Search

Begin New Search Topic Defense Policy Publishing Institution Project on Defense Alternatives

1. Korea versus Korea: Conventional Military Balance and the Path to Disarmament

Author:
Charles Knight and Lutz Unterseher
Publication Date:
04-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Project on Defense Alternatives
Abstract:
Varied incremental steps that embody and signal the accumulating commitment to a minimally acceptable common political future for Korea are key to this process. Progressive reduction of cross-border invasion threats through mutual confidence building force restructuring will constitute a virtuous circle of reinforcement for a changed relationship. [Through the] accumulation of the sunk costs of iterative reciprocity North and South Korea will arrive at a point where the demonstrated commitment to smaller restructured military postures is sufficient to allow rapid progress toward a stable level and disposition of arms compatible with a new peaceful political relationship.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, and Disarmament
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, and North Korea

2. Fundamental Design Principles of Confidence-Building Defense

Author:
Carl Conetta and Lutz Unterseher
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Project on Defense Alternatives
Abstract:
A selection of slides prepared for seminars held in Holland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Belarus in 1994. The seminars were organized and co-sponsored by the Study Group on Alternative Security Policy (SAS) and the Project on Defense Alternatives (PDA). Twenty-five years later the principles of Confidence-Building Defense remain relevant to the efforts of North and South Korea to construct a “peace regime” after many decades of enmity and military standoff.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, Defense Policy, National Security, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:
South Korea, North Korea, Hungary, Czech Republic, Holland, and Belarus

3. North Korea’s Conventional Military Forces: Relative Strength and Options

Author:
Lutz Unterseher
Publication Date:
04-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Project on Defense Alternatives
Abstract:
If we can assume that the drive to generate unconventional [nuclear] instruments of deterrence is a response to the lack of options in the conventional realm, it would make sense to come up with policy recommendations aiming to lessen northern concerns.” This paper by German military analyst Lutz Unterseher first assesses the relative conventional military power and potential of North and South Korea, then suggests a number of military restructuring steps the U.S. and South Korea can take to reassure North Korea of its security in the context of denuclearization. Unterseher calls for “…a genuine structural change, shifting the capabilities of the [allied] forces in the direction of a stable, non-provocative defense.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Armed Forces, Military Affairs, and Weapons
Political Geography:
Asia and North Korea

4. Sustainable Defense: More Security, Less Spending

Author:
Carl Conetta
Publication Date:
06-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Project on Defense Alternatives
Abstract:
The United States must partner with other nations in addressing challenges like climate change, epidemics of disease, nuclear proliferation, and human rights and humanitarian crises. None of these challenges are best dealt with by military force. Rather, they will depend on building non-military capacities for diplomacy, economic assistance, and scientific and cultural cooperation and exchange which have been allowed to languish in an era in which the military has been treated as the primary tool of U.S. security policy.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Climate Change, Economy, Sustainability, and Hybrid Threats
Political Geography:
North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

5. The Pentagon and Deficit Reduction FY-2012 Budget Retains Exceptional Level of Defense Spending

Publication Date:
03-2011
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Project on Defense Alternatives
Abstract:
At a time of growing concern over federal deficits, it is essential that all elements of the federal budget be subjected to careful scrutiny. The Pentagon budget should be no exception. As Secretary of Defense Robert Gates noted in a recent speech, paraphrasing President Dwight D. Eisenhower, "The United States should spend as much as necessary on national defense, but not one penny more."
Topic:
Security and Defense Policy
Political Geography:
United States

6. Pentagon Resists Deficit Reduction FY-2012 Budget Retains Exceptional Level of Defence Spending

Publication Date:
01-2011
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Project on Defense Alternatives
Abstract:
President Obama's 2012 budget plan maps out a future of steady increases for the National Defense account (apart from war costs, which the budget presumes will decline). The budget sets the base or peacetime portion of national defense to rise from $551.9 billion in 2010 to $637.6 billion in 2016 - a boost of about 15.5%. This increase exceeds the expected rate of inflation by about seven-tenths of a percent per year.
Topic:
Security and Defense Policy
Political Geography:
United States

7. Going for Broke: The Budgetary Consequences of Current US Defense Strategy.

Author:
Carl Conetta
Publication Date:
10-2011
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Project on Defense Alternatives
Abstract:
The sharp rise in the Pentagon's base budget since 1998 (46% in real terms) is substantially due to strategic choice, not security requirements, per se. It reflects a refusal to set priorities as well as a move away from the traditional goals of military deterrence, containment, and defense to more ambitious ends: threat prevention, command of the commons, and the transformation of the global security environment. The geographic scope of routine US military activity also has expanded.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, and Debt
Political Geography:
United States

8. The Pentagon's New Mission Set: A Sustainable Choice?

Author:
Carl Conetta
Publication Date:
10-2011
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Project on Defense Alternatives
Abstract:
Today, the United States enjoys an abundance of military power, but it is a uniquely expensive asset. During the past 20 years we have sought new ways to put this asset to work. Reviewing the change in the Pentagon's mission set, several broad trends are discernible: Mission objectives have grown much more ambitious, generally. The geographic scope for intensive US military efforts has widened significantly. Across the globe, the focus of US military action and investment has become less discriminate and more sweeping or comprehensive. Missions that put US “boots on the ground” in foreign nations in either a direct action, advisory, or capacity- building role have grown much more prominent. US policy continues to emphasize multinational approaches to addressing security issues, however the trend has been for the United States to play an ever more prominent role as the convener, governor, and quartermaster of joint action.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and Debt
Political Geography:
United States

9. Strategic Adjustment to Sustain the Force: A survey of current proposals.

Author:
Charles Knight
Publication Date:
10-2011
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Project on Defense Alternatives
Abstract:
The essential challenge in the art of strategy is how to achieve objectives within the demanding reality of resource constraints. Agile strategists must always be prepared for changing resource conditions and quickly adapt accordingly.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and Debt
Political Geography:
United States

10. Pentagon cuts in context: No reason for "doomsday" hysteria

Author:
Carl Conetta
Publication Date:
10-2011
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Project on Defense Alternatives
Abstract:
Recent Obama administration defense budget requests and proposals all fall within a narrow range of possible expenditures for the 2013-2023 period. All have kept the Pentagon's base budget above Cold War spending peaks. The President's 13 April proposal is no exception. It is a modest step that, at best, aims to retract future budget plans by 6.5 percent or $400 billion. The resulting average annual Pentagon base budget f or 2013-2023 would be close to today's level in real terms. The President's slice into non-security discretionary spending plans is audacious by comparison, reversing the proportionately suggested by his Fiscal Commission, and increasing the proportion of discretionary spending allocated to the Pentagon. The President's proposed new constraints on Pentagon budget growth hardly risk America's role in the world, as some contend, and by themselves do not necessitate a strategic review. Still, the President's launch of a such a review is a welcome development. It can help return America' s military posture to a reasonable and sustainable footing – provided that it elicits broad debate, solicits alternative viewpoints, and reaches beyond a $400 billion crease in the Pentagon's future budget plans.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Cold War, and Debt
Political Geography:
United States and America