Faculty of Social Studies, Masaryk University
Reviewer: Mgr. Richard Stojar, Ph.D., Centre for Security and Military
Strategic Studies, University of Defence in Brno
Published with the Faculty of Social Studies, Masaryk University subvention
within the EDIS publication series, aiming to support PhD. graduates’ publication
© 2018 Masarykova univerzita
ISBN 978-80-210-8911-2 (brož. vaz)
Scientific Editorial Board of Masaryk University
prof. Ing. Petr Dvořák, CSc.
PhDr. Jan Cacek, Ph.D.
Mgr. Tereza Fojtová
Mgr. Michaela Hanousková
prof. MUDr. Lydie Izakovičová Hollá, Ph.D.
doc. RNDr. Petr Holub, Ph.D.
doc. Mgr. Jana Horáková, Ph.D.
doc. PhDr. Mgr. Tomáš Janík, Ph.D.
doc. JUDr. Josef Kotásek, Ph.D.
prof. PhDr. Tomáš Kubíček, Ph.D.
doc. RNDr. Jaromír Leichmann, Dr.
PhDr. Alena Mizerová
doc. Ing. Petr Pirožek, Ph.D.
doc. RNDr. Lubomír Popelínský, Ph.D.
Mgr. Kateřina Sedláčková, Ph.D.
doc. RNDr. Ondřej Slabý, Ph.D.
prof. PhDr. Jiří Trávníček, M.A.
doc. PhDr. Martin Vaculík, Ph.D.
To all those who kept telling me that research on this topic
would not be possible, thank you. Your discouragements gave
me more motivation to keep going until the end.
“When you reach the top, keep ascending;
otherwise, you start descending.”
table of contentS
tA ble of Contents
1.1 Structure of the publication ............................15
2.2 Research questions....................................18
2.3 Research methods ....................................20
2.3.1 Historical method...................................20
2.3.2 Process-tracing .....................................21
2.4 Analytical models.....................................24
2.4.1 SWOT model.......................................24
2.4.2 CEg model.........................................28
2.5 Data gathering techniques .............................31
2.5.2 Content analysis ....................................34
2.6 Limitations ..........................................38
3 SUMMARy OF ExISTINg LITERATURE..................41
4 THEORETICAL PART ...................................43
4.1 Theory of strategy ....................................43
4.2 Conceptualization of counterinsurgency .................56
4.2.1 David galula .......................................66
4.2.2 David Kilcullen .....................................69
4.2.3 Other counterinsurgency scholars.....................76
CzeCh ApproACh towArd CounterinsurgenCy
5 EMPIRICAL PART ......................................84
5.1 Historical legacy?.....................................84
5.1.1 Czechoslovak legions (1917–1920) ....................85
5.1.2 Freikorps and State Defense guard (1938–1939) ........90
5.1.3 The World War II (1939–1945) .......................94
5.1.4 The Communist regime era (1948–1990)...............96
5.1.5 WWII or the Communist era legacy? ..................98
5.2 Czech approach toward counterinsurgency –
conceptual dimension ................................100
5.2.1 Relevant NATO documents .........................103
184.108.40.206 Allied Joint Doctrine for Counterinsurgency
5.2.2 Relevant documents of the Czech Republic............141
220.127.116.11 Military .......................................151
5.3 Czech approach to counterinsurgency –
practical dimension ..................................164
5.3.1 Kosovo ...........................................164
5.3.2 Iraq ..............................................170
5.3.3 Afghanistan .......................................174
18.104.22.168 Deployments of special operations forces (SOF).....185
22.214.171.124 Training and advising to ANSF ...................190
126.96.36.199 Reconstruction and stabilization efforts............193
188.8.131.52 Logistical support for coalition forces..............203
184.108.40.206 National Support Element (NSE)..................204
220.127.116.11 Relations with the Afghan population .............204
18.104.22.168 Humanitarian aid and development assistance......206
6 ANALyTICAL PART....................................222
6.1 SWOT analysis ......................................222
6.2 CEg analysis........................................232 table of contentS 7 CONCLUSIONS........................................256
8.1 Primary sources .....................................272
8.2 Secondary sources ...................................276
LIST OF TABLES AND FIgURES ..........................285
List of tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .285 List of Figures.............................................286
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS................................287
One of the distinctive features of the 21
century security environ
ment has been asymmetrical war fighting, with major conflict parties
being framed by many politicians, security practitioners as well as
researchers with labels of insurgencies of various kinds, sizes, meth
ods of fight they deploy and the interests they pursue. Closely aligned
to this was also the tendency to restore to the frequent use of the
term “counterinsurgency” in reference to the measures and efforts
employed and carried out in order to minimize and essentially elimi
nate activities of the contemporary non-state belligerents and/or war
opponents, designated as insurgencies.
The concept of counterinsurgency started gaining traction as re
lated to the coalition efforts in the post 9/11 conflict zones after the
2001 invasion of Afghanistan (overlapping operations Enduring Free
dom – Afghanistan (OEF-A) and the International Security Assistance
Force (ISAF) and the 2003 invasion of Iraq (Operation Iraqi Freedom
(OIF), and has been associated mainly with the discourse politicians,
military officers as well as various researchers and commentators had
been using under the administration of the then-US President Barrack
H. Obama. Since its introduction as one of the most effective ways of
how to best counter the contemporary security challenges in the post
9/11 conflict zones, counterinsurgency has been one of the dominant
military doctrines on the potential/possible deployment of military
(as well as, to some extent civilian) forces in the contemporary secu
rity environment. As such, counterinsurgency as a military strategy
and/or a military doctrine has been studied, analyzed and discussed
broadly and in depth, with most of the attention focused on what are
the most effective counterinsurgency principles, what does the ap
propriate use of military force in counterinsurgency missions mean,
how to reliably measure any possible success of counterinsurgency
operations. Factors like what level of local knowledge and localization
of the conflict is required for the mission to succeed/meet its minimal
objectives or how to best prepare military and civilian agents engaged
CzeCh ApproACh towArd CounterinsurgenCy
12 in this type of operations, and how to make the military actors and the civilian actors cooperate with each other effectively have been studied as well. A significant level of attention has also been devoted to the best counterinsurgency practices and lessons identified and (ideally) learned from the past for potential future operations.
Major part of the relevant literature, studies, and research project has addressed the issue of counterinsurgency from the Western point of view, as the perspective of a country/a coalition of countries engaged in the conduct of counterinsurgency operations “abroad”, i.e. not in its own territory (distinct, for instance, by the stress put on the element of the development of a host nation security forces and the significance of assistance provided to them). Most of those studies focused on strategies of individual sovereign states, most notably those with the superpower status, mirroring the security environment vis-a-vis national interest assessments and/or historical experience, like the United States (USA), the United Kingdom (UK) or France or the Russian Federation (Russia), or the Philippines, India, Israel or Colombia, as examples of the countries with long-term stakes in the potential effectiveness of their counterinsurgency efforts, given the presence of ongoing insurgencies in their sovereign territories. With regards to the coalition efforts (particularly) in Afghanistan, it was also the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) as another actor subjected to the closer scrutiny of its counterinsurgency efforts on the Alliance level. Individual counterinsurgency approaches and strategies differ in some of its principles, their framework, in both theoretical and practical terms, is, however, common and mostly invariable.
Smaller countries, like the Czech Republic, have been spared the greater counterinsurgency scrutiny, due to their limited means of projection of individual state power beyond its borders unilaterally and the comparatively stable domestic security environment with a low likelihood of insurgent activity in their sovereign territories. Nevertheless, it was much smaller countries that contributed greatly (in terms of resources and capabilities, but also knowledge and connections) to various counterinsurgency operations, especially those in Afghanistan and in Iraq, in order to help achieve the most effective level counterinsurgency efforts of engaged multinational coalitions possible. introduction
Specifically, in the case of the Czech Republic, as a country that lacked any broader, direct experience with efforts considered to be falling with a framework of counterinsurgency operations prior to its involvement in the NATO ISAF mission in Afghanistan in 2002, it is even more urgent to explore its conduct and approach in comprehensive manner in order to identify the key attributes, principles, liabilities as well as unique features of “the Czech way of doing counterinsurgency”. Such a comprehensive study, which this publication aims to be, seeks to critically assess and evaluate the current state of the art and identify its potential effectiveness, flaws, challenges or spheres for further development or yet unexploited potential.
The Czech Republic has been actively participating in the NATO counterinsurgency mission in Afghanistan for almost 15 years now and gained valuable broad counterinsurgency experience during these engagements. And even though the Armed Forces of the Czech Republic’s (along with another civilian state as well as non-state resources in the areas of reconstruction, development or humanitarian aid) deployment in Afghanistan marks historically the longest combat mission of the Czech (and Czechoslovak) state, with the largest and longest deployment of the greatest number of human, material, financial, etc. resources and capabilities, several frictions, caused by discontinuous approach, have occurred during the almost 15 years. The challenging discontinuity with its potential impacts on the overall effectiveness of the mission can be potentially costly (in human, financial or political terms) and is linked to the non-existence of any comprehensive, unifying official document on the governmental level, that would serve as a general framework of the Czech approach to counterinsurgency operations, listing resources and capabilities available, specify the conditions and requirements of their use or oversight and control mechanisms.
The added value of this monograph is also increased due to the basically non-existent larger expert community in the Czech academic, political as well as practitioner’s circles. The Czech contributions and conduct of counterinsurgency missions have been mostly described (and perhaps analyzed) in a fragmented manner, with a research focus placed on a specific issue or problem. This publication seeks to fill this gap in the Czech as well as international expert literature.
CzeCh ApproACh towArd CounterinsurgenCy
The deployment of the Czech civilian and military manpower and resources in Afghanistan, as part of the NATO (but also the EU and UN) mission resulted in a progressive, gradual learning process and in acquiring important combat, practical, counterinsurgency experience, knowledge and understanding of a complex, out of area mission, useful and beneficial for the power projections of the Czech state as well as the pursuit of its national interests, even in the future security environment. As already mentioned, the Czech mission in Afghanistan can be distinguished by the great amount and wide range and scope of both military and civilian resources deployed in Afghanistan, in both simultaneously conducted operations, OEF and ISAF, with various assigned tasks and efforts, as well as the historically longest essentially combat deployment of the Czech military, making it the main research subject of the author of this monograph.
Nevertheless, to draw any inferences or conclusions based on the exploration of just one, even though major case study can be misleading and simplistic. Therefore, two other foreign multinational missions the Czech Republic contributed to and that evinced significant counterinsurgency features are described and analyzed in this study as well, i.e. the missions in Kosovo and Iraq. Even though the counterinsurgency dimension of the Czech deployments was comparatively limited, the fact that the Czech Republic deployed under the NATO command aids the ambition of this monograph to be a first case study of the NATO counterinsurgency doctrine.
The time frame of this research is long enough to allow for a proper process-tracing method to be applied. It starts in 1999 with the Czech deployment to KFOR mission in Kosovo and ends with the end of 2013 when the Czech Republic withdrew most of its assets and resources from the ISAF mission in Afghanistan. Short historical excurse is included in the text, and covers the periods of the Czechoslovak Legion’s operations in Russia (1917–1920), the prelude for the Nazi invasion of Czechoslovakia in the form of the armed resistance in the Sudeten with the overwhelming majority of inhabiting germans (1938–1939), the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia (1939–1945) and the Czechoslovak (Federative) Socialist Republic (1948/1960–1990). The overall impacts of these historical periods on the results of this research are, however, very limited and mainly ab
stract. The dominant focus of this publication is on the contemporary
approach of the Czech Republic toward counterinsurgency endeavors.
1.1 Structure of the publication
In the first part of this monograph, the author introduces the meth
odology of the research at hand, articulates the main research ques
tions as well as discusses major limits of such a research, along with
the sources she used. Following chapter introduces the theoretical
framework of the research. First, the theory of strategy developed by
Harry yarger is introduced, in conjunction with theoretical equation
model of strategy, developed by Arthur F. Lykke, Jr. these two closely
interconnected theoretical frameworks are applied in the text and help
explain why the Czech counterinsurgency approach doesn’t constitute
a strategy. Second, the concept of counterinsurgency is addressed and
discussed, with the purpose of establishing the conceptual framework
of this publication, and to help readers better understand the topic.
Counterinsurgency theories of two well-known and distinguished ex
perts are introduced – David galula and David Kilcullen. The works
of these two experts are also used as the lenses through which the
Czech counterinsurgency approach is analyzed through in the con
cluding chapter of this book. Additionally, the extensive conceptual
and theoretical background counterinsurgency (as policy, strategy,
approach) entails deserves some more space in this publication. For
as comprehensive theoretical/conceptual framework of this research
as possible, the author of this monograph discusses counterinsurgen
cy related ideas, thoughts, opinions, theories and main arguments
of several other renowned scholars in the field, namely Santa Cruz
de Marcenado, B. H. Liddell Hart, Robert Thompson, Martin van
Creveld and John Nagl. This selection provides readers with the op
portunity to learn about the evolution of counterinsurgency strategy
and policy thinking, number of counterinsurgency pillars that have
remained solid in different operational theaters throughout the time,
as well as its shifting focus correspondingly to the changing nature of
the security environment and changes in the nature of warfare itself.
The empirical part of this monograph starts with a short histor
ical excurse, which maps the historical experience of Czechs with
CzeCh ApproACh towArd CounterinsurgenCy
the art of counterinsurgency. Such historic overview helps identify
potential existing legacy that can affect the current Czech approach
toward counterinsurgency. Then the contemporary Czech approach
to counterinsurgency is described and analyzed in two dimensions:
(1) conceptual, when all official relevant documents at NATO and
Czech levels are presented, and (2) practical. The practical dimension
then addresses the major Czech counterinsurgency contributions to
three NATO operations – in Kosovo and Iraq, where the Czech coun
terinsurgency experience remained largely limited and indirect, and
in Afghanistan, which represented the first truly counterinsurgency
operation the Czech Republic participated in directly. Importantly,
these all were multinational missions. Hence any examination of the
Czech contributions to them is inherently very closely linked to the
overall missions’ mandate and settings. given the primary relevance
of the Czech Republic’s participation in the mission in Afghanistan,
the missions in Kosovo and Iraq are introduced only briefly.
The findings discovered in the empirical part are analyzed in the
fifth chapter of this publication. Two analytical models, SWOT and
CEg, are used to gain analytical inferences that allow examining the
research subject in a comprehensive way. CEg model is then the main
analytical technique applied in this monograph. The main findings of
the previous chapters are then summarized in conclusions. Research
questions are answered and recommendations for improvement and
future development of the Czech approach toward counterinsurgency,
as well as recommendations for directions and areas of future research
in this topic, are formulated in the concluding chapter. methodoloGy
This monograph was developed using the qualitative design of the research, with a slight overreach to the quantitative research design.
The author seeks to overcome the state-centric tendency and includes the exploration of relevant sources of data and dynamics at the levels of NATO and non-governmental organizations (NgOs), who not necessarily coordinate their efforts with the state. The empirical-analytical approach seems to be the adequate one in the efforts to address and explore such a topic because it allows for unbiased and neutral work with data, their interpretation and analysis, regardless any ideological or values’ tone and purpose. Proper counterinsurgency research should be multidisciplinary to allow examination of all important features and perspectives. The author approaches the counterinsurgency topic from the perspective of political science/security and strategic studies field. Interdisciplinary outreach of this monograph is limited and includes mainly economy and psychology (especially the issue of perception
This monograph is a descriptive analysis and a case study of
a counterinsurgency approach of an individual, smaller (in power, economic and geographical terms) European country, that is a member state of NATO, the EU, and UN. It also represents a first academic case study of a newly adopted (2011) NATO Counterinsurgency strategy doctrine. 1
This overreach has a form of an original metrics developed by the author for
the purposes of measuring the value of the gap existing between capabilities
and expectations relevant for the Czech approach to counterinsurgency, which
serves as a research sub-tool generating important data and findings which are
further utilized and evaluated in the context of broader Czech counterinsur
gency approach. 2
For more on the roles and significance of perceptions in the modern war
fare, including counterinsurgency missions see: McKeldin, T. R. – David, g. J.
(2009): Ideas as Weapons: Influence and Perception in Modern Warfare. Wa s h
ington DC: University of Nebraska Press.
CzeCh ApproACh towArd CounterinsurgenCy
The aim of this publication is then to develop an evidence-based comprehensive study of the contemporary Czech approach toward counterinsurgency by describing and analyzing its key features. Importantly, the author doesn’t frame this research in the traditional theoretical approaches of realism and liberalism, even though certain tendencies in terms of implicit diversions of the arguments to one direction or another are noticeable through this publication. Key pillars of both approaches are important for the purposes of this study, i.e. a sovereign state acting in accordance and pursuance of its national interests, and important roles played by individual state agencies as well as nonstate, non-governmental actors like private entities,
ganizations, but also multinational organizations. Significantly, certain patterns of activity are traced and identified through this research, considering the complexities of the research topic that is distinguishable by its multifaceted, multidimensional character, further complicated by the multiplicity of identities of the Czech Republic (i.e. nation-state, NATO member state, EU member state, UN member state, etc.).
2.2 reSearch queStionS
given the fact that this monograph compiles and analyses data to draw a framework of the contemporary Czech approach to counterinsurgency at its end, the research questions articulated by the author intuitively mirror the so far unmapped landscape of the researched topic. The main three research questions, enabling the author to fulfill the stated aim and reach the objectives of this publication are:
1. What are the key attributes of the strategic Czech approach toward
counterinsurgency, and how consistent is it? 2. How autonomous and how specific is the Czech approach toward
counterinsurgency? 3. What counterinsurgency model does the Czech approach adhere to,
and how? 3
Some of the private entities have semi-governmental character, because its
founders, directors and/or chief executes tend to be closely linked to govern
ment individual on personal as well as wider basis.
Providing sufficient and evidence bolstered answers to these three
research questions requires not only an explicit scale for measuring the level of autonomy of the Czech counterinsurgency approach but also determining the level of its consistency. Identification of the most problematic or challenging principles, as well as an examination of the practical, not only theoretical, dimension of the research subject matter, and their mutual reflection, enables the author to determine the level of consistency. As for the autonomy, the essential platform for determining its level in the case of the Czech counterinsurgency approach is established by decision-making processes, ordinary functioning and the powers, responsibilities, and commitments of the individual nation states within NATO. The NATO factor is critically important for the purposes of this monograph. The Czech Republic is a credible member of the Alliance and cannot ignore its security and defense commitments stemming out of it. The majority of the foreign missions the Czech Republic has ever deployed its assets and resources to where conducted under the auspices of NATO. The individual theoretical or conceptual models are introduced in the respective chapter below in the text.
What the individual counterinsurgency models
differ in are the military vs. civilian dominance and decision-making authority, the importance and specific measures of a kinetic action against the enemy, the significance of stabilization, reconstruction, and development or the level of discretion assigned by nation states to their deployed military and civilian forces. 4
In the field of political science, international relations and security and stra
tegic studies, the term “autonomy” often refers to self-governance. The level
of autonomy or self-governance is usually determined by numerous deals and
agreements that explicitly state the areas of greater discretion. Therefore, any
specific concept related to the question of how to measure autonomy is not
introduced and used in this research.
CzeCh ApproACh towArd CounterinsurgenCy
2.3 reSearch methodS
2.3.1 historical method
First method applied in this research is the historical method used to
examine the historical record of the Czech experience with counter
insurgency activities to provide a written account of this experience,
with the use of primary sources and other evidence. Collected data are
then described and analyzed through the lenses of historical reason
ing when information is assessed in and against a certain context. His
torical method is a systematic body of principles and rules designed
to aid effectively in gathering the source materials of history, apprais
ing them critically, and presenting a synthesis (usually in a written
form) of the results achieved, as being a procedure for the attainment
of historical truth. Historical method is generally approached from
the standpoint of understanding it as the broadest possible method
ological context, covering general philosophical considerations of the
subject matter of the historical research (Porra, Hirschheim, Parks
2014: 538). Therefore, more than using one or two specific techniques
used in the history writing process, the author of this monograph
applies the historical method is its extended scheme, to, as Munslow
characterized it, create and eventually impose a narrative of the past
(Munslow 1997: 3). This narrative can vary across the spectrum of re
search, depending upon the paradigm and approaches used by schol
ars studying the historical events and is multidisciplinary (like the
historical method as itself ) in its nature. Effective use of the historical
method depends on adequate historical thinking skills of researchers,
on their ability to acquire, analyze, and contextualize complex histori
cal material in three main stages: (1) building a foundation to acquire
historical knowledge, (2) analyzing and evaluating historical material,
and (3) context and interpretation. These three stages make up the
essential stages of any research, historical, present or future, what is
different in the case of historical method though is the availability and
(sometimes disputed) credibility of the resources used as well as the
lures of so-called historical presentism
Historical presentism is a cognitive bias process that can be mitigated or elim
inating through the mechanism of establishing the values and beliefs of the methodoloGy
Process-tracing allows researchers to identify potential existing causal mechanisms in the subject matter of the research, which further enables to recognize possible/existing correlations, and perhaps even possible/existing causal relationships. Importantly, the author doesn’t seek to determine existing causalities when determining effects of a certain factor as independent variables on other factors, functioning as dependent variables. The process-tracing research method is applied with the purpose of tracing existing mechanisms that give the scholar enough evidence for identifying existing correlations between individual variables more than drawing conclusive causal inferences, that, after a proper, follow-up scrutiny, can be classified as causal mechanisms, or existing casual relationships between an independent variable (or a group of independent variables) and a dependent variable in the given relationship. The author of this monograph truly explores the mechanism of causal processes.
gary King, Robert O. Keohane, and Sidney Verba understand
process-tracing as the search for intervening factors that link an independent variable with a dependent variable. Uncovering these intervening steps is then viewed as part of the more fundamental goal of identifying and assessing the potential causal effect of an independent variable studied. In their understanding, process-tracing can increase the number of theoretically relevant observations, however, the value of the causal inference drawn through process-tracing is not very strong. King, Keohane and Verba consider process-tracing casual inferences only to “promote descriptive generalizations and prepare the way for casual inference” (King, Keohane, Verba 1994: 225–228), by detecting the link, the steps and the relevant variables intervening in the relationship of an independent variable and a dependent variable, but leaving the mechanics of their potential intervention to further inquiry. given the number of intervening causal steps between any
times as a lens to analyze the past, or using the values of the time to analyze
historical meaning rather than those of the 21
century. Other means for over
coming the tendency to analyze the historical records through the use of his
torical presentism is based on efforts aimed at comparing and contrasting the
values of the past with those of the present (Brown 2010: 8).
CzeCh ApproACh towArd CounterinsurgenCy
independent and dependent variable, King, Keohane, and Verba talk
about the infinite regress (Ibid: 86), any research using process-trac
ing encounters, as the research method itself is generally unable to
determine which of multiple potential intervening factors and mecha
nisms really function as a link between an independent and a depend
ent variable. For them, process-tracing is mainly a descriptive tool and
the first step in the causal analysis, requiring further research. The
understanding of process-tracing King, Keohane, and Verba present
in their work has been subjected to a lot of criticism, whose authors
have sought to provide alternative tools for overcoming the perceived
shortcomings of the process-tracing research method. One of the
most prominent tools at the disposal of contemporary scholars aimed
at overcoming the flaw of apparent inference regression is the focus on
“casual-process observation” (CPO), as opposed to “data-set observa
tion” (DSO) which accounts for merely a qualitative research equiva
lent to the normal statistical observation. CPO, however, is “an insight
or piece of data that provides information about contexts, process or
mechanisms, and that contributes distinctive leverage in causal infer
ence” (Collier, Brady, Seawright 2010: 277). Therefore, the discovery
of CPOs through process-tracing has a higher causal inference value
than DSOs in a qualitative research design, where data are more iso
lated in a form of a systemized set of variables, without broader un
derstanding or knowledge. By identifying and analyzing the existing
CPOs in the subject matter of this research, the author increases the
value of disclosed correlation and potential causations.
Indeed, process-tracing involves the examination of “diagnostic”
pieces of evidence within a case that contribute to supporting or over
turning alternative explanatory hypotheses. The core nature of the
process-tracing method lies in the search for the observable implica
tions of the hypothesized explanations with the goal of establishing
whether the events or processes within the case fit those predicted by
alternative explanations. Process-tracing can also play an important
role in comparisons of cases, as it can, for instance, enable scholars to
assess whether a variable whose values differs in two most similar cas
es is related to the difference in their outcomes (Bennett 2010). Pro
cess-tracing is also used as a method of discovering hypothesis by its
ability to determine the sequence of who, what, where, when, why and
how, including the response, going down to the lower levels of analymethodoloGy sis. Moreover, the process-tracing research method allows researchers to establish whether there is a causal chain of steps connecting independent and dependent variables and whether there is such evidence to identify other variables that might have caused the effect or might have influenced the respective variables at hand, and how (Ibid). To track process-tracing, from observed outcomes to potential causes as well as forward from hypothesized causes to subsequent outcomes, allows the researcher to uncover variables they have not previously considered, and thus provide new explanations or understandings. Case expertise and substantive knowledge can play a fundamental role in any use of the process-tracing method, as it facilitates a deeper understanding of a respective issue through sorting out explanations relevant to the subject matter.
Importantly, process-tracing involves several different kinds of empirical tests, focusing on evidence with different kinds of probative value and contributing to validation or falsification of potential explanations.
The obstacles with determining the causal mechanism in the research of the Czech counterinsurgency approach, its success and effectiveness, consequences and impacts, properly lie mainly in the problems and challenges of an adequate metrics of the success or effectiveness of counterinsurgency efforts in general. Many distinguished scholars criticized the existing metrics of success in Afghanistan as well as the Iraq counterinsurgency endeavors. Among the most prominent ones is an Australian strategist and military doctrine expert David Kilcullen, who in one of his publications assessed the widely applied, yet flawed metrics for tracking the progress of the ISAF mission in Afghanistan. What he suggested is an alternative framework for the success, effectiveness or progress evaluation. This monograph, however, doesn’t aim to evaluate the overall efficiency of the Czech counterinsurgency efforts, because it is virtually impossible. It has not been an isolated effort and strong mutual interdependency on other actors and factors exists. Also, casual mechanisms like efficiency, effectiveness or success usually measure certain goals, which is problematic in the case of the Czech counterinsurgency approach, because not enough data are available.
The essential major limitation is a result of the insufficient, inadequate and poor focus of the research community (in the field of
CzeCh ApproACh towArd CounterinsurgenCy
24 security and strategic studies, peace studies or development studies), on and its weak interest in any holistic, comprehensive examinations of possible variations within the counterinsurgency framework itself. Apart from studies describing, analyzing or criticizing counterinsurgency strategies of major, experienced actors in the realm of effective measures aimed at elimination of various forms of insurgencies or similar politically motivated violence, there is a critical shortage of literature and adequate relevant resources, addressing the issue of approaches of different actors or stakeholders to superior counterinsurgency strategies and doctrines, particularly as part of various multinational missions.
2.4 analytical modelS
2.4.1 SWot model
Being an established method in assisting critical evaluations and formulations of strategies and strategic development processes, policies and approaches, the SWOT analysis
is vital for achieving the aim
of this publication, due to its potential to yield significant strategic insights into recommended strategic actions. given its simple methodology, SWOT analysis is one of the most popular advanced an- 6
For literature reviews, critical assessment of SWOT use, misuse and pitfalls,
and analytical case studies on the mechanics and use of SWOT analysis, see,
for example, Helms, M. M. – Nixon, J. (2008): „Exploring SWOT analysis –
where are we now?: A review of academic research from the last decade“, Jour
nal of Strategy and Management, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 215–251; Chermack, T. J. –
Kasshanna, B. K. (2007): „The Use and Misuse of SWOT Analysis and Impli
cations for HRD Professionals“, Human Resource Development International,
vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 383–399; ghazinoory, S. – ghazinoori, S. (2006): „Devel
oping Iran’s government strategies for strengthening the national system of
innovation using SWOT analysis“, Science and Public Policy, vol. 33, no. 7,
pp. 529–540; Farazmand, A. (2014): Crisis and Emergency Management: Theory
and Practice, Public Administration and Public Policy, vol. 178, Boca Raton,
FL: CRC Press, 2nd Edition. On the methodology behind the SWOT analytical
technique, see Prunckun, H. (2010): Handbook of Scientific Methods of Inquiry
for Intelligence Analysis, Scarecrow Professional Intelligence Education Series,
no. 11, Lanham: Scarecrow Press. methodoloGy alytical techniques applied in the private, but increasingly also the public sector, as it represents a proven developmental, results-oriented strategic planning tool. Use of SWOT analysis helps identify the key elements of the Czech approach towards counterinsurgency as well as direct future planning and strategy development in this matter. The Czech counterinsurgency approach is analyzed through the SWOT analytical model, generating recommended strategic or policy actions and directions to the future. The technique was devised primarily for long-term business planning, but it can be applied beyond the private sector to countries and industries, in the intelligence or policy and military planning realm, on both strategic and tactical level.
The SWOT analytical model is one of the most popular analytic
tools used by intelligence analysts, for two reasons: (1) it can be used with a variety of unstructured data (qualitative data from either primary or secondary sources), and (2) the focus of the research is not on variable dependent, i.e. it can either be the target or the agency conducting the operation against the target (Prunckun 2010). These characteristic attributes of SWOT analysis and its use are of a utility in the case of the Czech Republic’s approach to counterinsurgency, because the data collected and analyzed in this research exist in a highly unstructured way, scattered across several primary and secondary sources. Moreover, as the SWOT analytical model can be also used to analyze information to help understand the current situation (i.e. as a situational analysis), it’s application more than fits the framework, analysis and goals of this monograph, as no similar action has been taken in the Czech or international academic circles thus far.
SWOT analysis follows several steps. First, an analyst defines the
end-state (strategic settings) or objective (tactical settings) of the use of SWOT in that case, i.e. what he/she wants to achieve with the SWOT inquiry. Then, SWOT matrix
Although a matrix typically displays a SWOT, SWOT analysis can be laid out
in any way that is suitable for the analyst (Prunckun 2010). It can be visualized
as a list or other.
CzeCh ApproACh towArd CounterinsurgenCy
table 1: SWot matrix sample
strengths, i.e. the attributes associated with the (issue, problem, agency, etc. under investigations) that are conducive to achieving the end/state. • What are the strengths? • What does the subject do better than
• What unique capabilities and resources
does the subject have?
• What do others perceive as your
weaknesses/liabilities, i.e. the
attributes associated with the
(issue, problem, agency, etc. under
investigation) that are detrimental or
achieving the end-state.
• What are the weaknesses?
• What do adversaries/other partners
• Where is the room for improvement?
• What do others perceive as your
opportunities, i.e. the conditions (legal, criminogenic, social, economic, political, security, psychological, information, etc.) that would assist in achieving the end-state. • What trends or conditions may
positively impact the subject?
• What opportunities are available for the
threats, i.e. the conditions (legal,
criminogenic, social, economic, political,
security, psychological, information, etc.)
that might be detrimental to the subject
and its operations.
• What trends and conditions may
negatively impact the subject?
• What are the adversaries doing that
might impact the subject?
• Is solid financial support available?
• What impact do the
subject’s weaknesses have on the
threats to it?
Source: IH, inspired by Prunckun, J. (2010): Handbook of Scientific Methods of inquiry for intelligence analysis
The analyst then populates each of the four quadrants of the SWOT
matrix with data and information he/she collected or generated from
a proper exploration of relevant primary or secondary resources. For
assessments on the strategic level, just it is the case in this publication,
it is useful to apply a multidisciplinary approach to consider each of
the four quadrants thoroughly and from a different perspective to get
as broad and complex view as possible. It allows gaining control over
all factors functioning as variables influencing the studied phenom
methodoloGy enon in one way or another. After all the quadrants have been filled in, the analyst assesses the factors one at a time and cross-checks them for agreement and arguments’ building. What the analyst must ensure is that there are no contrary or paradoxical positions stated in different quadrants. Prunckun suggests asking hypothetical questions to improve assessment of the arguments builds upon the data stated in the four quadrants. Questions like “In what way can the strengths be used to an advantage?”, “How can the weakness be shored up?”, “What is the best way to take advantage of each opportunity?”, “What needs to be done to mitigate each threat?” or similar (cf. Ibid). An analytical examination while applying SWOT is not linear, but rather an iterative process, often embedded with the overall planning processes. It has an extensive potential to be used in conjunction with other advanced analytical techniques, like the PEST technique, perception assessment analysis, fishbone analysis, or utilizing the analytic hierarchy process or similar hybrid methods.
The tactical dimension of the use of SWOT analysis is also relevant
for this study, as it helps examine operating structures of actors, their methods of operating, their capabilities, their financial base etc., thereby allowing the author of this monograph to examine the research topic from different perspectives. Final steps of the SWOT analysis are then executed by formulating strategy or policy recommendations (approach, in the case of this monograph), based on combinations of the factors as follows: table 2: SWot policy recommendations
(Ways that will use strengths so that opportunities can be realized.)
(Ways to address weaknesses to provide relief so that opportunities can be followed.)
• strengths/threats (Ways that use strengths “offensively” to moderate threats.)
• weaknesses/threats (Defensive ways that will protect against threats.) (Ibid). Source: ih, inspired by ibid
CzeCh ApproACh towArd CounterinsurgenCy
2.4.2 ceG model
The capability-expectations gap (CEg) model is based on a comparison of expectations and real, credible capabilities to meet these expectations of an entity in a specific field. Use of the CEg model enables the author to investigate actual performance as different from the potential performance
of the Czech Republic in the sphere of counter
insurgency operations, both multinational and potentially unilateral. This additional analytical tool not only feeds the scope and depth of the critical-analytical assessment presented in this monograph, but also the articulation of recommendations to the future.
An American scholar Christopher Hill is recognized to be the main
pioneer of the capabilities-expectations gap analytical concept. In 1993, Hill developed the concept and used it for the evaluation of the international role and the status of common foreign and security policy (CFSP) of the EU, the European Community (EC). According to Hill, a critical gap exists between capabilities and expectations regarding the EC’s/EU’s roles in the international system, and this gap tends to widen instead of reducing itself. Hill devotes significant attention on the part of third/external parties’ perceptions and expectations of the tasks and function the EC/EU is and may be fulfilling. As Hill himself stresses, what it seeks is to “sketch a more realistic picture of what the Community does in the world” (Hill: 1993: 306), and further establishes that the whole study Hill presents in his paper is “essentially pre-theoretical”, since he resorts to conceptualizing Europe’s international capability rather than to theoretical explanations and predictions of Europe’s behaviour (Ibid). Inspired by Hill, the author of this monograph also refrains from the thorough theoretical framing of the research subject, given its novelty, primacy, and uniqueness in the research field. As suggested in the concluding chapter, several theories can then be applied to the findings of this research to develop the knowledge of this topic further and test the validity of the arguments presented here.
Hill also recognized the perilous potential of the CEg model as
it could, in his own words, “lead to debates over false possibilities”, 8
Similar to the CEg model, the so-called gAP analytical model is quite fre
quently applied across the business, and increasingly public, sector in order to
assess the actual vs. potential performance of a subject.