ABSTRACT

There are times in almost every war where it appears to third parties that there is simply no hope of a negotiated cease-fire. Whether or not the imposed cease-fire becomes less exceptional, however, it is evident that coercion will be used as a means of attempting to end wars on more than a few occasions in the future. More specifically, it makes sense to what obstacles stand in the way of being able to force people to stop killing one another. In their study of coercion, Blechman and Kaplan concluded that demonstrative and discrete use of the armed forces for political objectives should not be an option which decision makers turn to frequently, nor quickly, to secure political objectives abroad, except under very special circumstances. An unwillingness to guarantee an imposed cease-fire agreement may act as an obstacle to peace, prolonging instead of ending a war.