Abstract
The reasoning of a conception of caveats that are both recognizable to military professionals and discrete and nuanced enough to be useful in empirical research, requires the reviewing of the post-Cold War experience with caveats and the mechanism of rules of engagement (RoE) in the regulation of the use of force. RoE is not a recipe for the use of force in combat, but guidelines as to when, where against whom, and how military force be used, and who has the authority to make such decisions. Situational judgment needs to be applied in the interpretation of RoE and relies on both local and prior knowledge to make optimal trade-offs between military and political concerns. RoEs vary regarding how specific, delegative, and robust formulated. The coalition RoE is a key yardstick against which national reservations on the use of force (caveats) be measured.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
