Olivier Schmitt
I am an associate professor of political science at the University of Southern Denmark. Previously, I was a post-doctoral research fellow at the Centre for International Studies (University of Montreal). I obtained my Ph.D from the department of War Studies, King’s College London in May 2014. I am also a reserve officer in the French navy.
My PhD was funded thanks to a grant from the French Délégation Générale pour l’Armement (DGA).
My PhD examines the utility of junior partners in coalition warfare after the Cold War. While research has established why and how junior partners are interested in joining a coalition, the literature is silent on the conditions that make these contributions useful, or counter-productive. I argue that there are two distinct, albeit mutually reinforcing, causal paths to utility; the first is the standing of the state joining the intervention, and the second is the combination of integration and quality of its armed forces. In order to establish this result, I adopt a mixed-method approach, combining a crisp-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (csQCA) conducted on 204 cases with detailed case studies of twelve states participating in four multinational military interventions after the Cold War. This thesis challenges the conventional wisdom about coalition-building in the post-Cold War era by arguing that in coalition warfare, having more partners in the coalition is not necessarily better. The legitimacy and military effectiveness of a multinational military intervention is not automatically improved when more junior partners are contributing to it. In fact, only the junior partners that meet the conditions identified in the two causal paths contribute to coalition effectiveness.
Supervisors: Theo Farrell and Rudra Chaudhuri
Phone: +4565509687
My PhD was funded thanks to a grant from the French Délégation Générale pour l’Armement (DGA).
My PhD examines the utility of junior partners in coalition warfare after the Cold War. While research has established why and how junior partners are interested in joining a coalition, the literature is silent on the conditions that make these contributions useful, or counter-productive. I argue that there are two distinct, albeit mutually reinforcing, causal paths to utility; the first is the standing of the state joining the intervention, and the second is the combination of integration and quality of its armed forces. In order to establish this result, I adopt a mixed-method approach, combining a crisp-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (csQCA) conducted on 204 cases with detailed case studies of twelve states participating in four multinational military interventions after the Cold War. This thesis challenges the conventional wisdom about coalition-building in the post-Cold War era by arguing that in coalition warfare, having more partners in the coalition is not necessarily better. The legitimacy and military effectiveness of a multinational military intervention is not automatically improved when more junior partners are contributing to it. In fact, only the junior partners that meet the conditions identified in the two causal paths contribute to coalition effectiveness.
Supervisors: Theo Farrell and Rudra Chaudhuri
Phone: +4565509687
less
InterestsView All (32)
Uploads
Books by Olivier Schmitt
This edited collection offers a synthetic approach to Raymond Aron’s theory of International Relations by bringing together some of the most prominent specialists on Raymond Aron, thus filling an important gap in the current market of books devoted to IR theories and the historiography of the field. The volume is divided into three parts: the first part explores Aron’s intellectual contribution to the theoretical debates in IR, thus showing his originality and prescience; the second part traces Aron’s influence and explores his relations with other prominent scholars of his time, thus contributing to the historiography of the field; and the third part analyses Aron’s contemporary relevance. This comprehensive volume contributes to current debates in the field by showing the originality and breadth of Aron’s thought.
Unique en son genre, cet ouvrage rassemble les meilleurs experts français et étrangers pour offrir un panorama complet de l’état des savoirs dans le domaine. À l’heure où les crises menaçant la sécurité de la France et de l’Europe se multiplient à une échelle inédite depuis la fin de la Guerre froide, il permet aux chercheurs, aux décideurs politiques comme militaires et aux citoyens intéressés de disposer des outils intellectuels nécessaires à l’intelligibilité d’un monde où la guerre et les conflits de puissance restent les principaux facteurs structurants des relations internationales.
Papers by Olivier Schmitt
This edited collection offers a synthetic approach to Raymond Aron’s theory of International Relations by bringing together some of the most prominent specialists on Raymond Aron, thus filling an important gap in the current market of books devoted to IR theories and the historiography of the field. The volume is divided into three parts: the first part explores Aron’s intellectual contribution to the theoretical debates in IR, thus showing his originality and prescience; the second part traces Aron’s influence and explores his relations with other prominent scholars of his time, thus contributing to the historiography of the field; and the third part analyses Aron’s contemporary relevance. This comprehensive volume contributes to current debates in the field by showing the originality and breadth of Aron’s thought.
Unique en son genre, cet ouvrage rassemble les meilleurs experts français et étrangers pour offrir un panorama complet de l’état des savoirs dans le domaine. À l’heure où les crises menaçant la sécurité de la France et de l’Europe se multiplient à une échelle inédite depuis la fin de la Guerre froide, il permet aux chercheurs, aux décideurs politiques comme militaires et aux citoyens intéressés de disposer des outils intellectuels nécessaires à l’intelligibilité d’un monde où la guerre et les conflits de puissance restent les principaux facteurs structurants des relations internationales.
outward in order to identify relevant solutions to tactical/doctrinal problems. This article questions such a narrative, and argues that the French armed forces are as quick as any to borrow from other countries’ experiences. In order to do so, this article introduces the concept of ‘selective emulation’, and compares the French and German military adaptation processes in Afghanistan. The article argues that there is indeed something distinctive about French military adaptation, but it is not what the fiercest defenders of the French ‘exceptionalism’ usually account for.