|
Showing 1 - 19 of
19 matches in All Departments
The maintenance and management of the NATO alliance is a delicate
balancing act between responding to security threats and navigating
the bargaining positions of the member states. This book highlights
how the alliance managed to maintain that balance in an area
critical to its operations today around the world - changing its
Cold War-era doctrine and structures. Based on his findings, John
Deni debates whether the NATO alliance ought to be considered by
policy makers to be a political organization first and a military
one second. Providing new empirical data valuable to our
understanding of NATO's post-Cold War evolution, the book offers a
unique perspective on alliance management and maintenance. It sheds
light on the continuing debate surrounding NATO's role in security,
how the alliance will fight and whether NATO is properly structured
to continue providing security for its member states.
The Routledge Handbook of Defence Studies provides a comprehensive
collection of essays on contemporary defence studies by leading
international scholars. Defence studies is a multi-disciplinary
study of how agents, predominantly states, prepare for and go to
war. Whereas security studies has been broadened and stretched to
cover at times the near totality of international and domestic
affairs, and war studies has come to mean not just operations and
tactics but also experiences and outcomes, defence studies remains
a coherent area of study primarily aimed at how defence policy
changes over time and in relation to stimulating factors such as
alterations in power, strategy and technology. This new Handbook
offers a complete landscape of this area of study and contributes
to a review of defence studies in terms of policy, security and
war, but also looks forward to new challenges to existing
conceptions of defence and how this is changing as states and their
militaries also change. The volume is divided into four thematic
sections: Defence as Policy; Defence Practice; Operations and
Tactics; and Contemporary Defence Issues. The ability to review the
field while also looking forward to further research is an
important element of a sustainable text on defence studies. In as
much as this volume is able to highlight the main themes of defence
studies, it also offers an in-depth look into how defence issues
can be examined and compared in a contemporary setting. This
Handbook will be of great interest to students of defence studies,
strategic studies, war studies, security studies and IR.
Recent upheaval in the global energy system - dramatic increases in
demand led largely by developing countries, significant decreases
in supply as a result of local or regional conflicts, and the
growing nexus between the burning of hydrocarbons and climate
change - has unsettled long-held notions of energy security. For
many years, transatlantic cooperation helped undergird the system's
stability, but Europe and North America have drifted apart in
several key ways, potentially undermining the search for energy
sufficiency, surety, and sustainability. Will the transatlantic
partners continue on separate paths in the face of dramatic change
in the global energy system, or does the breadth and depth of the
challenges they confront compel them to work more closely together?
In this edited volume, experts from across Europe and North America
- including advisors to the executive and legislative branches of
both the EU and the United States, to senior military commanders,
and to major international organizations and companies - examine
the most salient facets of the transatlantic energy relationship
and discern whether that relationship is characterized by growing
convergence or divergence. This book was based on a special issue
of the Journal of Transatlantic Studies.
The Routledge Handbook of Defence Studies provides a comprehensive
collection of essays on contemporary defence studies by leading
international scholars. Defence studies is a multi-disciplinary
study of how agents, predominantly states, prepare for and go to
war. Whereas security studies has been broadened and stretched to
cover at times the near totality of international and domestic
affairs, and war studies has come to mean not just operations and
tactics but also experiences and outcomes, defence studies remains
a coherent area of study primarily aimed at how defence policy
changes over time and in relation to stimulating factors such as
alterations in power, strategy and technology. This new Handbook
offers a complete landscape of this area of study and contributes
to a review of defence studies in terms of policy, security and
war, but also looks forward to new challenges to existing
conceptions of defence and how this is changing as states and their
militaries also change. The volume is divided into four thematic
sections: Defence as Policy; Defence Practice; Operations and
Tactics; and Contemporary Defence Issues. The ability to review the
field while also looking forward to further research is an
important element of a sustainable text on defence studies. In as
much as this volume is able to highlight the main themes of defence
studies, it also offers an in-depth look into how defence issues
can be examined and compared in a contemporary setting. This
Handbook will be of great interest to students of defence studies,
strategic studies, war studies, security studies and IR.
For the purposes of efficiently and effectively assuring allies and
deterring adversaries in Europe and on the Korean Peninsula, the
Army s force posture is out of balance today, with insufficient
units and Soldiers stationed overseas. Since the end of the Cold
War during which hundreds of thousands of Soldiers were stationed
overseas the pendulum has swung too far in the direction of a
U.S.-stationed Army, yielding an over-reliance on rotational
deployments for continuous heel-to-toe presence to achieve
deterrence and assurance effectively and at reasonable, sustainable
cost. The preceding assessment is the result of a 10-month study
examining the costs and benefits defined broadly of rotational
deployments versus forward stationing. Not all of the available
quantitative and qualitative data point in the same direction.
There are indeed a myriad of sometimes conflicting costs and
benefits that must be considered in determining whether and how
U.S. Army posture has become unbalanced and what to do about it.
For much of the last 25 years, NATO has focused on crisis
management in places such as Kosovo and Afghanistan, resulting in
major changes to alliance strategy, resourcing, force structure,
and training. Re-embracing collective defense -which lies at the
heart of the Treaty of Washington's Article 5 commitment- is no
easy feat, and not something NATO can do through rhetoric and
official pronouncements. Nonetheless, this shift is vitally
necessary if the alliance is to remain the bulwark of Western
defense and security. Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea and its
invasion of Ukraine have fundamentally upended the security
environment in Europe, thrusting NATO into the spotlight as the
primary collective defense tool most European states rely upon to
ensure their security. Collective defense is one of the alliance's
three core missions, along with crisis management and cooperative
security. It is defined in Article 5, the most well-known and
arguably most important part of NATO's founding treaty, which
states: "The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more
of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack
against them all." Although all three missions are vital to the
interests of NATO's many member states, collective defense has
become first among equals once again. However, three very
significant hurdles stand in the way of the alliance and its member
states as they attempt to re-embrace collective defense. These
loosely correspond to an ends-waysmeans construct. First is the
alliance's strategy toward Russia. Is Russia an adversary, a
partner, neither, or both? How should strategy and policies change
to place the alliance and its members on more solid ground when it
comes to managing Russia? Second are the ongoing disputes over
resourcing and burden-sharing. In recent years, it has become
commonplace for American leaders to publicly berate European allies
in an effort to garner more contributions to the common defense.
How might the alliance better measure and more equitably share
security burdens? Third is the alliance's readiness to fulfill its
objectives. Many allies have announced or are implementing
increases in defense spending. However, governments of European
NATO member states are strongly incentivized by domestic politics
to favor acquisition of military hardware or spending on personnel
salaries and benefits, usually at the expense of readiness. The
result is that NATO military forces risk quickly becoming hollow in
a way that is often underappreciated, which will prevent the
alliance from fulfilling the collective defense promise inherent in
Article 5. The book examines all such questions to assess NATO's
return to collective defense and offer a roadmap for overcoming
those challenges in both the short and long-term.
Although different U.S. Presidential administrations often face
differing national security challenges, one element common to all
American Presidents is the desire for policy options when it comes
to managing those challenges. Options provide room for maneuver
strategically, operationally, and politically. In this monograph,
the U.S. Army War College's Dr. John R. Deni argues that some
persistent biases and some more recent trends in defense strategy,
planning, and budgeting are likely to have the effect of reducing
the options available to current and future senior U.S. leaders.
As this monograph goes to press, the nuclear agreement negotiated
between Iran and the so-called P5+1-the five permanent members of
the United Nations Security Council consisting of the United
States, France, the United Kingdom, Russia, China, plus Germany-is
the subject of heated debate within Washington. The negotiations
that produced the agreement perhaps best exemplify the efforts by
the Barack Obama administration to use diplomacy to address the
most vexing security challenges of the day. The United States and
Iran have struggled to overcome mutual hostility and distrust
stemming from the 1953 coup against the Mohammad Mossadegh
government and the 1979-80 hostage crisis, not to mention Teheran's
use of Hezbollah as a proxy against American ally Israel. Yet
despite this, the administration persisted over several years to
first intensify and broaden economic sanctions against Iran, and
then to engage in painstaking negotiations with an authoritarian
country that routinely and methodically employs...
Explores the utility of forward presence in Eurpoe placing the
recent decisions in the context of a decades-long tradition on the
part of many political leaders, scholars and others.
Global energy markets are undergoing dramatic shifts. Developing
countries are beginning to outpace their more developed
counterparts in energy demand, the result not simply of higher
economic growth rates in the former, but also due to increased
efficiency in the latter. Traditional producers of hydrocarbons in
places such as Latin America, Eurasia, North Africa, and the Middle
East face a host of political, economic, technical, and societal
challenges that could potentially lead to major disruptions in the
global energy supply. Meanwhile, the unconventional fossil fuels
revolution has led to major changes in the flow of the global
energy supply, seemingly overnight.
Significant political, economic, and social change can dramatically
impact the international security environment and hence U.S.
security. For example, the revolutions that have unfolded across
the Middle East and North Africa over the last several years have
impacted American interests such as the security of Israel and the
spread of democracy. Likewise, the less "revolutionary" but equally
impactful changes that have unfolded across Latin America over the
last 15 years have affected American interests such as free and
open trade and access to reliable energy sources. In response to
these changes, American leaders will wield diplomacy, development,
and defense tools to safeguard U.S. interests and to fulfill
broader policy objectives. Whether and how those leaders choose to
wield Landpower-a critically important element of the defense
toolbox-is subject to significant debate these days in light of
sequestration's continuing impact and the post-war drawdown
impacting the U.S. Army in particular.
The U.S. Army performs a number of critical missions across the
vast Indo-Asia-Pacific region. These include underwriting
deterrence, building coalition capability, strengthening
institutional capacity among partner defense establishments,
maintaining interoperability, promoting military professionalism,
building operational access, and conducting humanitarian assistance
missions. For many, it may come as a surprise to know that almost
all of the many Army activities and events that support these
missions outside of Northeast Asia are conducted with U.S. Army
forces based in the 50 states, often Alaska and Washington State.
The roughly 22,000 U.S. Army Soldiers based in South Korea and
Japan are focused largely on deterring North Korea from large-scale
aggression, and assuring South Korea and other countries of the
steadfastness of Washington's alliance commitment.
The United States prefers to fight in coalitions, and has made this
clear in both word and deed. Most of the key American national
security or defense strategies, such as the Quadrennial Defense
Review report or the National Security Strategy, of the last decade
or more note this fact. In practice, the United States worked
diligently and tirelessly to construct and maintain coalitions of
the willing in both Iraq and Afghanistan. American political and
military leaders did this-and will continue to do this for future
conflicts-because coalition allies provide both political
legitimacy at home and abroad for broad national security policies
and specific military operations, and because coalition partners
help to shoulder security burdens. For these reasons, it seemed
appropriate and necessary to address the role that allies play
today and might continue to play in American national security
formulation and implementation during an era of change for the U.S.
military, and for the U.S. Army in particular.
In 2010, NATO decided to expand its ballistic missile defense
program, in part because of the American offer to include its
European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) as the centerpiece of an
expanded effort. For the Allies' part, few have actually
contributed tangible ballistic missile defense assets, in terms of
missile interceptors, radars or other sensors, or ballistic missile
defense-related platforms. This is likely to have significant
implications for the U.S. Army, which has an important but largely
underappreciated role in NATO missile defense today. In particular,
the Army is likely to face increased manpower demands, materiel
requirements, and training needs in order to meet the demand signal
created by the NATO ballistic missile defense program.
Additionally, Army units involved directly in or in support of
ballistic missile defense are likely to face a higher OPTEMPO than
currently projected. Ultimately, this will exacerbate the perceived
imbalance in transatlantic burden-sharing...
The utility of U.S. forward presence in Europe, placing the recent
decisions-and in particular the arguments against forward
presence-in the context of a decades' long tradition on the part of
many political leaders, scholars, and others, mistakenly tie
forward basing of U.S. forces to more equal defense burden sharing
across the entire North Atlantic alliance. In assessing whether and
how forward presence still matters in terms of protecting U.S.
interests and achieving U.S. objectives, the author bridges the gap
between academics and practitioners by grounding his analysis in
political science theory while illuminating how forward basing
yields direct, tangible benefits in terms of military operational
interoperability. This monograph forms a critical datapoint in the
ongoing dialogue regarding the future of American landpower,
particular in this age of austerity.
For much of the last 25 years, NATO has focused on crisis
management in places such as Kosovo and Afghanistan, resulting in
major changes to alliance strategy, resourcing, force structure,
and training. Re-embracing collective defense -which lies at the
heart of the Treaty of Washington's Article 5 commitment- is no
easy feat, and not something NATO can do through rhetoric and
official pronouncements. Nonetheless, this shift is vitally
necessary if the alliance is to remain the bulwark of Western
defense and security. Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea and its
invasion of Ukraine have fundamentally upended the security
environment in Europe, thrusting NATO into the spotlight as the
primary collective defense tool most European states rely upon to
ensure their security. Collective defense is one of the alliance's
three core missions, along with crisis management and cooperative
security. It is defined in Article 5, the most well-known and
arguably most important part of NATO's founding treaty, which
states: "The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more
of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack
against them all." Although all three missions are vital to the
interests of NATO's many member states, collective defense has
become first among equals once again. However, three very
significant hurdles stand in the way of the alliance and its member
states as they attempt to re-embrace collective defense. These
loosely correspond to an ends-waysmeans construct. First is the
alliance's strategy toward Russia. Is Russia an adversary, a
partner, neither, or both? How should strategy and policies change
to place the alliance and its members on more solid ground when it
comes to managing Russia? Second are the ongoing disputes over
resourcing and burden-sharing. In recent years, it has become
commonplace for American leaders to publicly berate European allies
in an effort to garner more contributions to the common defense.
How might the alliance better measure and more equitably share
security burdens? Third is the alliance's readiness to fulfill its
objectives. Many allies have announced or are implementing
increases in defense spending. However, governments of European
NATO member states are strongly incentivized by domestic politics
to favor acquisition of military hardware or spending on personnel
salaries and benefits, usually at the expense of readiness. The
result is that NATO military forces risk quickly becoming hollow in
a way that is often underappreciated, which will prevent the
alliance from fulfilling the collective defense promise inherent in
Article 5. The book examines all such questions to assess NATO's
return to collective defense and offer a roadmap for overcoming
those challenges in both the short and long-term.
Why does the United States need European allies, and why is it
getting more difficult for those allies to partner with Washington
in standing up to China, pushing back against Russia, and pursuing
other common interests around the world? This book addresses the
economic, demographic, political, and military trends that are
fundamentally upending the ability and willingness of European
allies to work with Washington. Brexit and its impact on
Britain’s economy and its military, Germany’s seemingly
relentless economic and political rise, France’s continuing
economic malaise, Italy’s aging population and its withdrawal
from major overseas operations, and Poland’s demographic decline
and single-minded obsession with Russia will combine to make
partnership with Washington nearly impossible. In short, the
constellation of allies and partners the United States has relied
on since 9/11 will look very different a decade from now. How
should Washington respond? It doesn’t hold all the cards, but
this book offers an array of practical recommendations for American
leaders. By leveraging these proposals, U.S. policy-makers can
avoid the worst-case scenarios and make the most of limited
opportunities.
|
You may like...
Merry Christmas
Mariah Carey, Walter Afanasieff, …
CD
R122
R112
Discovery Miles 1 120
Loot
Nadine Gordimer
Paperback
(2)
R398
R330
Discovery Miles 3 300
Loot
Nadine Gordimer
Paperback
(2)
R398
R330
Discovery Miles 3 300
|