IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ginixx/v41y2015i3p539-564.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Air Campaign Duration and the Interaction of Air and Ground Forces

Author

Listed:
  • Carla Martinez Machain

Abstract

This article explores the role that ground troops play in aerial campaigns. Specifically, it intends to explain how ground troops affect the duration of aerial bombing campaigns. It distinguishes between the effect of ground troops on the duration of aerial campaigns that are selective and on those that are more general and less discriminate (using newly coded data on aerial strategies). The effect of ground troops may vary depending on how air power is being used. Ground troops may increase the duration of aerial campaigns in cases in which selective strategies are used during the aerial bombing campaign. In these cases, states lose the possibility of quick, “clean” victories once ground troops are introduced. In the cases of the less-discriminate bombing campaigns, the effect of ground troops is the opposite: They shorten the duration of the bombing campaign, possibly through the increased effectiveness of a combined arms approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Carla Martinez Machain, 2015. "Air Campaign Duration and the Interaction of Air and Ground Forces," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(3), pages 539-564, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:ginixx:v:41:y:2015:i:3:p:539-564
    DOI: 10.1080/03050629.2015.1018414
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/03050629.2015.1018414
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/03050629.2015.1018414?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Slantchev, Branislav L., 2003. "The Power to Hurt: Costly Conflict with Completely Informed States," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 97(1), pages 123-133, February.
    2. Daniel M. Jones & Stuart A. Bremer & J. David Singer, 1996. "Militarized Interstate Disputes, 1816–1992: Rationale, Coding Rules, and Empirical Patterns," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 15(2), pages 163-213, September.
    3. Michael Horowitz & Dan Reiter, 2001. "When Does Aerial Bombing Work?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(2), pages 147-173, April.
    4. Sartori, Anne E., 2003. "An Estimator for Some Binary-Outcome Selection Models Without Exclusion Restrictions," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 111-138, April.
    5. Scott Sigmund Gartner & Gary M. Segura, 1998. "War, Casualties, and Public Opinion," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 42(3), pages 278-300, June.
    6. Fearon, James D., 1995. "Rationalist explanations for war," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(3), pages 379-414, July.
    7. Frederick J. Boehmke & Daniel S. Morey & Megan Shannon, 2006. "Selection Bias and Continuous‐Time Duration Models: Consequences and a Proposed Solution," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(1), pages 192-207, January.
    8. Brett Leeds & Jeffrey Ritter & Sara Mitchell & Andrew Long, 2002. "Alliance Treaty Obligations and Provisions, 1815-1944," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(3), pages 237-260, July.
    9. Powell, Robert, 2004. "The Inefficient Use of Power: Costly Conflict with Complete Information," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(2), pages 231-241, May.
    10. Faten Ghosn & Glenn Palmer & Stuart A. Bremer, 2004. "The MID3 Data Set, 1993—2001: Procedures, Coding Rules, and Description," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 21(2), pages 133-154, April.
    11. Brambor, Thomas & Clark, William Roberts & Golder, Matt, 2006. "Understanding Interaction Models: Improving Empirical Analyses," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 63-82, January.
    12. Slantchev, Branislav L., 2003. "The Principle of Convergence in Wartime Negotiations," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 97(4), pages 621-632, November.
    13. Alastair Smith & Allan C. Stam, 2004. "Bargaining and the Nature of War," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(6), pages 783-813, December.
    14. Zorn, Christopher J. W., 2000. "Modeling Duration Dependence," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(4), pages 367-380, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Emil Petersson, 2024. "Airpower and territorial control: Unpacking the NATO intervention in Libya," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 41(3), pages 289-312, May.
    2. Richard J. Saunders & Mark Souva, 2020. "Command of the skies: An air power dataset," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(6), pages 735-755, November.
    3. Susan Hannah Allen & Carla Martinez Machain, 2019. "Understanding the impact of air power," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(5), pages 545-558, September.
    4. Keisuke Nakao, 2022. "Denial and punishment in war," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 59(2), pages 166-179, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anderton,Charles H. & Carter,John R., 2009. "Principles of Conflict Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521875578, December.
    2. John Tyson Chatagnier, 2015. "Conflict bargaining as a signal to third parties," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 27(2), pages 237-268, April.
    3. Brian Benjamin Crisher, 2014. "Inequality Amid Equality: Military Capabilities and Conflict Behavior in Balanced Dyads," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(2), pages 246-269, March.
    4. Nakao, Keisuke, 2019. "Moving Forward vs. Inflicting Costs in a Random-Walk Model of War," MPRA Paper 96071, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Yuleng Zeng, 2021. "Biding time versus timely retreat: Asymmetric dependence, issue salience, and conflict duration," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(4), pages 719-733, July.
    6. Nakao, Keisuke, 2017. "Denial vs. Punishment: Strategies Shape War, but War Itself Affects Strategies," MPRA Paper 81418, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Michael Tiernay, 2015. "Which comes first? Unpacking the relationship between peace agreements and peacekeeping missions," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 32(2), pages 135-152, April.
    8. Anesi, Vincent, 2012. "Secessionism and minority protection in an uncertain world," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 53-61.
    9. Konrad, Kai A. & Kovenock, Dan, 2009. "Multi-battle contests," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 256-274, May.
    10. Enrico Spolaore & Romain Wacziarg, 2016. "War and Relatedness," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(5), pages 925-939, December.
    11. Hadjiyiannis, Costas & Heracleous, Maria S. & Tabakis, Chrysostomos, 2016. "Regionalism and conflict: Peace creation and peace diversion," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 141-159.
    12. Nakao, Keisuke, 2022. "Democratic Victory and War Duration: Why Are Democracies Less Likely to Win Long Wars?," MPRA Paper 112849, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Constantin Ruhe, 2021. "Impeding fatal violence through third-party diplomacy: The effect of mediation on conflict intensity," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(4), pages 687-701, July.
    14. Nakao Keisuke, 2020. "Rationalist Explanations for Two-Front War," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 26(4), pages 1-20, December.
    15. Govinda Clayton & Kristian Skrede Gleditsch, 2014. "Will we see helping hands? Predicting civil war mediation and likely success," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(3), pages 265-284, July.
    16. Serhat Doğan & Kerim Keskin & Çağrı Sağlam, 2023. "Analyzing strategic behavior in a dynamic model of bargaining and war," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 233-257, December.
    17. Vahabi,Mehrdad, 2019. "The Political Economy of Predation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107591370.
    18. Christopher R. Dittmeier, 2013. "Proliferation, preemption, and intervention in the nuclearization of second-tier states," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 25(4), pages 492-525, October.
    19. Eric Min, 2021. "Interstate War Battle dataset (1823–2003)," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(2), pages 294-303, March.
    20. Kıbrıs Arzu & Kıbrıs Özgür, 2016. "On the Dynamics of Extremist Violence," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 22(1), pages 1-25, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:ginixx:v:41:y:2015:i:3:p:539-564. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/GINI20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.