Search

Begin New Search Topic Foreign Policy Political Geography United States

651. Stategy and Air Power

Author:
Thomas Donnelly
Publication Date:
03-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
More than any of the other armed services, the U.S. Air Force approaches the 2005 Quadrennial Defense Review with a sense of foreboding. Touted just a few years ago as the shining exemplar of the revolution in military affairs and the new American way of war, the Air Force is today under increasing scrutiny from Congress and the Pentagon to justify its procurement priorities in the context of the global war on terror. Neither the Air Force's most fervent detractors nor its most devoted acolytes, however, offer an accurate assessment of the role of air power in the post-9/11 strategic environment. The time is ripe for a more realistic, balanced reappraisal of what air power can—and cannot—be expected to accomplish against present and future threats to U.S. national security.
Topic:
Security and Foreign Policy
Political Geography:
United States and America

652. Counterinsurgency and Democracy: Strategic Implications of the Iraqi Elections

Author:
Vance Serchuk and Thomas Donnelly
Publication Date:
02-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
As this goes to press, Iraqis are preparing to vote on January 30 in what will be their country's first democratic elections in nearly fifty years. In the face of the ongoing insurgency in the Sunni Triangle and efforts by guerrillas to disrupt voting, however, a chorus of voices—from former U.S. national security advisers to prominent Sunni politicians—is warning that the elections are likely to do more harm than good, strengthening the very forces responsible for the violence. But while some of these critics raise compelling objections, they fail to grasp why it is precisely U.S. counterinsurgency strategy—as much as any abstract, moral commitment to democracy—that makes holding elections more, rather than less, necessary.
Topic:
Security and Foreign Policy
Political Geography:
United States and Iraq

653. Transforming America's Alliances

Author:
Vance Serchuk and Thomas Donnelly
Publication Date:
01-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
Despite ingrained perceptions of unilateralism, the Bush administration has overseen the most sweeping expansion of American security commitments around the world since the dawn of the Cold War. Even as recriminations over Iraq dominate headlines, the contours of a new alliance system are quietly emerging out of America's partnerships with dozens of countries, from Mali to the Philippines, under attack by al Qaeda and its ideological affiliates. The challenge now is to ensure that this coalition of the willing is also a coalition of the committed—an enduring network of relationships for fighting the war on terror that the Bush administration can bequeath to its successors, be they Democrat or Republican.
Topic:
Security and Foreign Policy
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, America, and Philippines

654. Dangerous Doctrine: How New U.S. Nuclear Plans Could Backfire

Author:
Michael M. May and Roger Speed
Publication Date:
01-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:
In September 2002, President George W. Bush announced his new National Security Strategy. Although this doctrine retains some elements from the past, in some respects it is a bold departure from previous U.S. policy. It declares that the United States finds itself in a unique position of military and political dominance and that it has a moral duty to use this strength to establish a new liberal democratic world order. The National Security Strategy and Bush's supporting speeches argue that the United States must in effect establish and maintain a global military hegemony to secure its envisioned democratic, peaceful world. According to the strategy, carrying out this mission requires that any challenge to U.S. military dominance must be blocked, by force if necessary. A significant challenge to world stability comes from terrorists and certain states that are seeking weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Concerned that the Cold War doctrines of deterrence and containment may no longer work, and that "if we wait for threats to fully materialize, we will have waited too long," Bush announced in the National Security Strategy a new "preemption doctrine" against such threats. Earlier, in 2001, the Bush administration's Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) addressed the nuclear aspect of the issue. The review recognized the new cooperative relationship with Russia and the rising threat from the potential proliferation of WMD. The latter point was seen as particularly important, since future conflict with a number of regional powers was thought possible--North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Libya all were thought to sponsor or harbor terrorists and to have active WMD and missile programs. The NPR presented a new U.S. strategic military doctrine intended to transform the defense establishment with the creation of a new triad, consisting of offensive strike systems (both nuclear and conventional), defenses (both active and passive), and a revitalized defense infrastructure that will provide new capabilities to meet emerging threats. According to the NPR, the new triad will have four primary missions: to assure, dissuade, deter, and defeat. Bush later added a fifth mission, to preempt, which he characterized as proactive counterproliferation--the use of military force to prevent or reverse proliferation. The "Bush doctrine" called for new nuclear weapons to meet the requirements of these missions. It was argued that smaller nuclear weapons could reduce collateral civilian damage and make U.S. use of nuclear weapons more "credible," therefore deterring hostile nations or even dissuading opponents from acquiring WMD. However, our analysis indicates that low-yield nuclear weapons would likely be militarily effective in only a few cases, and even then the collateral damage could be significant unless the targets were located in isolated areas. Moreover, even if they were militarily effective, they would likely add little or nothing to U.S. deterrent capability, nor be effective at dissuading WMD acquisition. Indeed, the new weapons concepts advanced to date seem to have little to do with deterrence of a nuclear (or other WMD) attack on the United States or its allies. Instead, they appear to be geared toward a warfighting role, which could ultimately undermine rather than enhance U.S. security.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, and Democratization
Political Geography:
United States

655. Stretching the Model of "Coalitions of the Willing"

Author:
Andrew F. Cooper
Publication Date:
10-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
Two models may be draw up of coalitions of the willing. The first model is epitomized by the group of countries assembled by the United States for the mobilization of the 2003 Iraq war. The second model is the form of coalition associated with the anti-personnel landmines campaign and the initiative on the International Criminal Court in the mid to late 1990s. This paper will explore the relationship between these different types of coalitions. The former type is characterized by a top-down, state-centric, and coerced/opportunistic strategic form. The latter type by way of contrast takes a bottom-up, voluntary, mixed actor, diplomatic approach. Yet, along side these differences are some striking, but unanticipated similarities. Most dramatically, both types have been assembled on an intense stylistic basis with an eye to avoiding the frustrations associated with working via established institutions. By looking more closely at the external expression and inner workings of these modes of activity, the model of coalitions of the willing is stretched out in terms of their motivations, sense of ownership, and future trajectory.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Development, and Government
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, and Middle East

656. México ante América Latina: Mirando de reojo a Estados Unidos

Author:
Guadalupe González González
Publication Date:
11-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas
Abstract:
The purpose of this paper is to identify and analyze the patterns of continuity and change in Mexico's diplomatic strategies towards Latin America between 1945 and 2005 as a case study on the impact of systemic variables –specifically, changes in the distribution of power at world and regional level- on the foreign policy of intermediate states. It distinguishes four different periods in Mexico-Latin America relations using a typology of diplomatic strategies built upon two criteria: a) the intermediate state's level of attention and activity in its immediate regional area, and b) the level of alignment or convergence with U.S. policies, as the hegemonic power in the Hemisphere. The main argument is that changes in Mexico's relative position in the regional structure of power and the shift from bipolarity to unipolarity at global level do not explain the persistence of a historical gap between the symbolic and material dimensions of Mexico's relations with Latin America. Over the last six decades, the evidence points towards the existence of a growing disjuncture between Mexico's increasing power position in the region and its limited regional projection.
Topic:
International Relations and Foreign Policy
Political Geography:
United States, Latin America, Central America, and Mexico

657. Opinión pública y política exterior en México y Estados Unidos: un estudio comparado

Author:
Guadalupe Gonzalez (ed), Susan Minushikin (ed), Robert Y. Shapiro (ed), and Catherine Hug
Publication Date:
06-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas
Abstract:
The 2004 Mexico and the World survey, conducted by Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas (CIDE) and Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales (COMEXI), is the first-ever comprehensive study of Mexican public and leadership opinion on international affairs. The study is designed to measure general attitudes and values concerning Mexico's relationship with the world rather than opinions on specific foreign policies or issues. This year's survey was conducted in cooperation with The Chicago Council on Foreign Relations' (CCFR) 2004 study of American public and leadership opinion on foreign policy, a periodic survey conducted since 1974.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and Government
Political Geography:
United States, Central America, Mexico, and Chicago

658. Comparing Mexican and American Public Opinion and Foreign Policy

Author:
Guadalupe Gonzalez (ed), Susan Minushikin (ed), Robert Y. Shapiro (ed), and Catherine Hug
Publication Date:
06-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas
Abstract:
The 2004 Mexico and the World survey, conducted by Centro de InvestigaciÓ;n y Docencia EconÓmicas (CIDE) and Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales (COMEXI), is the first-ever comprehensive study of Mexican public and leadership opinion on international affairs. The study is designed to measure general attitudes and values concerning Mexico's relationship with the world rather than opinions on specific foreign policies or issues. This year's survey was conducted in cooperation with The Chicago Council on Foreign Relations' (CCFR) 2004 study of American public and leadership opinion on foreign policy, a periodic survey conducted since 1974.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and Government
Political Geography:
United States, Central America, and Mexico

659. U.S. Military Concepts of War and their Impact on Foreign Interventions

Author:
Charles W. Parker III
Publication Date:
06-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas
Abstract:
This essay argues that military doctrine shapes the nature of United States foreign interventions. In particular, the U.S. military's concepts of “war” and “Military Operations Other Than War” (MOOTW), and the resulting institutional orientation of the Pentagon towards such contingencies, have had a profound impact on the planning and execution of contingencies around the world since the U.S. became a great power. Before World War II, MOOTW-like military interventions were commonplace and mostly successful in the conduct of U.S. foreign policy. Most military interventions such as the Philippines War of 1899-1901 and in the Caribbean (Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Panama, Nicaragua) between 1899 and 1941 were successful limited campaigns that helped consolidate the United States as a regional and global power. U.S. military doctrine and capabilities in counterinsurgency, peace enforcement, and foreign internal defense, were robust. This core competency of the U.S. military was lost in the large scale and conventional struggles against the Axis powers and later the Soviet Union.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and War
Political Geography:
United States, Soviet Union, Cuba, Central America, Nicaragua, Haiti, and Dominican Republic

660. The U.S. National Security Strategy and the Global War on Terror “Force Multiplier”

Author:
Charles W. Parker III
Publication Date:
04-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas
Abstract:
In September 2002, President George W. Bush published a new National Security Strategy (NSS) in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 (9/11) terrorist attacks in the United States homeland. The publication of the new NSS represented a codification of a series of policy ideas that had been brewing since the end of the first Bush Administration and throughout the Clinton Administration, which were sharpened as a result of the newly perceived threats to the United States' security posture. Some prominent academics have argued that the NSS and Bush's actions represent a “neoimperialist” or “unilateralist” approach to the conduct of U.S. foreign relations, and are a radical and fundamental shift in the trajectory of U.S. power projection and assertiveness. They also lament a rift in relations with European allies in part due to this new policy trajectory, to the point of declaring that the Europe and the United States will be future rivals on the world stage.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, and Government
Political Geography:
United States and Europe