Abstract
The empirical research program does not by itself pretend to provide any conclusive answers to substantial research questions on the politics of caveats. The essence of the programmatic ambition is to reason directions on how to study and research a particular political phenomenon. The contribution of the empirical research program is assessed on its capacity to inspire, direct, and facilitate research: The program be judged on its capacity to reason precise conceptual constructs capable of distinguishing the phenomenon of caveats from adjacent phenomena and recognize different categories of caveats. The program assessed on the coherence and the capacity of the analytical framework to guide the selection of theory by which arguments are reasoned and empirical propositions deduced. The utility of the research program depends on the usefulness of the directions for the gathering and analyses of data while taking into account the particular attributes of the research field in question, as well as the ontological content of the analytical framework suggested. Finally, the empirical research program assessed on its capacity to inspire new and interesting research questions. The concluding chapter summarizes the several contributions of the programmatic effort, and discusses remaining shortcomings and challenges.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Allison, G., & Zelikow, P. (1999). Essence of Decision. Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. New York, NY: Longman.
Auerswald, D. P. (2004). Inward Bound: Domestic Institutions and Military Conflicts. International Organization, 53(3), 469–504.
Auerswald, D. P., & Saideman, S. M. (2014). NATO in Afghanistan: Fighting Together, Fighting Alone. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Bennett, A., & Checkel, J. T. (Eds.). (2015). Process Tracing. From Metaphor to Analytical Tool. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bergen, P. L. (2011). The Longest War. New York, NY: Free Press.
Brophy, J., & M. Fisera. (2010). National Caveats and Its Impact on the Army of the Czech Republic. http://user.unob.cz/fisera/files/clanky/National_Caveats_Short_Version_version_V_29JULY.pdf.
Caldwell, B. J. (1991). The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes: Criticisms and Conjectures. In G. Keith Shaw (Ed.), Economics, Culture, and Education. Essays in Honor of Mark Blaug (pp. 95–107). Aldershot: Elgar.
Checkel, J. T. (2006). Tracing Causal Mechanisms. International Studies Review, 8(2), 362–370.
Clark, W. K. (2001). Waging War: Bosnia, Kosovo, and the Future of Combat. New York, NY: Public Affairs.
Deni, J. R. (2004). The NATO Rapid Deployment Corps: Alliance Doctrine and Force Structure. Contemporary Security Policy, 25(3), 498–523.
Eckstein, H. (1975). Case Study and Theory in Political Science. In F. I. Greenstein & N. W. Polsby (Eds.), Handbook of Political Science (Vol. 7, pp. 79–137). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fermann, G. (Ed.). (2013). Utenrikspolitikk og norsk krisehåndtering. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademika. https://www.cappelendamm.no/_utenrikspolitikk-og-norsk-kriseh%C3%A5ndtering-gunnar-fermann-9788202378691.
Fermann, G., & Inderberg, T. H. (2013). Norway and the 2005 Elektron Affair: Conflict of Competences and Competent Realpolitik. In T. G. Jakobsen (Ed.), War. An Introduction to Theories and Research on Collective Violence (pp. 373–402). New York, NY: Nova Science.
Findlay, T. (2002). The Use of Force in UN Peace Operations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Frost-Nielsen, P. M. (2009). Rules of Engagement: En utenrikspolitisk case-analyse av den politiske kontrollen av norske kampfly i Operation Enduring Freedom, Afghanistan 2002–2003. Master Thesis in Political Science, Department of Sociology and Political Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim.
Frost-Nielsen, P. M. (2011). Politisk kontroll av militær deltakelse i internasjonale operasjoner: Restriksjoner på bruk av norske kampfly i Afghanistan. Internasjonal Politikk, 69(3), 359–386.
Frost-Nielsen, P. M. (2013). Norske kampfly i Afghanistan 2006. In G. Fermann (Ed.), Utenrikspolitikk og norsk krisehåndtering (pp. 267–298). Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademika.
Frost-Nielsen, P. M. (2016). Betingede forpliktelser. Nasjonale reservasjoner i militære koalisjonsoperasjoner. Ph.D. Dissertation in Political Science, Department of Sociology and Political Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim.
Frost-Nielsen, P. M. (2017). Conditional Commitments: Why States Use Caveats to Reserve Their Efforts in Military Coalition Operations. Contemporary Security Policy, 38(3), 371–397.
Frost-Nielsen, P. M. (2018, forthcoming). Bringing Military Conduct Out of the Shadow of Law: Towards a Holistic Understanding of Rules of Engagement (RoE). Journal of Military Ethics 17(1–2).
George, A., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case Studies and Theory Development in Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gerner, D. (1992). Foreign Policy Analysis. Exhilarating Eclecticism, Intriguing Enigmas. International Studies Notes, 18(1), 4–19.
Gerring, J. (1999). What Makes a Concept Good? A Critical Framework for Understanding Concept Formation in the Social Sciences. Polity, 31(3), 357–393.
Hague, R., Harrop, M., & Breslin, S. (Eds.). (1998). Government and Politics: An Introduction. Basingstoke: MacMillan.
Hall, J. R. (2007). Historicity and Socio-historical Research. In W. Outhwaite & S. P. Turner (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Social Science Methodology (pp. 82–101). London: Sage.
Haney, P. J. (2002). Organizing for Foreign Policy Crises: Presidents, Advisers, and the Management of Decision-making. Michigan, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Harris, W. A. (1997). On “Scope Conditions” in Sociological Theories. Social and Economic Studies, 46(4), 123–127.
Henriksen, D. (2007). NATO’s Gamble. Combining Diplomacy and Airpower in the Kosovo Crisis 1998–1999. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press.
Høiback, H. (2009). The Noble Art of Constructive Ambiguity. Oslo Files on Defence and Security, 3, 19–39.
Ingesson, T. (2017, September 20). Trigger-Happy, Autonomous, and Disobedient: Nordbat 2 and Mission Command in Bosnia. The Strategy Bridge. https://thestrategybridge.org/the-bridge/2017/9/20/trigger-happy-autonomous-and-disobedient-nordbat-2-and-mission-command-in-bosnia.
Johnson, G. J. (2004). Examining the SFOR Experience. NATO. http://www.nato.int/docu/review/2004/Historic-Changes-Balkans/Examining-SFOR-experience/EN/index.htm.
Jones, J. L. (2004, May 7–10). Prague to Istanbul: Ambition Versus Reality. Global Security: A Broader Concept for the 21st Century. Center for Strategic Decision Research 21st International Workshop on Global Security—Berlin. http://csdr.org/2004book/Gen_Jones.htm.
Kay, S. (2013). No More Free-Riding: The Political Economy of Military Power and the Transatlantic Relationship. In J. H. Matlary & M. Petersson (Eds.), NATO’s European Allies—Military Capability and Political Will (pp. 97–120). Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Koschut, S. (2014). Transatlantic Conflict Management Inside-Out: The Impact of Domestic Norms on Regional Security Practices. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 27(2), 339–361.
Kreps, S. (2008). When Does the Mission Determine the Coalition? The Logic of Multilateral Intervention and the Case of Afghanistan. Security Studies, 17(3), 531–567.
Lakatos, I. (1978). The Methodology of Scientific Research Program. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lijphart, A. (1971). Comparative Politics and Comparative Method. American Political Science Review, 65(3), 682–698.
Lijphart, A. (1975). The Comparable-Cases Strategy in Comparative Research. Comparative Political Studies, 8(2), 158–177.
Levy, J. S. (1996). Loss Aversion, Framing, and Bargaining: The Implications of Prospects Theory for International Conflict. International Political Science Review, 17(2), 179–195.
Levy, J. S. (1997). Prospect Theory, Rational Choice, and International Relations. International Studies Quarterly, 41(1), 87–112.
Levy, J. S. (2003). Political Psychology, and Foreign Policy. In D. O. Sears, L. Huddy, & R. Jervis (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology (pp. 253–284). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Levy, J. S. (2008). Case Studies: Types, Designs, and Logics of Inference. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 25(1), 1–18.
Lombardi, B. (2008). All Politics is Local: Germany, the Bundeswehr, and Afghanistan. International Journal, 63(3), 587–605.
Mackie, J. L. (1965). Causes and Conditions. American Philosophical Quarterly, 4(2), 245–264.
Marten, K. (2007). Statebuilding and Force: The Proper Role of Foreign Militaries. Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, 1(2), 231–247.
Mello, P. A. (2014). Democratic Participation in Armed Conflict. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Meyer, T. (2013). Flipping the Switch: Combat, State-Building, and Junior Officers in Iraq and Afghanistan. Security Studies, 22(2), 222–258.
Mill, J. S. (2002 [1891]). A System of Logic. Honolulu, HI: University Press of the Pacific.
Moses, J. W., & Knutsen, T. L. (2012). Ways of Knowing. Competing Methodologies in Social and Political Science. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
NATO (2006, November 28). NATO Boosts Efforts in Afghanistan. http://www.nato.int/docu/update/2006/11-november/e1128a.htm.
Noetzel, T., & Rid, T. (2009). Germany’s Options in Afghanistan. Survival, 51(5), 71–90.
Noetzel, T., & Schreer, B. (2009). Does a Multi-tier NATO Matter? The Atlantic Alliance and the Process of Strategic Change. International Affairs, 85(2), 211–226.
Platt, J. (2007). Case Study. In W. Outhwaite & S. P. Turner (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Social Science Methodology (pp. 102–127). London: Sage.
Pouliot, V. (2015). Practice Tracing. In A. Bennett & J. T. Checkel (Eds.), Process Tracing. From Metaphor to Analytical Tool (pp. 237–259). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Przeworsky, A., & Teune, H. (1970). The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York: Wiley.
Ragin, C. C. (1987). The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
Ragin, C. C. (2000). Fuzzy-Set Social Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Richter, A., & Webb, N. J. (2014). Can Smart Defense Work? A Suggested Approach to Increasing Risk- and Burden-sharing Within NATO. Defense and Security Analysis, 30(4), 346–359.
Rihoux, B., & Ragin, C. C. (Eds.). (2009). Configurational Comparative Methods. Qualitative Comparative Analysis and Related Techniques. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Ringsmose, J. (2010). NATO Burden-Sharing Redux: Continuity and Change After the Cold War. Contemporary Security Policy, 31(2), 319–338.
Rosenau, J. N. (1966). Pre-theories and Theories of Foreign Policy. In R. B. Farrell (Ed.), Approaches to Comparative and International Politics (pp. 27–92). Evanston, IL: North-Western University Press.
Ross, L., Lepper, M., & Ward, A. (2010). History of Social Psychology: Insights, Challenges, and Contributions to Theory and Application. In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology (pp. 3–50). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Ruffa, C., Dandeker, C., & Vennesson, P. (2013). Soldiers Drawn Into Politics? The Influence of Tactics in Civil–Military Relations. Small Wars & Insurgencies, 24(2), 322–334.
Saideman, S. M. (2018, April 3–7). Comments to Gunnar Fermann’s Paper on Coping with Caveats in Coalition Warfare: An Empirical Research Program. Presented in the panel on The Politics of Multinational Military Operations, 2018 International Studies Association Convention, San Francisco.
Saideman, S. M., & Auerswald, D. P. (2012). Comparing Caveats. International Studies Quarterly, 56(1), 67–84.
Sky, E. (2007). Increasing ISAF’s Impact on Stability in Afghanistan. Defense and Security Analysis, 23(1), 7–25.
Smelser, N. J. (1973). The Methodology in the Social Sciences. In D. P. Warwick & S. D. Osherson (Eds.), Comparative Research Methods (pp. 42–86). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Thomas, G. (2011). A Typology of the Case Study in Social Science Following a Review of Definition, Discourse, and Structure. Qualitative Inquiry, 17(6), 511–521.
Trønnes, O. (2012). Mapping and Explaining Norwegian Caveats in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2008. Master thesis in Political Science, Department of Sociology and Political Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim.
United Nations. (2000). Report of the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations (The “Brahimi Report”) (A/55/305-S/2000/809). New York, NY: United Nations.
van der Meulen, J., & Kawano, H. (2008). Accidental Neighbours: Japanese and Dutch Troops in Iraq. In J. Soeters & P. Manigart (Eds.), Military Cooperation in Multinational Peace Operations: Managing Cultural Diversity and Crisis Response (pp. 166–179). Oxon: Routledge.
Young, T.-D. (2003). The Revolution in Military Affairs and Coalition Operations: Problem Areas and Solutions. Defense and Security Analysis, 19(2), 111–130.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fermann, G. (2019). Recapitulations and Contributions. In: Coping with Caveats in Coalition Warfare. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92519-6_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92519-6_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-92518-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-92519-6
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)