« Previous |
1 - 10 of 13
|
Next »
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. A Significant Change in Russian Doctrine on Nuclear Weapon Use
- Author:
- Carl Conetta
- Publication Date:
- 09-2024
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Project on Defense Alternatives
- Abstract:
- Speaking to the Russian Presidential Security Council on Sept 25, 2024, Vladimir Putin asserted that “Aggression against Russia by any non-nuclear state… supported by a nuclear power should be treated as their joint attack.” But what does this imply for the Ukraine war and more generally? Although the announcement reaffirms several long-standing provisions of Russian nuclear weapon doctrine, it does add something new and portentous. It asserts that Russia may reply to a massive aerial attack on the homeland while it is underway even if the attack is purely conventional. The perceived “massiveness” of the attack is held practically speaking to be equivalent to an existential attack. The new view may also imply that such an attack by Ukraine would be considered a joint UA-NATO attack and possibly warrant a similar response.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, NATO, Nuclear Weapons, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia and Europe
3. Putin’s Next, Best Move – The Logic and Limits of Russian Action on Ukraine
- Author:
- Carl Conetta
- Publication Date:
- 02-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Project on Defense Alternatives
- Abstract:
- Moscow will act when and if it declares that the West has escalated contention rather than responding positively to its entreaties – principally those regarding NATO expansion and implementation of the Minsk II agreement. Recent, new US/NATO troop deployments and weapon transfers to Ukraine may already count as relevant escalation. Russian forces surrounding Ukraine stand at an exceptionally high level of readiness and significantly exceed the scale of previous deployments. Nonetheless, a full-scale invasion aiming to seize the whole of Ukraine is highly unlikely. Indeed, Russian action may involve no more than large-scale conveyance of weapons and munitions to the rebel areas, possibly along with an influx of “volunteers.” Several other options ranging between these two are discussed below.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, NATO, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America
4. And So Now… It’s War?
- Author:
- Carl Conetta
- Publication Date:
- 02-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Project on Defense Alternatives
- Abstract:
- The battle within Ukraine and the USA-Russia contest over it has returned Europe to the darkest, most ominous period of the 1947-1989 Cold War. That this should happen with both the United States and Russia barreling grimly forward reflects a singular failure of diplomacy and common sense. There were two recent points in time when positive leadership might have turned us away from the path of disaster. Fortunately, one of these is not yet foreclosed. Movement toward resolution begins with recognizing that all sides, all stakeholders share fault for the current crisis. And no side has told the whole truth of it. Without question, Russian intervention in Ukraine’s civil conflict violates international law. Although Russia has the right to defend itself from attack, this proviso does not apply in the current situation. The annexation of Crimea was illegal, as is Russian intervention in the Donbass. This is indisputable.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, NATO, Conflict, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America
5. Did NATO expansion prompt the Russian attack on Ukraine?
- Author:
- Carl Conetta
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Project on Defense Alternatives
- Abstract:
- Neither NATO nor US policy caused the Ukraine war. The invasion was Moscow’s unforced choice. But that doesn’t settle the issue of provocation. Although neither provocation nor “facilitation” amount to “cause,” such dynamics might have played a role in moving us toward this war. And knowing what role US or NATO policy may have played in bringing the world to this juncture can help illuminate ways to end the conflict (short of prosecuting it to its bitter end – however long that might take and at whatever cost it might entail).
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Foreign Policy, NATO, Alliance, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, and Ukraine
6. The “Stable Nuclear Deterrent” collapses in the Ukraine War
- Author:
- Charles Knight
- Publication Date:
- 10-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Project on Defense Alternatives
- Abstract:
- The comforting narrative of a dependable and stable nuclear deterrence between the US and Russia has been thrown into disarray by the War in Ukraine. This narrative, propagated widely in the years following the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, held that both the Super Powers fully appreciated that they could not “win” a nuclear battle and, therefore, would avoid direct conventional warfare, which might then quickly escalate into nuclear war. In a necessary corollary, it was thought that Russia and the US would make every effort to avoid a conventional war in Europe. Why? Because there are so many paths to escalation to nuclear war in Europe. Elsewhere in the world, US and Russian interests were more diffuse and, therefore, not so vital.
- Topic:
- Conflict Prevention, Foreign Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Deterrence, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America
7. Afghanistan: What Just Happened? What Comes Next?
- Author:
- Carl Conetta
- Publication Date:
- 09-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Project on Defense Alternatives
- Abstract:
- in short order, a 20-year $1.2 trillion US effort at nation-building evaporated, disintegrated, went up in smoke. And while unreconstructed interventionists pummel President Biden for surrendering Afghanistan, the truth is that we never had it. What we held instead was a hollow construct of our own imagination and creation – a client pseudo-state. And when it was finally and fully tested, it (for the most part) threw down its arms and ran away. In a sense, the sudden collapse of Kabul’s government and security services provides the surest litmus test of America’s 20-year enterprise in Afghanistan. It tells us that coercive nation-building by a foreign power – indeed, an alien power – is an impossible mission. Outsiders lack the knowledge, indigenous roots, legitimacy, and degree of interest to succeed against local resistance. Their very presence is provocative, especially given differences of language, religion, and culture. It’s as likely to spur resistance as it is to quell it. At the same time, such interventions risk becoming intractable given domestic political dynamics and Washington’s fixation on preserving its superpower reputation, its claim to being the “indispensable power”.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Taliban, Conflict, and Military
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, South Asia, and United States of America
8. Afghanistan: The Fog at the End of the Tunnel
- Author:
- Carl Conetta
- Publication Date:
- 06-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Project on Defense Alternatives
- Abstract:
- What is causing the uncertainty about when US ground forces will exit Afghanistan. The Biden administration insists that logistical factors explain its breach of the 2020 US-Taliban agreement, which reset the exit date from May to September. Logistical factors are also supposed to explain why the date may now be walked back to July. Actually, logistical issues explain neither. Using current data and historical precedent, this short analysis shows why. An alternative explanation for the delay is that it gave Washington more time to pursue some of its unfinished goals regarding Afghanistan. In this, the lingering troop presence serves as leverage. What goals? Improve Kabul’s military posture, polish plans and preparations for US forces to “fight from afar,” and pursue dramatic new international initiatives aiming to lock the Taliban into a cease-fire, peace settlement, and government reform plan substantially defined by the USA. This high risk-gambit won’t succeed, but it might prolong the conflict and America’s involvement in it.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Treaties and Agreements, War, Military Strategy, Armed Forces, Taliban, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, South Asia, North America, and United States of America
9. 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
10. Forceful Engagement: Rethinking the Role of Military Power in US Global Policy
- Author:
- Carl Conetta
- Publication Date:
- 12-2008
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Project on Defense Alternatives
- Abstract:
- A key objective of the new administration will be to "rebalance" America's foreign and security policy "tool kit", giving greater prominence to diplomacy and other elements of "soft power". And it is easy to see why. The surge in US defense spending and military activity that began ten years ago, and then sharply accelerated after the 11 September 2001 attacks, has had disconcerting results-to say the least. But setting an effective alternative course for US policy will not be as easy to accomplish as some assume.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy and Defense Policy
- Political Geography:
- United States