla warfare, and support the Continental Army. Women’s contributions were also essential due to the fact that they stayed home and managed the households, farms, and businesses while their male counterparts were off fighting the war. 6 Additionally, women contributed directly to defeating Britain by serving as nurses, spies, and sometimes participating in direct combat. Counterargument: 6 Fuller, 286.

It can also be argued that one of the most important factors to winning a symmetrical war is having a strong sense in the material dimensions of strategy. This is integral to the success of asymmetric warfare, as both state and non-state actors have to leverage out their available resources in order to be able to adapt to changing circumstances, and to exploit the vulnerabilities of their enemies to achieve their objectives during war and conflict. Seeing as asymmetric wars often involve significant resource disparities, material resources that are available to each side (weapons, equipment, funding, etc) all influence capabilities and strategies. Additionally, the effectiveness of logistical support and sustainment is critical. The weaker opponent may face challenges maintaining supplies, but they can be successful if they are able to secure resources (food, ammunition, medical supplies, etc). With that being said, the material dimensions of strategy are still not as futile in the success of asymmetric war as instruments of war, as the ability to adapt and effectively deploy instruments of war can offset material disparities and contribute significantly to the outcome of the conflict. International dimensions are more important due to the fact that external actors can shape the strategic environment and determine the success or failure of involved parties. Finally, the social dimension is far more vital as a comprehensive strategy that effectively addresses the social dimensions is considered essential for achieving lasting success during war termination. Conclusion: In conclusion, the most important factors for winning an asymmetrical war are the instruments of war, the international dimension, and the social dimension. This is because asymmetric wars often rely on insurgent tactics from the weaker side, meaning that the stronger side needs to be more prepared for surprise attacks. International support and legitimization can strengthen the means of success for either side of the conflict. Additionally, social support can

Works Cited Colwell, Brian. “What Is Asymmetrical Warfare?” Brian D. Colwell, February 1, 2020. https://briandcolwell.com/what-is-asymmetrical-warfare/. Freedman, Lawrence, and Efraim Karsh. The Gulf Conflict, 1990-1991: Diplomacy and War in the New World Order . London: Faber and Faber, 1994. Fuller, J.F.C. A Military History of the Western World . Vol. 2. Minerva Press, 1955.