Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Deterrence strategies for a small state: Analysis and survey Cover

Deterrence strategies for a small state: Analysis and survey

By: Maria Keinonen  
Open Access
|Nov 2024

References

  1. Alkula, T., Pöntinen, S., & Ylöstalo, P. (1995). Sosiaalitutkimuksen kvantitatiiviset menetelmät (English: Quantitative Methods of Social Sciences). WSOY, Helsinki.
  2. Arreguín-Toft, I. (2005). How the weak win wars: A theory of asymmetric conflict (Cambridge Studies in International Relations). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511521645
  3. Arreguín-Toft, I., Morgan, P. M., & Wirtz, J. J. (2009). Unconventional deterrence: How the weak deter the strong. In: Paul, T. V. (ed.), Complex Deterrence: Strategy in the Global Age. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 204-221. doi: 10.7208/9780226650043-011
  4. Azam, M. (2019). Achieving Unorthodox Deterrence Ability by Bangladesh. In NDC Journal, Volume 18, (2). pp. 1-12, December 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3613750
  5. Black, M., & Obradovic, L. (2022, Summer). Multi-actor deterrence, defining the concept. Journal of Strategic Airpower & Spacepower, 1(2), pp. 69-80. Available at https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Portals/10/AEtherJournal/Journals/Volume-1_Issue-2/Black.pdf NODOI
  6. Boone, Jr., H., & Boone, D. (2012). Analyzing Likert data. Journal of Extension, 50(2), pp. 2TOT2. Available at http://www.joe.org/joe/2012april/tt2p.shtml. doi: 10.34068/joe.50.02.48
  7. Bowers, I. (2018). Small state deterrence in the contemporary world. IFS Insights 9/2018. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339070138_Small_State_Deterrence_in_the_Contemporary_World
  8. Clason, D., & Dormody, T. (1994). Analysing data measured by individual Likert-type items. Journal of Agricultural Education, 35(4), pp. 31-35. doi: 10.5032/jae.1994.04031
  9. Coolsaet, R. (2004). Small states in world politics: Explaining foreign policy behavior. International Politics, 41, pp. 284-285. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.ip.8800051
  10. De Spiegeleire, S., Holynska, K., Batoh, Y., & Sweijs, T. (2020). Reimagining Deterrence: Towards Strategic (Dis)Suasion Design. The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies, The Hague. ISBN/EAN: 9789492102751.
  11. European Union. (2022). Facts and Figures on Life in the European Union. Available at https://european-union.europa.eu/principles-countries-history/key-facts-and-figures/life-eu_en [accessed 6 January, 2023].
  12. Faesen, L., Sweijs, T., Klimburg, A., & Tesauro, G. (2022). The Promises and Perils of a Minimum Cyber Deterrence Posture. Considerations for Small and Middle Powers. The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies, The Hague. Available at https://hcss.nl/report/promises-and-perils-of-minimum-cyber-deterrence-posture/
  13. Finnish Government (2021). Government’s Defence Report, Publications of the Finnish Government 2021:80, Finland. Available at http://urn.fi/URN; ISBN:978-952-383-852-859.
  14. Finnish Government (2023). Finland’s membership in NATO. https://um.fi/finlands-membership-in-nato, read 22.9.2023
  15. Freedman, L. (2013). Strategy. A history. Oxford University Press, New York.
  16. Goetschel, L. (2000). Small States and the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) of the EU: A Comparative Analysis, NRP42 Project-4042-044205 Final Report, Berne, May 2000.
  17. Harknett, R., & Smeets, M. (2020). Cyber campaigns and strategic outcomes. Journal of Strategic Studies, 45, pp. 1-34. doi: 10.1080/01402390.2020.1732354
  18. Heikkilä, T. (2004). Tilastollinen tutkimus (English: Statistical research). Edita, Helsinki.
  19. Hirsjärvi, S., Remes, P., & Sajavaara, P. (2005). Tutki ja kirjoita (English: Research and write). Tammi, Helsinki.
  20. Kanniainen, V. (2019). Kansallinen turvallisuus, asepalvelus ja kansantalous: miksi yleinen asevelvollisuus on välttämätön ratkaisu joillekin maille – ja miksi toisille taas ei? (English: National security, military service and the national economy: why is conscription a necessary solution for some countries while it is not so for others?). Ministry of Defence, Helsinki.
  21. Katz, M.N. (2018). Putin’s Security Policy and Its Implications for NORAD. In: Leuprecht, C., Sokolsky, J., Hughes, T. (eds.), North American Strategic Defense in the 21st Century: Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90978-3_2
  22. Keršanskas, V. (2020). Deterrence: Proposing a More Strategic Approach to Countering Hybrid Threats. Hybrid CoE Paper 2. Available at https://www.hybridcoe.fi/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Deterrence_public.pdf
  23. Kerttunen, M. (2019). Beyond punishment: Deterrence in the digital realm. Connections: The Quarterly Journal, 18(1–2), pp. 61-68. doi: 10.11610/Connections.18.1-2.04
  24. Lindsay, J., & Gartzke, E. (2019). Introduction: Cross-domain deterrence, from practice to theory. In: Lindsay, J., & Gartzke, E. (eds.), Cross-Domain Deterrence: Strategy in an Era of Complexity. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 1-24. doi: 10.1093/oso/9780190908645.003.0001
  25. Mazarr, M. (2018). Understanding Deterrence. Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CA. Available at https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/E295.html
  26. Mazarr, M., Rhoades, A., Beauchamp-Mustafaga, N., Blanc, A., Eaton, D., Feistel, K., et al. (2022). Disrupting Deterrence: Examining the Effects of Technologies on Strategic Deterrence in the 21st Century. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA. doi: 10.7249/RRA595-1
  27. Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland. (2020). Government Report on Finnish Foreign and Security Policy. Publications of the Finnish Government 2020: 32. PunaMusta Ltd., 2020. Available at http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-287-892-892
  28. Minkina, M. (2019). Russia’s return to the superpower status. Security and Defence Quarterly, 26(4), pp. 34-50. doi: 10.35467/sdq/110335
  29. Monaghan, S. (2022). Deterring Hybrid Threats: Towards a Fifth Wave of Deterrence Theory and Practice. Hybrid CoE Paper 12. ISBN (web) 978-952-7472-28-26.
  30. Morgan, P. (2003). Deterrence Now. Cambridge Studies in International Relations, pp. 172–202. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511491573.006
  31. Mueller, K. (2021). The Continuing Relevance of Conventional Deterrence. In Osinga, F., Sweijs, T. (eds.), NL ARMS Netherlands Annual Review of Military Studies 2020. NL ARMS. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, pp. 47Journal of Political–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-419-8_8
  32. NATO. (2022, December). AJP-01 Allied Joint Doctrine, Edition F Version 1 edn. North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Bristol.
  33. Paul, E. (2000). Moving forward with state autonomy and capacity: Example from two studies of the Pentagon during W.W.II. Journal of Political & Military Sociology, 28(1), pp. 21-42. Available at http://www.jstor.org/stable/45294262
  34. Penttilä, R. (1994). Finland′s Security in a Changing Europe, A Historical Perspective. Finnish Defence Studies. National Defence College, Helsinki. Available at https://www.doria.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/119969/FDS%207%20OCR.pdf?isAl-lowed=y&sequence=2
  35. Pöyhönen, J. (2018). SWOT-analyysin soveltaminen yrityksen kyberturvallisuuden tilannekuvan muodostamiseen (English: Applying a SWOT analysis to form a situational awareness of a company’s cyber security). Informaatioteknologian tiedekunnan julkaisuja, No. 58/2018, Jyväskylän yliopisto.
  36. Puusa, A., & Juuti, P. (2020). Laadullisen tutkimuksen näkökulmat ja menetelmät (English: Perspectives and methods of qualitative research). Gaudeamus, Helsinki.
  37. Radoman, J. (2018). Small states in world politics: State of the art. Journal of Regional Security, 13(2), pp. 179-200. doi: 10.11643/issn.2217-995X182SPR101
  38. Rekasius, M. (2005). Unconventional Deterrence Strategy. Naval Postgraduate School, California, USA. Available at https://calhoun.nps.edu/handle/10945/1863
  39. Riipinen, P. (2008). Kokonaismaanpuolustuksen käsitteen kehityskaari osana Suomen kansallista turvallisuutta (English: The evolution of the concept of comprehensive national defense as part of Finland’s national security). Puolustusministeriö, Turvallisuus-ja puolustusasiain komitea. Kirjapaino Keili, Helsinki. Available at https://www.defmin.fi/files/1296/Riipisen_raportti_nettiin.pdf
  40. Sanastokeskus. (2017). Vocabulary of Comprehensive Security. Available at https://turvallisuuskomitea.fi/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Kokonaisturvallisuuden_sanasto.pdf
  41. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2012). Research Methods for Business Students, Sixth edn. Pearson Education Limited, Essex.
  42. Smeets, M., & Lin, H. (2018). “Offensive cyber capabilities: To what ends?” 2018. In: 10th International Conference on Cyber Conflict (CyCon), Tallinn, Estonia, 2018, pp. 55–72. doi: 10.23919/CYCON.2018.8405010
  43. Sweijs, T., & Zilincik, S. (2021). The Essence of Cross-Domain Deterrence. In Osinga, F. & Sweijs, T. (eds.), NL ARMS Netherlands Annual Review of Military Studies 2020. NL ARMS. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. pp. 129–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-419-8_8
  44. The Security Committee. (2017). The Security Strategy for Society, Government Resolution/2.11.2017, Finland. Available at: https://turvallisuuskomitea.fi/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/YTS_2017_english.pdf
  45. Toomse, R. (2015). Defending Estonia in peace and war. Retaining a small state near aggressive neighbor by utilizing unconventional strategies. Dissertations on social sciences, Tallinn University.
  46. Tor, U. (2017). ‘Cumulative deterrence’ as a new paradigm for cyber deterrence. Journal of Strategic Studies, 40(1–2), pp. 92-117. doi: 10.1080/01402390.2015.1115975
  47. Trading Economics. (2023). Available at https://tradingeconomics.com/[accessed 1 June, 2023].
  48. Väyrynen, R. (1997). Small states: Persisting despite doubts. In: Inbar, E., & Sheffer, G. (eds.), The National Security of Small States in a Changing World. Frank Cass, London, pp. 41-77.
  49. Wee, E. (2014). The viability of deterrence strategies by non-nuclear states. Pointer, the Journal of the Singapore Armed Forces, 40(3), pp. 1-7. Available at https://www.mindef.gov.sg/oms/imindef/publications/pointer/journals/2014/v40n3.html
  50. Zagare, F., & Kilgour, D. (2000). Perfect deterrence. Cambridge Studies in International Relations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511491788
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jms-2024-0006 | Journal eISSN: 1799-3350 | Journal ISSN: 2242-3524
Language: English
Page range: 67 - 77
Submitted on: Nov 28, 2023
Accepted on: Aug 9, 2024
Published on: Nov 18, 2024
Published by: National Defense University
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2024 Maria Keinonen, published by National Defense University
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.