Search

Begin New Search Topic Military Spending Publication Year within 10 Years

31. NATO and Postmodernity. An Organization not too well Understood and Geopolitically Necessary / La OTAN y la postmodernidad. Una organización poco comprendida y geopolíticamente necesaria

Author:
Federico Aznar Fernández-Montesinos
Publication Date:
12-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on International Security Studies (RESI)
Institution:
International Security Studies Group (GESI) at the University of Granada
Abstract:
NATO is an organization hindered by its 20th century success; in addition, it is not well understood in a postmodern world despite having been transformed by increasing its political aspect and reduced its military weight through the simple re-reading of its founding treaty. A "Hard" power institution in a postmodern and "Soft” world. However, risks and threats have only faded and, although they have lost some of their intensity, they have gained in specter. Paradoxically, NATO dissolution with the end of the Cold War would have led to the disappearance of a forum for dialogue, to the unraveling of the security space and, thus, to the rearming of Europe. Russia is the continent nation heir to the USSR, the reason for the creation of NATO. But Russia is not the USSR in geopolitical or ideological terms, even though its recent action has brought back the shadows of the Cold War. The complexity of the approach to the problem of its relationship with the West cannot be reduced to the dichotomous and exclusive enemy friend key (it is a partner, supplier, supplier ... more than a strategic rival). Its correct definition comes from the resolution of the problem of its identity. In this context, NATO remains a geopolitically necessary organization, not in vain is today the only bridge that links exclusively Europe and the United States while contributing to the stability and structure of the West. And it serves to find a place for Russia too. His eventual tensing is a proof of the vigor of his health and the need to find channels of understanding among its members. In general, it is not good to blow up bridges already built despite it is legitimate to want to change them.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, Geopolitics, and Military Spending
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and United States of America

32. Waiting for Disruption?! Undersea Autonomy and the Challenging Nature of Naval Innovation

Author:
Heiko Borchert, Tim Kraemer, and Daniel Mahon
Publication Date:
02-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS)
Abstract:
This paper looks at the mechanics of military innovation to sound a cautionary note on the current and future use of undersea autonomy. It starts from the premise that undersea autonomy is not yet as inevitable and disruptive as many believe. In particular, this is because of the current threat environment, the limited scope of current missions for unmanned undersea vehicles (UUVs), and the prevailing technology push. For undersea autonomy to lead to disruptive and discontinuous changes in undersea warfare, navies will need to understand how to translate technological advancements into operational advantages. This will require navies, industry and science partners to develop a better understanding of the interplay between operational needs, cultural predispositions, organisational and resource needs, and technological options.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Military Strategy, Water, and Military Spending
Political Geography:
Global Focus

33. Defense and Development Industry: Theoretical Controversies and Implications in Industrial Policy

Author:
Christiano Cruz Ambros
Publication Date:
06-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
AUSTRAL: Brazilian Journal of Strategy International Relations
Institution:
Postgraduate Program in International Strategic Studies, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
Abstract:
The main objective of this article is to expose the debate around the relationship between military spending and economic development, as well as between defense industry and technological development. With this in mind, we have explored literature from the classical school of economics through to Marxist, Skeletal, Schumpeterian and Neoclassical writers. We argue in this paper that the strengthening of the defense industry, through a robust and focused industrial policy, is a viable strategy for the endogenization of critical technologies central to the domain of the paradigm of development of the digitization. This strategy demands the construction of a robust industrial policy focused on the development and strengthening of the national defense industry. Therefore, it is necessary to advance the research agenda of institutional arrangements and governance focused on this sector.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Development, Military Strategy, Military Spending, Defense Industry, and Digitization
Political Geography:
Global Focus

34. Against the Odds Driving Defense Innovation in a Change-Resistant Ecosystem

Author:
Jeffrey P. Bialos, Christine E. Fisher, and Stuart L. Koehl
Publication Date:
02-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Transatlantic Relations
Abstract:
Generating the innovation to sustain the United States’ technology-based military superiority will, of necessity, be a core element of defense strategy for the Trump Administration. This paper identifies the challenges faced by the DoD’s large, multi-faceted research and development ecosystem in meeting that national security goal, and proposes a holistic and balanced strategy for addressing them. Fundamentally, the outgoing Obama Administration concluded that the U.S. military dominance against our near-peer adversaries is eroding in a globalized environment where commercial innovation is not only being rapidly generated through agile and fast-paced processes but is being rapidly disseminated globally and therefore available to potential adversaries. In contrast, the DoD faces the challenge of building a future force that is second to none while using internal processes that generally are overly cumbersome, somewhat antiquated and slower—processes which constrain its ability to access all available innovation, commercial and otherwise, and to rapidly transition that technology to the war fighter in order to produce robust effects on the battlefield. Notwithstanding years of studies that have highlighted well known institutional obstacles to change in both our defense R&D ecosystem and the Department more broadly, these challenges still largely remain. Numerous DoD initiatives to address these issues and incentivize change unfortunately have not moved the needle.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Economics, Military Strategy, Military Affairs, Cybersecurity, and Military Spending
Political Geography:
United States of America, North America, Washington, and D.C.

35. The Dispatch (Fall 2016)

Author:
David J. Bercuson, Julian Lindley-French, Alan Stephenson, Neil Desai, John Adams, Charity Weeden, Elinor Sloan, Mike Day, Stephen M. Saideman, Kyle Matthews, and David McLaughlin
Publication Date:
09-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Global Exchange
Institution:
Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI)
Abstract:
The Dispatch (later called The Global Exchange) is the Canadian Global Affairs Institute’s quarterly magazine featuring topical articles written by our fellows and other contributing experts. Each issue contains approximately a dozen articles exploring political and strategic challenges in international affairs and Canadian foreign and defence policy. This Fall 2016 issue includes articles on climate change, digital security, Brexit and more.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Climate Change, Diplomacy, Cybersecurity, Brexit, Military Spending, Alliance, and Space
Political Geography:
Britain, Turkey, Canada, North America, and United States of America