Saving Soldiers or Civilians? : Casualty-Aversion versus Civilian Protection in Asymmetric Conflicts

There is a dilemma facing the US in asymmetric conflicts. Balancing concern for the lives of soldiers and innocent civilians has opened new areas of vulnerability that have been systematically exploited by non-state adversaries. Kaempf examines how the resulting trade-off is forcing decision-makers to have to choose between these two norms.

Concerns for the lives of soldiers and innocent civilians have come to underpin Western, and particularly American, warfare. Yet this new mode of conflict faces a dilemma: these two norms have opened new areas of vulnerability that have been systematically exploited by non-state adversaries. This strategic behaviour creates a trade-off, forcing decision-makers to have to choose between saving soldiers and civilians in target states. Sebastian Kaempf examines the origin and nature of this dilemma, and in a detailed analysis of the US conflicts in Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq, investigates the ways the US has responded, assessing the legal, moral, and strategic consequences. Scholars and students of military and strategic studies, international relations and peace and conflict studies will be interested to read Kaempf''s analysis of whether the US or its adversaries have succeeded in responding to this central dilemma of contemporary warfare.