How The Crisis In Ukraine Is Shaping How Strategists Study War

Russia's President Vladimir Putin chairs a government meeting at the Novo-Ogaryovo state residence outside Moscow, July 30, 2014. Credit: Reuters/Alexei Nikolskyi/RIA Novosti/Kremlin

What Ukraine Means For How We Study War -- Joshua Rovner, Washington Post

Last week Marc Lynch wrote a thoughtful commentary on the future of political science after Gaza. He noted that while the ongoing violence seems very familiar, it actually suggests a number of new questions for political scientists who focus on the Arab-Israeli dispute. These include everything from the limits of transnational moral campaigns to the future of U.S alliance relations in the region. What looks like another dreary chapter in a stagnant conflict may ultimately inspire research that pushes our understanding of war and politics in the Middle East.

The crisis in Ukraine raises similar questions for the future of strategic studies, a related though somewhat different discipline. Research in strategic studies tends to focus on historical analyses, and it usually shies away from quantitative work or formal modeling. Students of strategy often emphasize the role of contingency and chance and are wary of making broad generalizations as a result. Despite these differences, the two subjects are inseparable. Strategy is about war, and war is simply the continuation of politics by other means. Decisions about how to use violence shape political outcomes, and political problems shape the purposes of organized force. So political scientists have a strong interest in understanding strategy, just as strategists must pay close attention to politics.

Read more ....

My Comment: Joshua Rovner is making the case that Russia will end up being a weaker power regardless of what it does in Ukraine. I have doubts that this may happen .... the West (and the East) needs Russia's resources, and once the Ukraine crisis blows-over, sanctions against Russia will just be a fading memory.