Set against non-stop cable news broadcasts recounting the ongoing daily carnage in Iraq and the resurgent violence in Afghanistan, the headline “wars decrease” was a jolt.
Topic:
Defense Policy, International Political Economy, and War
Eric Hagt, Philip E. Coyle, Whitney Parker, Rachel Stohl, Winslow Wheeler, and Anthony Zinni
Publication Date:
08-2006
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Defense Information
Abstract:
North Korea's launch of numerous missiles the first week of July raised serious questions about the capabilities of both the U.S. missile defense system and North Korea's ballistic missile program. CDI Analyst Victoria Samson and Senior Advisor Philip Coyle appeared on numerous radio talk shows and TV news programs nationwide, helping viewers, listeners and readers to understand that the missile defense system being deployed in Alaska and California has no demonstrated capability to defend the United Sates against an enemy attack. Meanwhile the Bush administration is losing precious time. As Coyle points out in the article below, it's time to enter into one-on-one talks with North Korea before Pyongyang improves its short and long range missiles further. The six-party talks are important and necessary, but not sufficient to stop North Korea's missiles. And neither, unfortunately, are U.S. missile defenses.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, and United Nations
Political Geography:
United States, China, Iraq, Middle East, Asia, and North Korea
Philip E. Coyle, Whitney Parker, Rachel Stohl, Winslow Wheeler, Victoria Samson, Jessica Ashooh, Mark Burgess, and Rhea Myerscough
Publication Date:
09-2006
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Defense Information
Abstract:
In the days before Sept. 11, riding the post-Cold War high, America was blissfully unaware of the threats it faced, and why. A few in the William J. Clinton administration tried to warn their successors about al-Qaida's danger, but overall, most Americans were blindsided by the Sept. 11 attacks. Five years later, America is still largely in the dark.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Terrorism, and War
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, United States, Iraq, Middle East, and Asia
Philip E. Coyle, Whitney Parker, Rachel Stohl, Winslow Wheeler, Victoria Samson, and Theresa Hitchens
Publication Date:
11-2006
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Defense Information
Abstract:
For decades, the U.S. Air Force has promoted the F-22 as its fighter for the 21st century. Advocates tout its technical features: fuel efficient, high speed “super-cruise,” advanced electronics, and reduced profile against enemy sensors, known as “stealth.” While those are popular amenities, the measures that really determine winning or losing in air combat have been overlooked by the Air Force. The F-22 fails to improve America's fighter force and degrades our combat capability.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, and Nuclear Weapons
The final recommendations of the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission became law in November. Congress or the president could have rejected the commission's recommendations entirely, but could not “cherry pick” the parts they liked or reject parts they didn't.
How do Congress and the Bush administration prioritize the issues monitored by the Center for Defense Information's Challenging Conventional Threats project? This examination of the fiscal year (FY) 2006 and 2007 budget appropriations and requests for U.S. government programs involving small arms and light weapons (hereafter referred to as “small arms”) and landmines attempts to determine just that.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Government, Political Economy, and Politics
Amjad Atallah, David Makovsky, Graham T. Allison, Richard Haass, R. Nicholas Burns, Moshe Yaalon, and Dan Meridor
Publication Date:
05-2006
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
I want to present some thoughts about the way we should look at modern Iran, the threat it poses to the United States, what we can do as Americans to confront that threat, and what your government is doing and should be doing along those lines.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Government, and War
Considerable controversy surrounds the effects of America's post-9/11 wars on its armed forces – more specifically, their effects on military readiness. And there are grounds enough for concern in the August 2006 admission by General Peter Pace, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, that two-thirds of the US Army's active and reserve combat brigades registered in the two lowest readiness categories.
Since the onset of the US “global war on terrorism”, the operational capacity of the original “Al Qaeda” centered around Osama bin-Laden has been significantly degraded. Hundreds of cadre formerly commanded by bin-Laden have been killed (mostly during the Afghan war). Several top leaders of the organization have been killed or captured – most notably Mohammed Atef, Abu Zubaydah, and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed – as have several leading regional associates, such as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Dozens of third tier operatives have been killed or captured. Nonetheless, the organization continues to function in a more decentralized form.
As originally conceived the Quadrennial Defense Review was meant to help ensure the internal consistency of mid-and longer-term US defense planning. By “internal consistency” I here mean a concordance of strategy, assets, and budgets. As critics often put it in the past: the point is to show how the force fits the strategy and the budget fits the force. The exercise is supposed to “connect” our military strategy with our force development plans and, in turn, connect these with current and future budgets. In this regard, the 2006 QDR is long on assertion and short on quantification – “short” as in utterly lacking.