The Experts below are selected from a list of 327 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Ozcan Saritas - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
future of sustainable Military Operations under emerging energy and security considerations
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2016Co-Authors: Ozcan Saritas, Serhat BurmaogluAbstract:Due to limited energy sources and growing concerns about environment, secure, safe and sustainable energy has become one of the Grand Challenges at the global level. Likewise in many other aspects of life, energy is crucial for Military forces. In parallel to the changing nature of warfare, the need for energy in Military Operations has increased dramatically. While energy consumption in the World War II was 1gal per soldier per day, it was 4gal per soldier per day during the Desert Storm operation in 1991. Not only the quantity, but also the type of energy required for Military Operations has changed dramatically. Shifts have been observed from individual man power to machines powered by fuel and electricity. Energy demand and type have changed further through the introduction of more sophisticated devices with new capabilities such as to enable night vision, designate targets with lasers, provide advanced sensing and communication capabilities and reduce human involvement in Operations through drones and robotic technologies. Investigating the trends in changing nature of warfare and energy through review, technology mining and scientometrics, the present study develops future scenarios, and a strategic roadmap to identify priority technology areas and strategies for the future Military energy R&D.
Serhat Burmaoglu - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
future of sustainable Military Operations under emerging energy and security considerations
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2016Co-Authors: Ozcan Saritas, Serhat BurmaogluAbstract:Due to limited energy sources and growing concerns about environment, secure, safe and sustainable energy has become one of the Grand Challenges at the global level. Likewise in many other aspects of life, energy is crucial for Military forces. In parallel to the changing nature of warfare, the need for energy in Military Operations has increased dramatically. While energy consumption in the World War II was 1gal per soldier per day, it was 4gal per soldier per day during the Desert Storm operation in 1991. Not only the quantity, but also the type of energy required for Military Operations has changed dramatically. Shifts have been observed from individual man power to machines powered by fuel and electricity. Energy demand and type have changed further through the introduction of more sophisticated devices with new capabilities such as to enable night vision, designate targets with lasers, provide advanced sensing and communication capabilities and reduce human involvement in Operations through drones and robotic technologies. Investigating the trends in changing nature of warfare and energy through review, technology mining and scientometrics, the present study develops future scenarios, and a strategic roadmap to identify priority technology areas and strategies for the future Military energy R&D.
Paulina Starski - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Accountability and Multinational Military Operations
The 'Legal Pluriverse' Surrounding Multinational Military Operations, 2019Co-Authors: Paulina StarskiAbstract:The chapter focuses on the rules on ‘international legal responsibility’ of states and international organizations as one scheme of holding actors of multinational Military Operations ‘accountable’. It shows that the ‘pluriverse’ of multilevel Military Operations gravitates in terms of ‘legal accountability’ around three basic sub-problems: the ‘attribution of conduct’, the ‘attribution of responsibility’, and the allocation of secondary obligations stemming from responsibility. With respect to these matters, the actors involved and the various overlapping spheres of control they exercise over multinational Military Operations pose a major challenge that international legal scholarship has yet to address in a satisfactory manner. In that regard—so the key argument—‘multiple attribution’ and ‘multiple responsibility’ appear as feasible concepts to process the realities of multinational Military Operations in a manner that would facilitate the accountability of relevant actors.
-
accountability and multinational Military Operations
2018Co-Authors: Paulina StarskiAbstract:Multinational Military Operations [MNMO] occur in different emanations: They might involve the concerted action of states – (ad hoc) ‘coalitions of the willing’ – participating in a joint Military operation in which every state retains command over its troops (‘national command model’) or a ‘multinational integrated command’ is established or – in another variant – national contingents are subjected to the lead or domination of a specific state (‘framework nation’ or ‘lead nation’ model). Furthermore such coalitions may act with the authorization of an international organization [IO] or within its institutional setting under its lead or under the lead of one IO which might be in turn authorized by another IO. The plurality of actors involved and the intricate web of different spheres of authority and control characterizing MNMO pose considerable challenges in terms of ‘accountability’. This contribution is dedicated to their illustration and shall simultaneously critically reflect on the specific schemes international law offers to address the ‘pluriverse’ of ‘accountability problems’ arising when states and IO act together militarily. After sketching the conceptual contours of ‘accountability’ [I.] as well as the specific features of MNMO that account for the difficulties to hold relevant actors accountable [II.], this contribution will in its main part turn to rules on the ‘international legal responsibility’ of states and IO – a genuinely legal scheme which realizes – ‘accountability’ [III.] before closing with final observations [IV.].
Patrick A Mello - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the politics of multinational Military Operations
Contemporary Security Policy, 2019Co-Authors: Patrick A Mello, Stephen M SaidemanAbstract:ABSTRACTToday, few countries fight alone; most fight as allies or partners in multilateral campaigns. The end of the Cold War opened a window of opportunity for multinational Military Operations (M...
-
National restrictions in multinational Military Operations: A conceptual framework
Contemporary Security Policy, 2018Co-Authors: Patrick A MelloAbstract:ABSTRACTRecent scholarship in security studies has started to explore the causes and consequences of various forms of national restrictions in multinational Military Operations (MMOs). This article...
Anna Petrig - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The 'Legal Pluriverse' Surrounding Multinational Military Operations - Multinational Military Operations at Sea
The 'Legal Pluriverse' Surrounding Multinational Military Operations, 2019Co-Authors: Anna PetrigAbstract:Multinational Military Operations have extended to the sea. These Operations mirror the changing maritime security landscape wherein transnational crime has become one of the most prominent security threats. With this, the traditional war-related role of navies has slowly but steadily been supplanted by a new function: policing the sea. This new role is more often than not carried out by navies working together, either as naval coalitions or as highly integrated naval forces of regional organizations. This chapter describes the ‘legal pluriverse’ in which such multinational Military Operations at sea take place. It first asserts that such Operations are not ‘warfare lite’, but rather determined by peace time law. It then proceeds to take stock of the rules authorizing multinational forces and contributing states to enforce the law at sea. In a last step, the legal bases imposing strictures on the exercise of these enforcement powers are carved out. The chapter concludes that the legal framework governing enforcement jurisdiction at sea is arguably the epitome of a ‘legal pluriverse’, yet the powers are more clearly defined than the strictures attaching to their exercise.