Change search
Refine search result
1 - 3 of 3
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Eriksson, Gunilla
    et al.
    Swedish Defence University, Department of Military Studies, Joint Warfare Division, Operational Functions Section.
    Pettersson, UlricaSwedish Defence University, Department of Military Studies.
    Special Operations from a Small State Perspective: Future Security Challenges2017Collection (editor) (Refereed)
  • 2.
    Josefsson, Anders
    et al.
    Swedish Defence University, Department of Military Studies, Science of Command and Control and Military Technology Division, Command and Control Section.
    Anderson, Joseph
    United States Army.
    Norlander, Arne
    Marcusson, Björn
    Swedish Defence University, Department of Military Studies, Joint Warfare Division, Operational Functions Section.
    Mission Command when waging cyber operations2019In: 24th International Command and Control Research & Technology Symposium (ICCRTS), International Command and Control Institute , 2019, Vol. Topic 2Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The conditions for military operations have changed due to many things and the cyber-related challenges associated with these conditions require more attention. Many cyber activities are conducted under other circumstances than conventional war that is called the grey zone between peace and war. The objective of this paper is to explore the conditions for mission command when conducting cyber operations. The distinction between war and peace has blurred and adversaries, both state and non-state, threaten the stability in many western countries. Mission command can be seen both as a philosophy and as a method. The fundamental principles for mission command as a philosophy are trust, intent focus, initiative and common ground. This paper discusses if the conditions for Mission Command have changed and are applicable while conducting different types of cyberspace operations and that offensive and defensive cyber operations imply different conditions for Mission Command. The conclusion is that Mission Command as a philosophy is still relevant, but it has to be supported by a comprehensive Command and Control (C2)-Method that is flexible and able to vary between Direct Control and Mission type Control. The C2 Method should be complemented with a dynamic and adaptive control policy for different types of cyber actions. The paper also suggests a holistic model for Dynamic Command that considers both the situations need for action and the Mission Systems C2-needs.

  • 3.
    Klein, Robert M.
    et al.
    (Ret.) Center for Strategic Research (CSR), Institute for National Strategic Studies, National Defense University, USA .
    Lundqvist, Stefan
    Swedish Defence University, Department of Military Studies, Joint Warfare Division, Joint Operations Section.
    Sumangil, Ed
    Center for Strategic Research (CSR), Institute for National Strategic Studies, National Defense University, USA .
    Pettersson, Ulrica
    Swedish Defence University, Department of Military Studies, Joint Warfare Division, Operational Functions Section.
    Baltics Left of Bang: the Role of NATO with Partners in Denial-Based Deterrence2019In: INSS Strategic Forum, no 301, p. 1-20Article in journal (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    The North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s military contribution to deter Russian aggression in the Baltic region should begin with an overall strategic concept that seamlessly transitions from deterrence through countering Russia’s gray zone activities and onto conventional war, only if necessary. NATO should augment its ongoing program to enhance the denial-based deterrence for the region with threats of punishment that demonstrate to Russian leaders they cannot achieve their aims at acceptable costs. Rather than forward-position military forces in the Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania), NATO should consider keeping forces further back to take advantage of strategic depth to limit vulnerability to Russian attack and increase operational flexibility. To support the overall denial-based deterrence concept, the Baltics must commit wholeheartedly to the concept of total defense including significant increases to their active and reserves forces.

1 - 3 of 3
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf