Border Interdiction in Counterinsurgency

One of the tools available to the counterinsurgent when devising a campaign is the interdiction of the insurgent's movement of men, materiel, and money at the border. This thesis examined three case studies of border interdiction in insurgency: the French in Algeria from 1954 to1962, the Rhodesian experience from 1965 to1980, and the current Coalition experience in Iraq. In 1956, to counter insurgent infiltration of fighters and weapons, the French built the Morice Line, a barricade system built around an electronically charged fence. The Morice Line was remarkably effective in stopping insurgent infiltration. While the Rhodesians attempted similar border fortifications, they lacked the resources to successfully employ such means. They instead found the employment of highly mobile teams to track and kill insurgents more successful, given their resource constraints. The US-led Coalition in Iraq, after a slow start, employed small advisory teams in support of Iraqi security forces working from border forts to secure Iraq's borders. The three case studies show that border interdiction is a relatively inexpensive component of a counterinsurgency campaign, but can be a vital component of that campaign if the counterinsurgent interdicts the right target (manpower, weapons, or funding).

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.

This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.

As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.