Small but not Beautiful
| Author | Wilhelm Agrell |
| Published date | 01 June 1984 |
| Date | 01 June 1984 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/002234338402100206 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Small
but
not
Beautiful
WILHELM
AGRELL
Lund
University
Peace
Research
Institute
(CUPRI)
Alternative
military
defence
can
be
regarded
both
as
a
concept
for
a
general
change
in
military
structures
and
as
a
possible
strategy
for
small
and
medium-size
countries.
The
general
concept
is
vague
and
far
away
from
any
political
implementation.
Several
models
of
alternative
military
defence
have
been
discussed
for
small
and
medium-size
countries,
mainly
in
Europe.
Of
these,
a
high
technology
territorial
defence
appears
to
offer
an
optimal
compromise
between
a
defensive
deterrence
and
the
abandonment
of
elements
that
could
be
regarded
as
provocative.
The
article
investigates
the
possibilities
to
implement
a
high-technology
defence,
with
the
operational
task
to
absorb
an
attack
by
offensive
forces
of
a
super-power.
The
basic
principles
for
such
a
defence
must
be
to
avoid
the
main
capacity
of
these
forces,
their
weapon
systems,
intelligence
systems
and
electronic
warfare
systems.
PGM
technology
has
created
some
opportunities
for
this
model,
but
also
for
new
offensive
systems.
A
continuous
development
of
systems
adapted
to
territorial
defence
is
therefore
a
necessity.
The
idea
of
small
independent
units
is
hardly
feasible
in
this
context.
The
organization
of
defence
must
be
dispersed
and
decentralized
but
still
coordinated
in
very
deep
defensive
zones.
The
model
therefore
can
only
be
employed
by
a
well-trained
and
professionally
led
citizen
army.
I.
The
concept
of
alternative
defence
The
idea
of
alternative
military
defence,
base(
on
defensive
instead
of
offensive
weapons
systems,
has
appeared
with
increasing
frequency
in
the
West
European
debate
on
security
and
disarmament
in
the
last
two
or
three
years.
Most
of
the
books
and
articles
dealing
with
the
issue
describe
various
assumed
advantages
of
this
approach.
There
are
few
thorough
analyses
of
the
nature
of
such
an
alternative
defence
and
hardly
any
attempt
to
discuss
seriously
its
shortcomings,
along
with
the
advantages.
I
see
this
rapidly
growing
interest
as
the
first
important
reason
to
deal
with
its
shortcomings,
although
from
a
constructive
perspective.
A
second
reason
is
that
the
proponents
of
traditional
defence
postures,
whether
nuclear
or
not,
so
far
have
been
very
reluctant
to
engage
in
a
dialogue
on
these
issues.
In
many
cases
alternatives
are
flatly
rejected
as
un-
realistic
or
impossible
to
implement.
Here
more
or
less
well-founded
shortcomings
of
the
alternatives
are
simply
used
to
legitimate
preconceived
ideas.
So,
if
ideas
of
alternative
military
defence
are
to
be
developed
to
something
solid
enough
to
gain
entrance
into
the
sphere
of
defence
policy
decision-making,
the
advocates
themselves
must
present
an
analysis
where
possibilities
and
limitations
are
seriously
discussed.
A
third
reason
to
focus
on
the
problems
of
military
implementation
is
the
lack
of
clarity
regarding
the
definition
of
alternative
military
defence.
In
some
cases
the
term
is
simply
used
in
the
meaning
’something
better
than
today’.
In
other
cases
there
are
serious
definitions,
but
on
an
abstract
level.
Alternative
military
defence
can
also
indicate
alternatives
of
a
very
different
nature,
close
to
or
far
from
traditional
defence
postures.
We
must
therefore
ask:
Alternatives
for
whom
and
about
what?
Alternative
defence
is
something
that
con-
cerns
military
structures,
not
only
a
choice
between
different
weapons
systems
or
different
strategic
doctrines.
Alternatives
must
also
be
viewed
against
an
existing
structure.
In
British
debate
Sweden
has
been
used
as
an
example
for
an
alternative
defence
solution
(see
e.g.
Defence
without
the
Bomb,
1983).
This
does
not,
however,
mean
that
the
Swedish
defence
as
now
constituted
should
be
classified
as
an
alternative
form
of
defence.
It
is
certainly
an
alternative
in
relation
to
a
nuclear
force,
based
on
a
professional
military
without
con-
scripts
and
designed
to
fight
overseas.
But
if
we
focus
on
Sweden
there
is
considerable
To continue reading
Request your trial