Abstract
Abstract Oil is a double-edged sword in modern warfare for its usage enables greater firepower and mobility in combats while imposing tremendous operational and strategic burden to run and defend Wartime Fuel Network. The tension between the two generates a fuel dilemma, a consequential trade-off between fuel-powered capability and fuel sustainability. States facing the dilemma address it with three fuel management practices: minimalism, control, and gamble. I describe promises and pitfalls of each measure with three illustrative case studies—the Japanese “gamble” during WWII, Chinese “control” in the Korean War, and Vietnamese “minimalism” during the Vietnam War. The theory and evidence have important implications for future research on military logistics, warfighting capability, and the study of conventional warfare.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
