Article,
Irresistible Force or Immoveable Object? The Revolution in Military Affairs and Asymmetric Warfare
Defense & Security Analysis, 25 (1): 21--36 (March 2009)
Abstract
The aim of this article is to assess the value of two, much contested, concepts. It will argue that both concepts have some, albeit limited, utility. Moreover, taken together they act as a useful corrective to each other, and also shed light on the changing nature of contemporary conflict and its place in the international system. If the RMA is understood in a reasonable way (that is, avoiding: a definition that would in practice rule out nearly every plausible: historical case), then me capabilities and concepts that emerge can be turned against asymmetric warfare, even if they best fit conventional, regular warfare. However, this argument entails accepting limits on the meaning of the term, and hence on the effects and benefits to which such a revolution can be expected to give rise. Considering asymmetric warfare does not invalidate the RMA concept but rather helps to refine an understanding of its potential and limitations. In turn, consider of the RMA helps to deflate some of the exaggeration that is attached to the idea of asymmetric warfare. This article argues that, although both concepts are often the subject of misunderstanding and exaggeration, they both have considerable utility, especially if taken together when each can help to refine the understanding of the other.
