Vojenské Rozhledy

Czech Military Review

Vojenské rozhledy / Czech Military Review Nr. 4/2021: 60-73

Qualitative Research on PESCO Projects Direction in the Field of CBRNReviewed - Research

Miroslav Pohanka, Antonín Novotný

Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) weapons still represent a relevant threat despite international treaties and regulations. International projects like the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) of European Union (EU) appears as a suitable way of the further development when considered both complexity and expensiveness of the countermeasures to the CBRN. In this work, basic principles of PESCO, limitations, opportunities and expected directions of innovations were searched. The final recommendations on PESCO projects in the CBRN field are founded on the reached findings. Recommendations and conclusions on limited PESCO efficacy on one side and opportunity to resolve weakness of the Army of the Czech Republic (AČR) in the CBRN by collaboration in the EU on the other were particularly described in this paper. Without the collaboration, the AČR will hardly reflect the progress on CBRN defense.

Keywords: Biological Weapon; European Union; Chemical Weapon; Nuclear Weapon; Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Published: December 15, 2021  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Pohanka, M., & Novotný, A. (2021). Qualitative Research on PESCO Projects Direction in the Field of CBRN. Czech Military Review102(4), 60-73
Download citation

References

  1. ELLIS, P. D. Lone Wolf Terrorism and Weapons of Mass Destruction: An Examination of Capabilities and Countermeasures. Terrorism and Political Violence. 2014, 26(1), 211-225.
  2. IVANOVA, K. a T. SANDLER. CBRN incidents: Political regimes, perpetrators, and targets. Terrorism and Political Violence. 2006, 18(3), 423-448.
  3. KAUNERT, C. a S. LEONARD. The European Union's Response to the CBRN Terrorist Threat: A Multiple Streams Approach. Politique Europeenne. 2019, 65(3), 148-176.
  4. KISLITSYN, S. V. EU defence initiatives and Washington´s position Mirovaya Ekonomika I Mezhdunarodnye Otnosheniya. 2020, 64(10), 29-39.
  5. MURILLO, B. C. Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) and third states´ participation Revista General De Derecho Europeo. 2021, 53(53), 289-315.
  6. USIAK, J. a D. TRUBENOVA. Challenges for security and defence cooperation in central Europe: will the EU be able to manage the crisis in the EU periphery? Revista Unisci. 2020, 54(54), 195-221.
  7. AMBERT, A. M., et al. Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1995, 57(4), 879-893.
  8. MEY, G. a K. MRUCK. Qualitative research in Germany - A short cartography. International Sociology. 2007, 22(2), 138-154.
  9. AMINIZADEH, M., et al. Hospital management preparedness tools in biological events: A scoping review. Journal of Education and Health Promotion. 2019, 8(1).
  10. BAZYAR, J., et al. The Principles of Triage in Emergencies and Disasters: A Systematic Review. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine. 2020, 35(3), 305-313.
  11. CARTER, H., J. DRURY a R. AMLOT. Recommendations for improving public engagement with pre-incident information materials for initial response to a chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear (CBRN) incident: A systematic review. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 2020, 51, 101796.
  12. RABAJCZYK, A., et al. Monitoring of Selected CBRN Threats in the Air in Industrial Areas with the Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Atmosphere. 2020, 11(12), 1373.
  13. European Commission. European Defence Fund (EDF) calls 2021. 30.June 2021. Dostupné z: https://ec.europa.eu/defence-industry-space/factsheet-edf-calls-2021_en