Fulltext search in archive

This thoroughly elaborated paper deals with the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan (ISAF). Similar missions represent NATO's global interests in problems of word's security. Afghanistan is the very place where new warfare methods are tested, new ways of combat come into existence. After September 11, 2001, American administration declared the war to global terrorism - GWOT (Global War on Terror), the first theatre of GWOT became Afghanistan. From military point of view, it was unambiguous success, to a large degree, it succeeded even politically. But Afghanistan was negatively affected by the situation in Iraq. Afghanistan is far off being stabilized. Local warlords, tribal chiefs, called anti-coalition militants (ACMs), avoid regular warfare, they use raids, sabotages, acts of terror, provocations. Coalition units use e.g. PSYOP operations, as a way how to implement norms based deterrence.

Conventional military strategists did not hold counterinsurgency (COIN) and irregular warfare with high esteem. In fact, strategists often marginalized COIN and irregular warfare, never regarding irregular warfare as worthy of strategic-level discussions. But true strategic thinking on the subject of COIN and irregular warfare consider time and space and long strategic view. Now we must consider critical areas for the global war on terrorism (GWOT), including changing nature of the threat environment. Sources: Principles, Imperatives and Paradoxes of Counterinsurgency, by E. Cohen, Lt.Col. C. Crane, Lt.Col. J. Horvath, Lt.Col. J. Nagl; Strategic Aspects of Counterinsurgency by Col. J. B. Celeski in Military Review March-April 2006.

The author, the former chief military chaplain, nowadays an advisor to the Czech defence minister, summarizes all relevant views on global responses to terrorism. The deadly attacks against Word Trade Center were more than acts of terror, they were acts of war. International law makes it possible to hunt the perpetrators, organizers and instigators of terrorism wherever they are. Immediately after the 11 September attacks on the United States, the Security Council expressed its determination to combat, by all means, threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts. The Council reaffirmed the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence in accordance with the Charter of United Nations. The States concerned have set their current military action in Afghanistan in that context. Col. Holub quotes individual views on war expressed by leaders of the U.S., NATO, United Nations, international law specialists, high Catholic clergy, ideas of Bishop Conference, and those of religious groupings. He doesn't come to any conclusion; he only wants to initiate a wide-ranging ethic discussion, as the traditional concept of the "just war" doesn't fit to this new situation. In his opinion, the core of problem lies in justifiability or unjustifiability of preventive war.