|Institution:||Swedish National Defense College|
|Keywords:||Engineering and Technology; Civil Engineering; Transport Systems and Logistics; Teknik och teknologier; Samhällsbyggnadsteknik; Transportteknik och logistik; Officersprogrammet (OP); Officersprogrammet (OP); Krigsvetenskap, självständigt arbete; War Studies Thesis|
|Full text PDF:||http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:fhs:diva-4794|
The background of this study comes from the lack of documentation and knowledge about logistics in units, which has the main focus on combat or reconnaissance. The aims of the thesis is to determine and compare the different methods used to provide logistical support to units operating in enemy territory by Sweden and the Czech Republic in todays convention and asymmetric wars.Method of gathering information is through qualitative interviews using a semi-structured interview technique with both Swedish and Czech officers. The topics of the interviews are defined beforehand on an interview template and are based on the Swedish basic view of logistics. The three logistical branches that are covered are; service, movement and healthcare support. The result shows that Sweden and the Czech Republic have largely the same methods in all three branches. Sweden has one method in both service and healthcare support, which the Czech Republic does not have. For service support the method is a “forward operating place” which is similar to a forward operating base but only smaller and within the enemies territory. With healthcare support Sweden has small competent medicalgroups further out in enemy territory.The conclusion is that although Sweden and the Czech Republic have mostly the same logistical methods in supporting units in enemy territory they sometimes use them differently. The Swedish armed forces have a more evolved system for logistical support in enemy territory, which is a consequence of the cold war and the Swedish decision of not joining NATO, according to the author.