Deterrence, Compellence, and Coercion

Understanding Coercion, Deterrence, and Compellence

Coercion is threatening to harm an enemy or pledging to benefit the enemy if the enemy complies with the demands of an assailant. Deterrence is a tripwire to avoid war and compellence is threatening to start one if victims do not subdue. 

 Outline: 

1. Coercion 
2. Deterrence and Compellence 
3. Analysis 

Coercion: 

Coercion is to do our bidding without destroying the enemy. Coercion is the threat of the use of force to overcome an enemy. The ultimate motive is to achieve goals under conflict without going to war. Force can simply use to hurt, if we uncover the point where it would hurt most, a threat to do so can motivate our opponent to avoid it. We shall call this coercive use of force. The use of coercion is to Open up room for bargaining.

Nuclear weapons states use the threat of use of nuclear weapons to quash an enemy. 

Strategic coercion:

Strategic coercion is what analysts call when larger armies are involved in conflicting parties. 

Examples from History: 

Mongols used brute force to terrorize the opponents. Usually massacred the whole city to show what they do to those who do not surrender. Sometimes, they left the city without damage as people surrender.

Coercion vs. Undue Influence

Roman people did the same. They slaughtered the whole city population along with animals. 

Two Methods of Coercion: 

1. A threat is a pledge to impose costs if the opponent acts contrary to one’s wishes. 
2. A promise is a pledge to provide benefits to the opponent if he acts by one’s wishes.                                                                                                                                                 Both threats and promises are intended to influence the expectations of the opponent and cause him to change his behavior. Both threats and promises are costly to the one making them although threats are costly if the player fails to influence the opponent, and promises are costly if the player succeeds

Coercion and Compellence

Brute Force:

Coercion mostly do the trick, however, often it is necessary to use brute force to make the threat of further violence more credible. The threat is necessary and had to perform if the enemy does not comply.

High school bully uses brute force to take away lunch money. Force is used indeed. 

Salami Tactics is taking small steps that do not deter response from the enemy. 

Deterrence and Compellence: 

 Schelling defined compellence as “a threat intended to make an adversary do something,”

While deterrence is defined as "one sets up the tripwire and then leaves things up to the opponent without any time limit".

Deterrence 1        Conservative and passive 2        Protects status quo 3        Persuade the enemy not to initiate its action 4        We make the demand, explain the consequences, and wait for action 5        If opponent crosses the line, we take punitive action 6        It is difficult to judge whether it was a success or not. 7        Best achieved by threat (sanctions, embargoes) 8        Can be passive and static. Sets up the tripwire and then leave it up to the enemy to cross it.  9        Punishment if the status quo disturbed

Compellence            Compellence is active          Seeks to change the status quo                                Persuade the enemy to change its behavior           We make a demand of action and then initiate our own, continue doing so until opponent ceases          To persuade the opponent to change its behavior or government,            Success is easy to see in form of change of government, or halt of ongoing behavior.            Best achieved by promise (to invest in the country, economic aid, military aid, USAID, infrastructure development)            Compellence must have a deadline.            Progressively worse if not compliant, reward if comply          Like offensive strategy, it takes the initiative and engages the opponent until the later relents.

 

 

Deterrence and Deniability

 Analysis: 

The difference is in timing, initiative, and monitoring. A deterrent can be passive and static. One sets up the tripwire and then leaves things up to the opponent without any time limit. As we shall see, stationing American troops in Europe provided a trip-wire (or plate glass) that performed these functions. If the Soviets ever decided to attack, they have to do it in a strength that would be sufficient to overcome these forces.

Example: 

Throughout the Cold War, the U.S. constantly worried about the possibility of the USSR attacking Western Europe. The problem was that in conventional armaments, the Red Army was much, much stronger than what NATO could muster against it. A general war over Western Europe almost invariably meant that the U.S. would have to resort to nuclear weapons. The Americans could say “If you ever attack Western Europe, we shall fight back with all we’ve got, including nukes.” Then they could sit back, wait, and watch. Only if the Soviets ever invaded would the Americans have to do anything.

 

 Salami-Slice Tactics and Deterrent: 

The deterrent can be eroded by salami tactics, a strategy that takes steps that are small enough not to activate the threatened action, yet that brings the player closer to his goal.

Choose with Objective: 

Generally, if deterrence is the goal, you would do best by choosing a status quo such that if your opponent acts contrary to your wishes, what you do is punishment. This usually involves making the status quo sufficiently pleasant and threatening to make it much worse if he disrupts it. You can also promise to make it progressively better as long as he persists in compliance. If compellence is the goal, you would do best by choosing a status quo such that what you do if the opponent complies with your demand becomes a reward. This usually requires that you make the status quo sufficiently unpleasant and promise to improve it if he complies. You can also threaten to make the status quo progressively worse if he persists in non-compliance.