OPERATIONALISATION OF DEFENCE DIPLOMACY

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to establish an operational definition of defence diplomacy, based on an "arbitrary convention" after making an analysis of the methods of measuring an object, phenomenon or concept, of the existing types of variables, combined with the identification of conceptual definitions of defence diplomacy and of certain sciences with which in interacts and which play an important role in its development.

Headnote

The purpose of this paper is to establish an operational definition of defence diplomacy, based on an "arbitrary convention" - after making an analysis of the methods of measuring an object, phenomenon or concept, of the existing types of variables, combined with the identification of conceptual definitions of defence diplomacy and of certain sciences with which it interacts and which play an important role in its development.

Keywords: defence diplomacy, operationalisa- tion, measurement, qualitative 'variables, quantitative variables.

1. Preliminary considerations

The importance of this paper resides in the fact that it demonstrates, at theoretical level, that defence diplomacy is not merely an interesting linguistic construction, easy to forget after having been the subject of a fervent, but simplistic debate; it has a complex meaning and its dimension can be measured directly or indirectly, depending on a series of quantitative and qualitative variables. At the same time, the topic approached in this paper can be a subject of general interest, since the operationalisation of defence diplomacy can be considered a complex means to generate a state of national, regional or international security.

The purpose of this research is to extend the information scope of defence diplomacy and to make value judgments on it, which can represent starting points for the identification of the solutions necessary to avoid conflicts, improve and develop relations among states. At the same time, I intended for this research to also have a practical use, so that it can be useful not only to the persons interested in the theoretical aspects of the topic, but also to practitioners, who might find a series of interesting landmarks on the manner in which defence diplomacy can be operationalised. The main focus of the research was not on its predictive use, but rather on explaining the manner in which a concept can be operationalised, as the title announces.

This paper is not based on a statistical analysis meant to identify an acceptable method to operationalise defence diplomacy, but rather on the principle of cause and effect, providing the explanation and description of phenomena and concepts which can be found at the level of international relations and can be considered to fall within the scope of defence diplomacy.

The hypothesis I started from in the elaboration of this paper was that, after understanding the manner in which defence diplomacy is operationalised, the members of the military and civilian diplomatic staff are able to use certain approaches in the critical situations they might encounter, so that the measures proposed by them to political and military decision- makers can reduce the possibility for a violent conflict to be initiated, at both regional and international level. In other words, the hypothesis of the paper is that the operationalision of defence diplomacy can add value to the efforts made by the international community to preserve peace, solidarity, trust and cooperation among states.

2. Operationalisation and the method to operationalise a concept

In order to identify the method to operationalise a concept, I have used the theoretical interpretation specific to social sciences (but it must be emphasised that social sciences borrowed the operationalisation process from physics).

Percy Williams Bridgman, who won the 1946 Nobel Prize in Physics, sought to explain the manner in which a concept can be operationalised in the book "The Logic of Modern Physics", published in 1927. Bridgman stated that: "In general, we mean by any concept nothing more than a set of operations; the concept is synonymous with a corresponding set of operations"1. Thus, the operationalisation of a concept involves, first of all, the identification of a large number of operations which, once they are achieved, simultaneously or in a certain order, they can generate the theoretical or practical activities aimed by the concept itself. At the same time, in order to operationalise a concept, it is necessary to identify the defining elements that can be explained, assessed and measured according to the following definition provided by the Oxford Dictionary of Sociology for the notion of operationalisation: "the transformation of an abstract, theoretical concept into something concrete, observable and measurable in an empirical research project. Operational definitions are pragmatic and realistic indicators of more diffuse notions. (...) Operational definitions are crucial to the process of measurement and are often the most controversial aspect of any research design."2

A general concept has a series of features that can be identified through human sensors, but this is not enough to correctly understand all these features. Beyond the perception of certain features through sensors, the operationalisation of a concept also needs two very important elements, namely: a high cognitive capacity to interpret reality and a satisfying information horizon.

Nevertheless, there is the risk or disadvantage that an operational definition might be limited only to the aspects considered relevant by the person drawing up the definition or to aspects that one thinks can be measured by using units or instruments of measurement, sometimes falling into the trap of superficial causality, to the detriment of documented arguments ensured by scientific research. Thus, an operational definition can define a field of interest only partially, since, sometimes, it does not enable to identify a series of processes that can occur between certain elements of the field of interest that is subject to research.

In other words, since each activity involves a degree of risk (in the sense that some deficiencies may occur), scientific research can also have a certain degree of reductionism which, at times, materialises in the failure to consider certain scientific aspects, apparently irrelevant, but which can influence the results of the research.

In order to operationalise a concept, it is necessary to identify its operational definition, which must include certain measurable aspects of the concept, whose interpretation can ensure a greater scientific rigour. In this context, the situation in which a concept cannot be measured directly cannot be excluded. Thus, there arises the need to find a new possibility for it to be measured directly.

The concept of "measurement" was also borrowed from physics, just like the notion of "operationalisation". The British physicist Norman Robert Campbell states, in his paper "Physics: The Elements", that: "All fundamental measurements belong to physics, which might almost be described as the science of measurement"3; further on, he provides the following definition: "Measurement is the assignment of numerals to represent properties"4.

Thus, in order to operationalise a concept, measurable properties must be identified. These properties are measured by using numbers and numerals for which a certain order was established under international conventions. This order of numerals helps to establish a hierarchy, in the sense that certain numerals are assigned to certain properties, in order to create a system of numerical values and a numerical scale, facilitating, for example, the comparison (by means of preset criteria) the level of usefulness of certain properties in a given context.

From the point of view of physics, measuring weight, height, density, for instance, is a concrete operation that also benefits from specific units of measurement, but there are concepts whose measurement is difficult to achieve and, even if it is achieved, is inaccurate. Beauty and colours, despite the fact that they are properties of objects, are difficult to measure, although they can be highly relevant. A relevant example can be the one offered by Norman Robert Campbell who, after identifying a few properties of crystals, tried to measure them5. The properties enumerated by him include the following: number, weight, density, hardness, colour, beauty. He was able to measure the first three properties, but did not manage to measure the following three. But he noticed that precisely the colour and the beauty of those crystals generally increase their value. Therefore, the properties which are easy to measure are not always the most valuable. At the same time, it can be stated that the importance of properties depends on the context, since different properties become relevant in different situations.

Norman Robert Campbell supported the idea that colours can be measured provided that an empirical "arbitrary convention"6 is established. This way, numerals can be assigned arbitrarily to certain colours, subsequently establishing a hierarchy of properties represented by colours7. If, in respect of colours, "arbitrary conventions" are not established, then it can be stated that, for instance: certain features are "more yellow than" or "less yellow than", "as yellow as", "darker than" or "lighter than", "different in colour from".

Also referring to measurement, Stanley Smith Stevens stated that: "Measurement is... in its broadest sense... the assignment of numerals to objects or events, according to rules"8. This way, Stevens complements Norman Robert Campbell and is more accurate that him, claiming that assigning numerals is not sufficient for representing properties, but clear rules are also needed, such as, for instance, establishing the fact that a property can be measured exclusively by using a certain unit of measurement. Thus, when a concept is analysed according to a certain criterion, it is necessary to use a standard unit of measurement, known by everybody, firstly in order to be placed on a certain scale of value, depending on the numerical value assigned to it, and, secondly, so that it can be compared to other concepts in the same reference field or included (or not) in a desirable interval.

"Arbitrary conventions", referred to by Norman Robert Campbell, can be considered "rules" from Stevens's perspective, but their greatest value resides in the fact that they open the possibility to measure certain concepts (such as defence diplomacy) that, in theory, are hardly "measurable", thus leading to their operationalisation. In theory, there is no need for these "arbitrary conventions" to be accepted unanimously, but, in practice, when certain properties (difficult or impossible to measure directly) are subject to research, it is also important to be aware of the fact that, nevertheless, their measurement was achieved (directly or indirectly) according to certain "arbitrary conventions".

"Measurement" is important because it brings us closer to "accuracy". Charles West Churchman, referring to measurement in general, stated: "The contrast between quantitative and non-quantitative information seems to imply a contrast between «precise» and «vague» information. Precise information is information enabling one to distinguish objects and their properties to some arbitrarily assigned degree if refinement"9. The more correct and true the information on a certain concept is, the less vulnerable is the construction of a demonstration to subjective and even objective arguments. The undermining of an argumentation is also based on the identification of inaccurate elements of the reasoning underlying the respective argument. Thus, it can be stated that the power to dismantle an argumentative construction is directly proportionate to the accuracy of the information underlying the formulation of the theses.

In order to quantify a concept, it is very important to identify the variables of the analysed concept. The variable is a feature of a research topic (object, phenomenon, concept) that may take different values either in respect to the same feature of the same topic, or to the same type of feature, but of different topics. This feature is subject to measurement and need not be defining for the analysed topic; for example, it can be important only in a certain context, while being secondary in another context.

In order to be useful, variables must correspond to certain values, which are, in fact, a set of data manifesting in a concrete way. Edward L. Thorndike, Professor of education psychology at Columbia University, stated, in 1918, that: "Whatever exists at all exists in some amount. To know it thoroughly (the value - a.n.), involves knowing its quantity as well as its quality"10. He emphasises the idea that variables, depending on the value they may take, are of two kinds, namely qualitative variables and quantitative variables.

To conclude this subchapter, it can be stated that the operationalisation process consists of various elements and "measurement" is not simply one of them, but perhaps the most important of them. In order to operationalise a concept, I think it is useful to take into account the following aspects, which also play an important indicative role:

- identifying certain attributes and features of the concept, relevant for the research;

- establishing the measurable and non-measurable features of the analysed concept;

- identifying the features that can be used as variables;

- establishing the instruments and units of measurement for the measurable features and the values that can be taken by the variables;

- establishing "the arbitrary conventions" for the non-measurable features or the methods of indirect measurement;

- establishing the interval of numerical values in which certain features should be placed;

- exercising the management function of controlling the operationalisation process and permanently monitoring the level of performance for each feature, according to the established interval of values;

- identifying certain rules and methods to correct the deficiencies identified during controls.

3. Sciences that play an important role in the development of defence diplomacy

The interpretations of defence diplomacy can differ from one author to another, to a certain extent, in the sense that there are different points of view concerning the sciences that play an important role in the development of this concept. In my opinion, several disciplines can be used in the study of defence diplomacy, namely law, military sciences, political sciences and international relations.

Law, especially diplomatic law11 and consular law12 play the role of regulating a series of aspects concerning: the diplomatic staff, protocol and etiquette, immunities, accreditation, order of precedence.

Military knowledge13 is considered "an operational science that generates action concepts"14. It is the science that constitutes the foundation for the preparation of the components holding the monopoly over the use of force and those holding the monopoly over the foreign military representation in a country that wages military actions in a manner destined to gain tactical, operational and strategic advantages, with minimum loss of (material, human, financial, time and information) resources. In order for this goal to be attained, a series of principles integrated in the military science must be observed, such as: the principle of objective, the principle of security and theprinciple of deterrence.

The principle of objective holds that "When undertaking any mission, commanders should clearly understand the expected outcome and its impact"15; according to this principle, defence diplomacy is considered to be a non-violent military operation whose main goal is to establish or re-establish trust between two or more states, recourse being made to clearly defined activities, meant to put an end to misunderstandings, to promote cooperation and lead to the implementation of relations based on mutual respect.

The principle of security "protects and preserves combat power"16; in the framework of this principle, defence diplomacy brings its contribution by making sure to avoid situations of surprise; to this end, it uses defence, military, air and naval attachés, whose mission is, inter alia, to identify whether or not the receiving state adopts a friendly stance.

The principle of deterrence is highly applicable in the military field, although it can be stated that, in principle, it addresses the collective or individual psyche of a potential enemy and his resistance to the stress caused by a series of factors, especially designed in a seemingly disorganised form, but which are guided to adapt to his vulnerable parts. In other words, in order to cause deterrence, it is necessary to identify the action or circumstance desired the least by the enemy, which causes him the greatest strategic disadvantages and which he fears the most. After having identified this action or circumstance, the potential enemy can be persuaded to give up his hostile intentions and accept negotiation. Defence diplomacy supports deterrence to the detriment of the violent confrontation; moreover, it has the ability to create the appropriate context for starting exploration, preliminary negotiations and negotiations proper. In my opinion, compared to prevention, deterrence is closer to defence diplomacy, at least because deterrence excludes "preventive hits".

In order to maintain a potential for deterrence, the following elements are necessary17: preparedness, non-provocation, prudence, publicity, credibility, maintaining a certain level of certainty, paradox ("peace, paradoxically, can occasionally best assured by war")18, independence ("when shared incentives cease, so do coalitions")19, change.

In the book "On thermonuclear war", Herman Kahn identified a series of military deterrents, such as20: some temporising military measures, like alerting and mobilising the population, direct military support for the threatened area, a small controlled reprisal.

The principle of prevention differs from the principle of deterrence, which is more concerned with persuasion, as prevention can reflect in the adoption of physical and concrete measures, destined to settle certain situations generating misunderstandings or to end the escalation of a possible conflict. If deterrence aims to show possible enemies the risks incurred if they wish to escalate the conflict, prevention seeks to avoid, through various means, the development of a conflict, thus enabling the adoption of complex measures to this end. Even if prevention and deterrence can have the same results, the common goal being to avoid conflicts, they have different means of manifestation. For example, if two states have the same type and quantity of missiles, the situation of a mutual attack can be avoided if they are deterred by the fact that they are both aware of the effects of the respective missiles on the target; this way, without initiating large-scale military operations, the states in question can be deterred from starting a conflict by a simple notification accompanied by proofs showing the quantity of armament owned by each of them and the possible effects of their use. Regarding prevention, an appropriate example could be a state that deploys a great number of forces near its borders, following the threats made by a neighbouring country concerning a possible invasion. After identifying the dimension of the military apparatus mobilised on the borders, the number of forces and means mobilised and prepared to take action, the state that initially launched the threats may review its intentions. This way, the development of a conflict is prevented. It can be stated that, in certain situations, deterrence can be a cheaper alternative than prevention.

Professor Gheorghe Väduva identified the following forms of expression and materialisation of the principle of prevention21: recourse to political, diplomatic and other types of non-violent means to settle a dispute; using political, economic and military pressure; the embargo, the boycott and the blockade; (political, diplomatic, economic and military) restraints; the threat to use force; demonstrative military actions; preventive hits.

In my opinion, both deterrence and prevention start and end by involving defence diplomacy, but throughout their development, defence diplomacy might be left out of the question when the negotiation is replaced by explicit violence.

Political sciences influence defence diplomacy because, most times, military conflicts originate in differences of political opinions among states that are largely influenced by economic interests. Generally, it is desirable that the political strategy drawn up by the holder of legitimacy within a state relies on theoretical elements borrowed from political sciences and adapted from a scientific perspective to the features of the reference space-time environment. Defence policy and foreign policy, which are part of the governing program, represent the most concrete connection between political sciences and defence diplomacy.

Last but not least, international relations also play an important role in defence diplomacy. Hans J. Morgenthau, one of the founding fathers of the classical realist school in the 20th century, holds that nation-states are the main actors in international relations and that their main concern in absolutely all actions undertaken is to acquire, use and preserve power. In the book wrote by him in 1948, "Politics among nations. The struggle for power and peace", the author stated that "the main signpost that helps political realism to find its way through the landscape of international politics is the concept of interest defined in terms of power."22 International relations are, in fact, the most favourable environment for the development of diplomatic relations, especially between international state actors, but also within intergovernmental organisations. In the contemporary security environment, international relations are strongly marked by "the realist theory" which advances the idea that states, instead of acting rationally, making decisions of foreign policy on the basis of scientific research, they act in pursuit of their own national interests. The behaviour of states at international level is influenced by their foreign policy and defence policy. These are both put into practice at the same time by defence diplomacy, which has started to gain a significant importance in connection with contemporary diplomatic relations. In the framework of international relations, diplomatic relations represent a very important component; in turn, for the greatest part, they are divided into defence diplomacy and economic diplomacy.

In the framework of international diplomatic relations, it is desirable that defence diplomacy should develop directly proportional with conventional or unconventional threats, identified in the contemporary security environment, in order to be able to counter, in real time, the threats posed by various aggressive states or non-state organisations to the national, regional and international state of security.

4. Operational definition of defence diplomacy

In order to analyse the manner of operationalisation of defence diplomacy, we need to formulate its operational definition. The operational definition refers to the identification of a different solution, original or ordinary, used in a scientific research environment or paper, in order to measure a variable or a set of variables of a concept, phenomenon or object.

The operational definition of a phenomenon or concept should be based on real variables and clear measurements, but, since it refers to a specific problem and solution, although it can be very good from a technical perspective, it may include a relative dose of subjectivism, at least from the perspective of disregarding other variables which may have a vital importance in another context and for another scientific study. In other words, the operational definition has its own limits, more or less identifiable. Including the operational definition of defence diplomacy, far from being exhaustive, is improvable, leaving room for eventual completions, changes and updates.

In order to obtain the operational definition of defence diplomacy, the following elements were taken into account: conceptual definitions of defence diplomacy; understanding the process of the operationalisation of a concept; analysing the method and the possibility of measurement of a concept (including indirect measurement23); understanding the meaning of the term "variable" and subsequently of the types of variables relevant for defence diplomacy.

Before laying down the operational definition of defence diplomacy, it is useful to remind its lexical definition, which is the following: "it is the academic or universal meaning of a word or group of words (...) and yet it is more abstract and more formal than the operational definition."24

The conceptual definition of defence diplomacy was laid down for the first time in Great Britain's Strategic Defence Review issued in 1998, where it was mentioned the fact that its mission is: "to provide forces to meet the varied activities undertaken by the Ministry of Defence to dispel hostility, build and maintain trust and assist in the development of democratically accountable armed forces, thereby making a significant contribution to conflict prevention and resolution".25

In the national specialised literature, defence di- plomacy was defined by Sergiu Medaras as represent- ing "all actions undertaken by the Government and the staff appointed by it, designed to reduce the cli- mate of tension or hostility, to implement new meas- ures to increase trust among states, to contribute to the development of the relations of collaboration and cooperation between armies and to ensure the condi- tions for the creation or functioning of alliances and coalitions."26

On the basis of these definitions and a series of other interpretations of defence diplomacy, I identified the following operational definition of defence diplomacy.

Defence diplomacy is a branch of general diplomacy used by a state in its bilateral or multilateral relations, under the foreign policy and defence policy issued by the legitimate authorities of the sovereign state in question, and is put into practice in the receiving state by legitimate representatives of the sending state, in order to build (initiate) or increase trust among states, with a view to efficiently use defence resources to prevent eventual conflicts or end certain conflicts, in the framework of which most of the following requirements are met (more than half of the following statements are answered affirmatively):

- existing defence, military, air and naval attachés;

- membership in a political and military alliance;

- participation in international military drills;

- participation in military drills together with at least one neighbouring country;

- existing cooperation agreements between the Ministry of National Defence of the respective state and the defence ministries of other states;

- organisation of official visits of military delegations from other states;

- organisation of official visits of military delegations to other states;

- receiving foreign military trainees in military education institutions;

- sending military trainees in military education institutions from other states;

- the Minister of Defence is a civilian or the army is controlled by civilian political decision-makers or by the sovereign power of the people;

- existing scientific research projects in the military field developed in collaboration with various countries;

- organisation of military exhibitions to which various countries are invited and in which they actually participate, via firms producing military equipment;

- organisation of scientific events within higher education institutions attended by guests from various countries;

- visits made by foreign vessels in military or civilian ports at least once a year;

- air shows or flight demonstrations organised on Aviation Day (or on other occasions) attended by air crews from other countries;

- official consultations at the level of the Parliament, Government or ministries with other states concerning issues regarding defence or the security sector reform;

- participation in international peacekeeping missions, organised following a Resolution approved by the UN Security Council;

- organisation of postgraduate courses, master programs, training courses, workshops in education institutions or in other institutions, on the topic of "Defence diplomacy", with a view to acquaint the military and civilian staff working in the field of defence with the requirements of this field;

- be a signatory of the "Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE)";

- be a signatory of the "Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty"27, of the "Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction"28 and of "The Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti- Personnel Mines and on their Destruction"29;

In the definition presented above, I identified a series of dichotomous qualitative variables, whose scale is made up of two opposite values ("yes" or "no"), without claiming an exhaustive identification. "The arbitrary convention", mentioned in the text of the definition, maintains that, if affirmative answers prevail, then the defence diplomacy adopted by a state is operational or functional.

In principle, the most important aspect promoted by defence diplomacy is the earning of trust among states. If the above-mentioned qualitative variables receive an affirmative answer, in the sense that they are fulfilled, they can contribute significantly to increasing trust among states.

Conclusions

The operational definition of defence diplomacy presented in this paper refers more to the perception of the possibility for a state to use defence diplomacy in its relations with other countries at a minimum level of functionality and it is not able to indicate the level of efficiency of a diplomatic corps from a sending state in a receiving state. In order to exceed the minimum level of functionality of defence diplomacy promoted by a state, it is necessary to analyse each variable and identify methods to improve them.

The definition of defence diplomacy has the role to emphasise the importance of a relatively new concept in the contemporary security environment, whose importance is most times appreciated. By a detailed explanation of the sciences which had a major impact on the development of defence diplomacy and by identifying the dichotomous qualitative variables underlying the process of operationalisation of defence diplomacy, I wish to argue the fact that, in the future relations among states, it would be more economical and more convenient to use diplomacy to the detriment of force. Defence diplomacy is one of the instruments used by the "soft"30 power, which is able to settle a conflict situation without using force and sometimes even without resorting to threats to use force.

At present, defence diplomacy can be the platform on which states can build relations of cooperation, dialogue and partnership, ensuring the achievement of their national interests. The fact that political and military decision-makers from certain states encourage the receiving or sending of trainees to study in military education institutions from the partner states is a phenomenon suggesting a certain dose of trust among the respective states.

Footnote

NOTES:

1 Percy BRIDGMAN, The Logic of Modern Phys- ics, MacMillan, New York, 1927, p. 5, http://evans-expe- rientialism.freewebspace.com/bridgman.htm, accessed on 14 June 2013.

2 Oxford Dictionary of Sociology, Edited by John SCOTT, Gordon MARSHAL, Oxford University Press, 2009, p. 532.

3 Norman Robert CAMPBELL, Physics: The El- ements, Publisher University Press, Cambridge, 1920, p. 267, http://ia600202.us.archive.org/8/items/physicstheele- men029733mbp/physicstheelemen029733mbp.pdf, ac- cessed on 15 June 2013.

4 Ibidem.

5 Ibidem, p. 268.

6 Ibidem. p. 272.

7 An appropriate example can be considered "the electronic colour code", where resistors and capacitors, for example, are marked with one or more coloured wires, each colour being assigned a certain value. The placing into position of the coloured wire which, depending on the place it is installed (first, second, third, etc.), may take dif- ferent values.

8 Stanley Smith STEVENS, Mathematics, Meas- urements and Psychophysics, Handbook of Experimental Psychology, ed., New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1951, p. 23, apud Robert Raymond STERLING, The Theory of the Measurement of the Income of Trading Enterprises, University Of Florida, April, 1965, p. 81, http://ia700504. us.archive.org/4/items/theoryofmeasurem00sterrich/theo- ryofmeasurem00sterrich.pdf, accessed on 15 June 2013.

9 Charles West CHURCHMAN, Philburn RA- TOOSH, Measurement: Definitions and Theories, Wi- ley, New York, 1959, p. 83, http://www.questia.com/ read/94955679/measurement-definitions-and-theories, ac- cessed on 18 June 2013.

10 Edward L. THORNDIKE, "The nature, purpos- es, and general methods of Measurements of educational products" , in The Seventeenth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Public School Publish- ing Company Bloomington, Illinois, 1918, p. 16, http:// archive.org/stream/measurementofedu00whiprich/meas- urementofedu00 whiprich_djvu.txt, accessed on 24 June 2013.

11 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961, http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments /english/ conventions/9_1_1961.pdf, accessed on 28 June 2013.

12 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, 1963, http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments /english/ conventions/9_2_1963.pdf, accessed on 28 June 2013.

13 "Military science is a unitary system of knowl- edge related to the laws and principles of armed combat, the forms of organisation, preparation and use of armed forces during a war, to the techniques and methods of wag- ing military actions.", Lexicon militar, Editura Militará, Bucureçti, 1980.

14 Gheorghe VÄDUVA, §tiinja Militara - Rolul çtiinjei militare în managementul mediului de securitate f aparare în procesul de modernizare a societäjii (Military Science - The role of military science in the management of the security and defence environment in the process of society modernisation), "Dimitrie Cantemir" Christian University - Security Studies Institute, Bucharest, 2011, p. 5.

15 FM 3-0 (Field Manual No. 3-0), C1 (Change No. 1) Operations, Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC, 22 February 2011, p. 149, http://www. fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-0.pdf, accessed on 28 June 2013.

16 Ibidem.

17 John M. COLLINS, "Principles of Deter- rence", in Air University Review, November-December 1979, http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/ aureview/1979/nov-dec/jcollins.html#jcollins, accessed on 28 June 2013.

18 Ibidem.

19 Ibidem.

20 Herman KAHN, On thermonuclear war, Editor Transaction Publishers, New Jersey, 2007, p. 287. http:// books.google.ro/books?id=EN2gtPTjFd8C&pg=PA256& hl=ro&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=4#v=onepage&q&f=false, accessed on 29 July 2013.

21 Gheorghe VADUVA, Principii ale räzboiului f luptei armate - realitäji f tendinje (The principles of war and armed combat - realities and trends), Universi- tatea Nafionalä de Aparare, Central de Studii Strategice de Aparare $i Securitate, Bucureçti, 2003, p. 7, http://cs- sas.unap.ro/ro/pdf_studii/principii_ale_razboiului.pdf, ac- cessed on 2 July 2013.

22 Hans J. MORGENTHAU, Política între nafuni. Lupta pentru putere f lupta pentru pace (Politics among nations. The struggle for power and peace), Editura Poli- rom, Bucureçti, 2007, p. 112.

23 Indirect measurement is made when the result of a measurement is established by comparison with the results obtained by direct measurement, using certain standard units. These measurements are more complex and have a lower accuracy, but they cannot be avoided in most cases.

24 Estela G. ADANZA, Research methods: Prin- ciples and Applications, First Edition in 1995, Reprinted in 2006, Rex Book Store Inc, Manila, 2006, p. 21. http:// books.google.ro/books?id=yNmTHbQiPEUC&pg= PAl&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=4#v=onepage&q&f=false, accessed on 3 July 2013.

25 Strategic Defence Review, Ministry of De- fence, UK, July 1998, p. 151, http://www.mod.uk/NR/ rdonlyres/65F3D7AC-4340-4119-93A2-20825848- E50E/0/sdr1998complete.pdf, accessed on 26 July 2013.

26 Sergiu MEDAR, Diplomajia apärärii (Defence diplomacy), Editura Centrul Tehnic-Editorial al Armatei, Bucureçti, 2006, p. 4.

27 The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, signed in New York on 1st of July 1968. http://www.onuinfo.ro/ documente_fundamentale/instrumente_internationale/ tratat_neproliferarea_armelor_nucleare/, accessed on 26 July 2013.

28 Convention on the Prohibition of the Develop- ment, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weap- ons and on their Destruction, signed in Paris on 13 January 1993, http://www.ancesiac.ro/upload/Conventia_CWC.pdf and http://www.cwc.gov, accessed on 26 July 2013.

29 The Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction, adopted in Oslo on 18 September 1997, http://www.cdep.ro/pls/legis/legis_pck. htp_act_text?idt=25041, accessed on 26 July 2013.

30 For details, see Joseph S. Nye Jr. "Soft Power: the means to success in world politics", New York: Public Affairs (Perseus Group), 2004.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1. ADANZA, Estela G., Research methods: Principles and Applications, First Edition in 1995, Reprinted in 2006, Rex Book Store Inc, Manila, 2006.

2. BRIDGMAN, Percy, The Logic of Modern Physics, MacMillan, New York, 1927.

3. CAMPBELL, Norman Robert, Physics: The Elements, Cambridge University Press, 1920

4. CHURCHMAN, Charles West, Ratoosh, Philburn, Measurement.Definitions and Theories, Wiley, New York, 1959.

5. COLLINS, John M., "Principles of Deterren- ce", in Air University Review, November-December 1979, http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchroni- cles/aureview/1979/nov-dec/jcollins.html#jcollins

6. KAHN, Herman, On thermonuclear war, Transaction Publishers, New Jersey, 2007.

7. MORGENTHAU, Hans J., Politica între na- fiuni. Lupta pentru putere §i lupta pentru pace (Poli- tics among nations. The Struggle for Power and Pea- ce), Editura Polirom, Bucureçti, 2007.

8. MEDAR, Sergiu, Diplomafia Apârârii, Edi- tura Central Tehnic-Editorial al Armatei, Bucureçti, 2006.

9. NYE Jr., Joseph S., Soft Power: the means to success in world politics. New York: Public Affairs (Perseus Group), 2004.

10. STERLING, Robert Raymond, The Theory of the Measurement of the Income of Trading Enter- prises, University of Florida, 1965.

11. THORNDIKE, Edward L., "The nature, purposes, and general methods of Measurements of educational products" in The Seventeenth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Public School Publishing Company Bloomington, Illinois, 1918, p. 16, http://archive.org/stream/mea- surementofedu00whiprich/measurementofedu00whi- prich_djvu.txt

12. VÄDUVA, Gheorghe, Principii ale rdzboiu- lui §i luptei armate - realitäfi §i tendinfe, Universita- teaNa(ionalä de Aparare, Central de Studii Strategice de Aparare §i Securitate, Bucureçti, 2003.

13. VÄDUVA, Gheorghe, §tiin}a Militará - Ro- lul §tiintei militare în managementul mediului de se- curitate §i aparare în procesal de modernizare a so- cietäfi, Universitatea Creatina "Dimitrie Cantemir" - Institutul de Studii de Securitate, Bucureçti, 2011.

14. ** Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Rela- tions, 1961.

15. ** Vienna Convention on Consular Relati- ons, 1963

16. ** Lexicon militar, Editura Militara, Bucu- reçti, 1980.

17. ** Oxford Dictionary of Sociology, Edited by John SCOTT, Gordon MARSHAL, Publisher Ox- ford University Press, 2009.

18. ** Strategic Defence Review, Ministry of Defence, UK, July 1998.

19. ** Tratatul de neproliferare nuclearä, New York, July, 1968 .

20. ** Convenga privind interzicerea dezvoltä- rii, producerii, stocärii §i folosirii armelor chimice §i distrugerea acestora, Paris, January 1993 .

21. ** Convenga privind interzicerea utilizärii, stocärii, producerii §i transferului de mine antiperso- nal §i distrugerea acestora, Oslo, September 1997.

22. *** FM 3-0 (Field Manual No. 3-0), C1 (Change No. 1) Operations, Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC, 22 February 2011.