Search

Begin New Search Political Geography United States Publishing Institution Chatham House

21. Justifying sacrifice: Barack Obama and the selling and ending of the war in Afghanistan

Author:
Trevor Mccrisken
Publication Date:
09-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
Just a month after entering office, US President Barack Obama spoke at the US Marine Corps base at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. His remarks focused on his plans to 'responsibly' end the war in Iraq and to deepen the commitment of the United States to the fight against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan. One of the key motifs that Obama used in his speech was that of 'sacrifice'—the need for all Americans to continue the age-old tradition of paying a price for the freedoms they enjoy. As he told the audience of US Marines: 'The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. You know because you have seen those sacrifices. You have lived them. And we all honor them.' He then characterized this notion of sacrifice for one's country as being part of a long tradition that was responsible for the very existence of the United States and an essential guarantor of its domestic freedom:
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, United States, Iraq, Taliban, and North Carolina

22. Introduction

Author:
Julie Smith
Publication Date:
11-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
Many people believed that Great Britain was not and did not wish to become European, and that Britain wanted to enter the Community only so as to destroy it or divert it from its objectives. Many people also thought that France was ready to use every pretext to place in the end a fresh veto on Britain's entry. Well, ladies and gentlemen, you see before you tonight two men who are convinced of the contrary.
Topic:
War
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, and Germany

23. The UK and European defence: leading or leaving?

Author:
Sven Biscop
Publication Date:
11-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
The problem of European defence is that it does not work with the United Kingdom, but would not work without it either. Unlike in other policy areas, in defence the issue is not British resistance to Brussels directives. Populist outcries against a mythical 'Euro-Army' notwith-standing, British sovereignty is not under threat. The real issue is that other European countries are not doing enough in spite of being urged from both sides of Brussels—by the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). 'Too many countries are failing to meet their financial responsibilities to NATO, and so failing to maintain appropriate and proportionate capabilities. Too many are opting out of operations or contributing but a fraction of what they should be capable of ', in the words of Defence Secretary Philip Hammond. Britain, on the contrary, is the leading European military power, accounting for 22.4 per cent of defence expenditure and 11.8 per cent of armed forces, and it is more willing than most to deploy those forces (providing 20.8 per cent of the average number of troops deployed), including for combat operations. Its military clout enables the UK to lead the others—any scheme for European defence without it would indeed be severely handicapped. But does Britain want to lead? The paradox is that while the EU's Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) would not have come into being without British leadership, it would be much more effective without British reluctance to make full use of it. In contrast to most European countries, the UK has never stopped seeing European defence and the continued assurance of transatlantic partnership (in the shape of its special relationship with the United States and the NATO alliance) as a zero-sum game.
Political Geography:
United States, United Kingdom, Europe, and North Atlantic

24. Britain, Europe and the United States: change and continuity

Author:
Arthur I. Cyr
Publication Date:
11-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
There is no shortage of attention to disagreements and tensions between the United States and the nations of Europe, considered both individually and collectively. The 40th anniversary of Britain's entry into the European Economic Community (EEC), now the European Union (EU), is a good benchmark anniversary not only for reflection on what has transpired to date but also for evaluation of current trends and likely future developments. The nation's course, regarding both entry into membership and participation, has hardly been smooth, but the relationship with the institution has endured.
Topic:
War
Political Geography:
Britain, United States, and Europe

25. Q Mark Kleiman says Cannabis may be legal in the US in a decade

Author:
Alan Philps
Publication Date:
09-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
Mark Kleiman is Professor of Public Policy at the University of California, Los Angeles and has worked on drugs and crime since the 1980s. He tells Alan Philps that the real issue is not prohibition or legalization, but reducing the damage done by drugs.
Topic:
Crime
Political Geography:
United States

26. We're too tolerant of corruption at home

Author:
Mark Galeotti
Publication Date:
09-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
Moral hazard in the wild West
Topic:
Corruption and Politics
Political Geography:
United States

27. The risks for British schools in relying on rich foreign pupils

Author:
Anthony Seldon
Publication Date:
09-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
The world loves British independent schools but they may lose their moral purpose if they chase the global super-rich
Political Geography:
Britain and United States

28. Smart muddling through: rethinking UK national strategy beyond Afghanistan

Author:
Paul Cornish and Andrew Doorman
Publication Date:
03-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
When the Conservative–Liberal Democrat coalition was formed in May 2010 it was confronted with a Ministry of Defence (MoD) in crisis, with armed forces committed to intensive combat operations in Afghanistan and with an unenviable financial situation. Yet within five months the coalition government had published a new National Security Strategy (NSS—the third in three years), a new Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) and a spending review. Among the United Kingdom's allies, France and Australia had prepared their defence white papers of 2008 and 2009 respectively in the context of a more benign global economic environment, while the United States used its national security policy of 2010 to provide a strategic overview without setting out in much detail what it would require of the relevant departments. The UK was effectively, therefore, the first western state to undertake a complete defence and security review in the 'age of austerity'. To add to the challenge, the coalition recognized that there were also problems within its own machinery of government, and came up with some novel solutions. In a radical step, it decided that national security would henceforth be overseen by a new National Security Council (NSC) chaired by the Prime Minister. A National Security Advisor—a new appointment in UK government—would lead Cabinet Office support to the NSC and the review process. The novelty of these arrangements raised questions about whether a more established system might be required to manage such a major review of UK national security. Nevertheless, the strategy review proceeded apace.
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, United States, United Kingdom, and Australia

29. Military doctrine, command philosophy and the generation of fighting power: genesis and theory

Author:
Geoffrey Sloan
Publication Date:
03-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
It was the British maritime strategist Sir Julian Corbett who, on the eve of the First World War, described doctrine as 'the soul of warfare'. This assertion conceals as much as it reveals, leaving out any explanation of how doctrine is formulated, disseminated or used, and any account of the relationship between doctrine and command philosophy. It is only through a synthesis of these two factors that fighting power can be generated. Doctrine can be described as a force multiplier in that a fighting organization that applies it consistently will be able to take on a larger force in battle and win. It is often analysed and evaluated in isolation from command philosophy. How, then, do we define doctrine and what are the major variants of command philosophy? What is the nature of the relationship between doctrine and command philosophy? Is it possible to identify and assess the component parts of doctrine, and to understand how they manifest themselves at the tactical, operational and strategic levels of war?
Topic:
War
Political Geography:
United States

30. British civil–military relations and the problem of risk

Author:
Timothy Edmunds
Publication Date:
03-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Institution:
Chatham House
Abstract:
The theme of risk pervades the western security discourse at the beginning of the 2010s. The United Kingdom's 2010 National Security Strategy (NSS) employs the term 'risk' no fewer than 545 times, while its 2010 Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) mentions the word 96 times. The United States' 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) uses the words 'risk' or 'risks' 95 times over the course of its analysis. Risk is an explicit theme in the Australian Defence White Paper of 2009, Germany's Defence Policy Guidelines of 2011, The French White Paper on Defence and National Security of 2008 and the Spanish Security Strategy of 2011. It is also implicit in almost all other western security documentation since 2001 in one way or another.
Political Geography:
United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and Australia