|
Showing 1 - 6 of
6 matches in All Departments
This book examines the reasons counterforce has become widely
accepted in U.S. nuclear weapons policies. It discusses the
implications of adherence to the counterforce doctrine despite
increasing popular support for avoiding nuclear war through
deterrence and arms control. .
American power has been subjected to extensive analysis since
September 11, 2001. While there is no consensus on the state of US
hegemony or even on the precise meaning of the term, it is clear
that under George W. Bush the US has not only remained the 'lone
superpower' but has increased its global military supremacy. At the
same time, the US has become more dependent on its economic,
financial and geopolitical relationships with the rest of the world
than at any other time in its history, markedly since the events of
9/11. The distinguished scholars in this volume critically
interpret US hegemony from a range of theoretical and topical
perspectives. They discuss the idea of empire in the age of
globalization, critique the Bush doctrine, analyze the ideologies
underpinning a new American imperialism and examine the influence
of neo-conservatism on US foreign and domestic policy.
Since the U.S. presidential elections of 1980, debate has
intensified between those who believe that nuclear weapons can only
deter a war not intended to be fought and those who see nuclear
weapons as an advancement in weaponry that allows for the waging
and winning of a nuclear war. At the focal point of this debate is
the rise of the "counterforce" doctrine-the concept of a nuclear
attack exclusively against the enemy's military forces. The author,
in outlining the unresolved tension between the two approaches,
examines the reasons counterforce has become widely accepted in
U.S. nuclear weapons policies. He argues that many strategists are
worried that the counterforce strategy is out of touch with the
reality of the nuclear world and see it as merely a "technical fix"
for a dilemma that may have no solution. Finally, Dr. David
discusses the implications of adherence to the counterforce
doctrine despite increasing popular support for avoiding nuclear
war through deterrence and arms control.
Since the advent of the contemporary US national security apparatus
in 1947, entrepreneurial public officials have tried to reorient
the course of the nation's foreign policy. Acting inside the
National Security Council system, some principals and high-ranking
officials have worked tirelessly to generate policy change and
innovation on the issues they care about. These entrepreneurs
attempt to set the foreign policy agenda, frame policy problems and
solutions, and orient the decision-making process to convince the
president and other decision makers to choose the course they
advocate. In National Security Entrepreneurs and the Making of
American Foreign Policy Vincent Boucher, Charles-Philippe David,
and Karine Prémont develop a new concept to study entrepreneurial
behaviour among foreign policy advisers and offer the first
comprehensive framework of analysis to answer this crucial
question: why do some entrepreneurs succeed in guaranteeing the
adoption of novel policies while others fail? They explore case
studies of attempts to reorient US foreign policy waged by National
Security Council entrepreneurs, examining the key factors enabling
success and the main forces preventing the adoption of a preferred
option: the entrepreneur's profile, presidential leadership, major
players involved in the policy formulation and decision-making
processes, the national political context, and the presence or
absence of significant opportunities. By carefully analyzing
significant diplomatic and military decisions of the Johnson,
Nixon, Reagan, and Clinton administrations, and offering a
preliminary account of contemporary national security
entrepreneurship under presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and
Donald Trump, this book makes the case for an agent-based
explanation of foreign policy change and continuity.
Since the advent of the contemporary US national security apparatus
in 1947, entrepreneurial public officials have tried to reorient
the course of the nation's foreign policy. Acting inside the
National Security Council system, some principals and high-ranking
officials have worked tirelessly to generate policy change and
innovation on the issues they care about. These entrepreneurs
attempt to set the foreign policy agenda, frame policy problems and
solutions, and orient the decision-making process to convince the
president and other decision makers to choose the course they
advocate. In National Security Entrepreneurs and the Making of
American Foreign Policy Vincent Boucher, Charles-Philippe David,
and Karine Prémont develop a new concept to study entrepreneurial
behaviour among foreign policy advisers and offer the first
comprehensive framework of analysis to answer this crucial
question: why do some entrepreneurs succeed in guaranteeing the
adoption of novel policies while others fail? They explore case
studies of attempts to reorient US foreign policy waged by National
Security Council entrepreneurs, examining the key factors enabling
success and the main forces preventing the adoption of a preferred
option: the entrepreneur's profile, presidential leadership, major
players involved in the policy formulation and decision-making
processes, the national political context, and the presence or
absence of significant opportunities. By carefully analyzing
significant diplomatic and military decisions of the Johnson,
Nixon, Reagan, and Clinton administrations, and offering a
preliminary account of contemporary national security
entrepreneurship under presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and
Donald Trump, this book makes the case for an agent-based
explanation of foreign policy change and continuity.
The Future of NATO looks at the conceptual and theoretical
approaches that underlie the question of enlarging NATO's
membership and the consequences of enlargement on international
relations. It examines the policies of some of NATO's leading
member states - including Canada, which has recently begun a
two-year term on the security council - and deals with the issue of
enlargement from the point of view of the East European candidates,
focusing on Russia and its opposition to the current process.
Contributors include Andras Balogh (Loran Eotvos University),
Martin Bourgeois, Charles-Philippe David (UQAM), Andre P. Donneur
(UQAM), David G. Haglund (Queen's), Philippe Hebert (Montreal),
Stanislav J. Kirschbaum (Glendon College), Richard L. Kugler (RAND,
National Defence University), David Law (Queen's), Paul Letourneau
(Montreal), Jacques Levesque (UQAM), Gale Mattox (U.S. Naval
Academy), Marie-Claude Plantin (Lumiere Lyon 2), Sergei Plekhanov
(York), Jane M.O. Sharp (Kings College, London).
|
|