Last July, a majority of the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC), led by Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., tried to reverse Secretary of Defense Robert Gates' decision to stop production of the F-22. After Defense Secretary Robert Gates and the White House lobbied long and hard against the emissaries from Lockheed, the F-22 lost in a somewhat lopsided vote of 58 to 40. Game over. Right?
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, Security, Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, and Counterinsurgency
The international Global Zero Commission, a group of political and military leaders from the United States, Russia and other key countries, held an intensive two-day meeting in Washington, D.C. on June 28-29, 2009 - where they presented a practical and comprehensive plan calling for the phased and verified elimination of all nuclear weapons over the next 20 years, and briefed senior Obama administration officials on their recommendations in advance of the July 6-8 Moscow Summit.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, Security, Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, and Counterinsurgency
The Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS) and National War College (NWC) jointly hosted a conference on “Sun Zi's Art of War and U.S. Joint Professional Military Education” on October 6, 2009. This was the first conference to bring together leading academic experts and faculty from all major U.S. military academies and senior Service schools. The morning session, an integral part of the NWC core course on war and statecraft, featured speakers who explored the historical context and modern military applications of Sun Zi. The afternoon session provided a forum for dialogue and an exchange of ideas between leading academic experts from civilian institutions and professors and military practitioners who teach Art of War at professional military education (PME) institutions. The panelists addressed a range of topics relevant to how to teach Sun Zi, including identifying best practices and potential pitfalls, translation issues, research gaps, and opportunities to engage foreign counterparts.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, War, and Political Theory
The Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College
Abstract:
Since assuming command in 1998 of the first Civil Support Team (CST) Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), Colonel Stewart witnessed and experienced dramatic changes in homeland security theory, policy, and practice. Understandably, the most significant changes have occurred since the horrific attacks on September 11, 2001, which violently demonstrated how turbulent today's world strategic environment is. Widely available chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, high yield explosive, and cyberspace security (CBRNE-C) materials, technologies, and equipment often have dual uses. Preventing rogue states and terrorist organizations from acquiring these materials is a necessary but formidable challenge. Additionally, the cyber domain has grown tremendously and may be used to target key infrastructure and resources. In addition to these threats, dramatic weather changes have caused unusual and devastating shifts in weather patterns, which in turn have triggered catastrophic events.
Topic:
Security, Terrorism, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
The Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College
Abstract:
There is a vast literature on the potential for new technologies to create a Revolution in Military Affairs or “networked warfare,” but that is a discussion of the impact of military technology on the way the force itself can be used. Today there is a question regarding the impact of new communication and information technologies in the hands of civilians—some of whom are combatants—on the environment in which the force will be used. This monograph argues that the impact of these technologies has been, and will be, great enough that the way they are shaping the battlefield needs to be understood.
Topic:
Security, Science and Technology, Terrorism, and War
The Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College
Abstract:
Because strategic performance must involve the ability to decide, to command, and to lead, as well as the capacity to understand, there are practical limits to what is feasible and useful by way of formal education in strategy. The soldier who best comprehends what Sun-tzu, Clausewitz, and Thucydides intended to say, is not necessarily the soldier best fitted to strategic high command. It is important to distinguish between intellect and character/personality. The superior strategist is ever uniquely a product of nature/biology, personality/psychology, and experience/opportunity. Nonetheless, formal education has its place.
Casey Wardynski, David S. Lyle, and Michael J. Colarusso.
Publication Date:
10-2009
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College
Abstract:
For years, the U.S. Army has given “competency” pride of place in its officer development doctrine. In popular usage, competent means having requisite or adequate ability, and in a labor market context, it is defined as “an enduring combination of characteristics that causes an appropriate level of individual performance.”
The Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College
Abstract:
The purpose of the Army's Ethic is stated clearly in Field Manual (FM) 1, The Army . It is “to maintain [the Army's] effectiveness.” The implication is as clear as it is true—without such an ethic, the Army cannot be effective at what it does. As is well-documented in the literature of professions, their ethics provide the primary means of social direction and control over their members as they perform their expert duties, often under chaotic conditions. For the Army profession, its evolving expert knowledge in the moral-ethical domain is what enables the profession to develop individual professionals—Soldiers and their leaders—to fight battles and campaigns “effectively and rightly,” as expected by the client the profession serves. Without such good, right, and just application of its expertise, the Army will lose its lifeblood—the trust of the American people.