| Summary/Abstract |
Insurgent guerrilla groups are on occasion faced with difficult decisions: whether and when to become a conventional force, and whether to defend an operational base or fixed site. Standard doctrine suggests that to achieve state capture or acquire autonomous status apart from a central authority, the ability to successfully engage in conventional warfare may became necessary. A conventional force must be capable of defending territory, a defined space. Accompanying the decision to defend territory is a certain level of risk. This article examines the decision by four insurgent organizations to defend ‘operational hubs’, territory deemed worthy of a defense. The analysis herein submits that in insurgent warfare the utility of the territory being defended often supersedes the likelihood of a successful defense, on occasion generating negative outcomes for the insurgent forces.
|