Search

Begin New Search Topic Defense Policy Political Geography United States of America

451. Get "Smart": Paving the Way To A More Efficient Alliance

Author:
Young Atlanticists
Publication Date:
05-2012
Content Type:
Working Paper
Abstract:
NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen's concept of Smart Defense, defined as "ensuring greater security, for less money, by working together with more flexibility," will be a hot topic at the NATO Summit in Chicago. The Secretary General has stressed that to successfully maintain its strength amid shrinking defense budgets and economic austerity, NATO "must prioritize... must specialize... and must seek multinational solutions." The European Union, much of its membership overlapping with NATO, has endeavored to accomplish a similar task through pooling and sharing, but concerns over sovereignty have severely limited progress. This policy memo provides several recommendations on how NATO can overcome this roadblock to secure state participation in the Smart Defense initiative. As military cooperation remains a sensitive issue, the success of Smart Defense will depend on how well NATO packages and markets these projects. NATO leadership must prove Smart Defense’s utility and dynamism while demonstrating the financial and strategic benefits to be gained by swift and comprehensive implementation. In order to create attractive projects, NATO will have to focus on four policy areas: 1) rework its structure to facilitate a more cooperative environment, 2) provide mechanisms to ensure efficiency, 3) stimulate and secure connections between like-minded states, and 4) find creative ways to include non-NATO actors in Smart Defense projects. It is through these initiatives that Smart Defense’s prospects for success can be raised; a success which is vital if NATO is to become the more efficient and interoperable alliance that its members need.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and European Union
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

452. The New U.S. Defense Strategic Guidance and Its Implications for South Korean Security

Author:
Young Ho Kim
Publication Date:
02-2012
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
East Asia Institute (EAI)
Abstract:
On January 5, 2012, U.S. President Barack Obama paid a rare visit to the Pentagon and unveiled his guidelines for the Department of Defense to set the goals and priorities of its defense strategy for the next ten years. The resulting eight-page-long guidelines, entitled Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defense (hereafter DSG), contain the administration’s assessment of changing global security conditions and propose the roles and shape of the U.S. armed forces for the coming decade. Prepared through “unprecedentedly” close consultations between the President himself and senior leaders in the U.S. defense department and military including both service chiefs and combatant commanders, the DSG defines the present as a historic “inflection point” and envisions the future U.S. military as “smaller and leaner, but agile, flexible, ready and technologically advanced.” Moreover, in accordance with the DSG the U.S. defense budget will be cut by $487 billion and the sizes of the Army and Marine Corps will shrink by 80,000 and 14,000 respectively over the next ten years. While a more detailed picture will be revealed next month with the administration’s FY2013 budget request to Congress, the DSG reflects the Obama administration’s arduous effort to rebalance and redirect its defense priorities and spending under severe fiscal austerity. Because of the unusual timing of its publication and the magnitude of the reduction in defense spending, the DSG has generated controversy and concern domestically in the United States as well as internationally. In the United States, particularly people in the conservative wing of the Republican Party have been prompted to criticize the guidelines for putting the nation’s security in danger, whereas some people on the liberal side have advocated seeking deeper and bolder cuts in defense spending. Internationally, China was understandably the first to respond negatively to the DSG. For example, rebutting the DSG’s portrayal of Beijing’s military policy as lacking transparency as “groundless and untrustworthy,” Liu Weimin, a spokesman of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, stressed that Beijing was committed to peaceful development and “defensive” policy. What then are the implications of the DSG for South Korean security? Will there be any changes in U.S. defense policy or posture in the region under the DSG that may affect security conditions in South Korea significantly and, if so, require new measures or scrutiny by the South Korean government or the military? In fact, there have been largely four issues raised by the news media in South Korea. I will examine these four issues, and then discuss more challenging concerns that will require closer attention by South Korean foreign and security policy-makers.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, International Cooperation, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:
China, Asia, South Korea, North Korea, North America, and United States of America

453. Selling the Future in DC. Marketing Stability for International Security

Author:
Ariel Colonomos
Publication Date:
02-2012
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Centre d'Etudes et de Recherches Internationales (CERI)
Abstract:
What kind of future worlds do experts of international security envision? This paper studies the role of experts in DC's think tanks, a relatively small world socially and culturally highly homogeneous. It underlines the characteristics of this epistemic community that influence the way its analysts make claims about the future for security. The DC's marketplace of the future lacks diversity. The paradigms analysts use when they study international politics are very similar. Moreover, the range of issues they focus on is also relatively narrow. The paper highlights three main features of the relation between those who make claims about the future of security and those to whom these claims are addressed (mainly policymakers). First, it shows that, for epistemic but also for political reasons, the future imagined in think tanks is relatively stable and linear. This future also contributes to the continuity of political decisions. Second, the paper shows that think tanks are also "victims of groupthink", especially when they make claims about the future. Third, it underlines a paradox: scenarios and predictions create surprises. Claims about the future have a strong tunneling effect. They reinforce preexisting beliefs, create focal points, and operate as blinders when, inevitably, the future breaks away from its linear path.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Terrorism, War, International Security, and State
Political Geography:
North America, United States of America, Washington, and D.C.

454. Security Policy in the European Union and the United States through the issue of their Defence Expenditures

Author:
Theodore Metaxas and Emmanouil Marios L. Economou
Publication Date:
01-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Rest: Journal of Politics and Development
Institution:
Centre for Strategic Research and Analysis (CESRAN)
Abstract:
This article aims to clarify how the level of defence expenditures affected security poli- cy in the post-World War II Europe and the United States till the present day. We first analyze theoretically the issue of a nation’s power through its defence outlays. We then proceed to the examination of how security policy was formulated during Cold War and afterwards for both Europe and the United States through their defence ex- penditures. By comparing European to United States defence budgets ceilings we found that the European military capabilities are undermined by the low level of the defence budget which is provided by the European Union member states as a whole, as well as by the lack of homogeneity in military means. By contrast, we noticed that the historically large US defence expenditures were one of the major reasons for the US global hegemony during Cold war and afterwards. We also examine the implica- tions that defence expenditures have on military industry, macroeconomic perfor- mance and geopolitics and the correlation that arises among them.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Regional Cooperation, European Union, and Regionalism
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

455. Scaling Japan’s Defense Needs: Airpower in Asia and the FX Program

Author:
Dan Blumenthal
Publication Date:
11-2011
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Project 2049 Institute
Abstract:
The widespread modernization of Asian air forces is changing the strategic landscape in the Asia-Pacific. The United States, South Korea, Taiwan, Australia, Singapore, and India are all engaged in upgrading their military’s fighter fleets as security competition in the region is on the rise. Among Asia’s burgeoning air force modernization programs, the most important to U.S. security (apart from America’s own) is that of the Japan Air Self-Defense Force (JASDF) — Tokyo is the United States’ closest Asian ally and U.S.-Japan alliance is the lynchpin of America’s alliance structure in the region.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Armed Forces, Modernization, and Air Force
Political Geography:
Japan, India, Taiwan, Asia, South Korea, Australia, Singapore, and United States of America

456. China’s Electronic Intelligence (ELINT) Satellite Developments: Implications for U.S. Air and Naval Operations

Author:
Ian Easton and Mark Stokes
Publication Date:
02-2011
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Project 2049 Institute
Abstract:
A review of authoritative Chinese writings indicate that the People’s Republic of China is researching, developing, testing, and deploying a number of electronic intelligence (ELINT) satellites for the tracking and targeting of mobile air defense systems and ships at sea. This program has potentially serious and immediate implications U.S. and allied air and naval operations in the Asia-Pacific region.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Intelligence, Armed Forces, and Satellite
Political Geography:
China, Asia, Asia-Pacific, and United States of America

457. A Complex Strategy to Overcome the Yeonpyeong Incident

Author:
Young-Sun Ha
Publication Date:
12-2010
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
East Asia Institute (EAI)
Abstract:
Since North Korea’s deadly artillery barrage on Yeonpyeong Island, South Korea has been stepping up efforts in its defense posture and international cooperation. In preparing against any further provocation from the North, Seoul has been reinforcing forces on the island, strengthening defense and deterrence capabilities, and drastically increasing its defense budget. Somewhat belatedly, it has also been taking up actions to reexamine the strategies of the ROK-U.S. military alliance, demanding cooperation from China and Russia while maintaining the traditional trilateral cooperation with the United States and Japan. Of course, analyzing the causes of the weak response to the shelling and preparing to prevent further provocations are undoubtedly important. However, reading the bigger picture and formulating key strategies for the future is a far more critical task. The Kim Jong-il/Kim Jong-un leadership in November 2010 conducted two consecutive moves—revealing its uranium enrichment facilities and launching an artillery strike on Yeonpyeong Island. Understanding the situation of the whole East Asian region, while at the same time anticipating Pyongyang’s strategies and taking preemptive actions will be the main challenges ahead for Seoul. Firstly, it is important to understand the range of North Korea’s strategic options from aggressive diplomacy to peaceful diplomacy. The Korean Peninsula went through the Korean War in 1950 and following of the ceasefire, both Koreas were stuck between ‘hot war’ and ‘cold war.’ Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the world has passed the stage of ‘cold peace’ and moved towards a ‘hot peace.’ In spite of this global shift, North Korea has been frequently using combinations of ‘cold war,’ ‘hot war,’ ‘cold peace,’ and ‘hot peace’ on the international strategic chessboard. For example, during the Cold War period North Korea provoked the South in a number of cases: Rangoon bombing (1983), bombing of Korean Air Flight 858 (1987), attempted Blue House raid (1968), North Korean infiltration in the Uljin and Samcheok areas (1968). Even in the post-Cold War period, nuclear tests, naval battles in the Yellow Sea, the sinking of Cheonan naval ship and the shelling on Yeonpyeong Island ensued. At the same time, Pyongyang has been aggressively demanding for a peace agreement to this day. The possibility for limited warfare on the Korean Peninsula came dangerously close with the recent Yeonpyeong shelling, more so than the last North Korean provocation, the sinking of the Cheonan. As the pendulum of war and peace on the Korean Peninsula swung from the ‘cold war’ to ‘hot war,’ greater chaos arise. It is expected that the Kim Jong-il/Kim Jong-un regime will try to maximize the use of this pendulum of peace and war in order to strengthen Kim Jong-un’s weak power base. In spite of the dangers, merely worrying about the possibility of war is not going to help. Rather, we have to understand precisely why the North has raised the bar of aggression from acts of terrorism to that of a direct artillery attack on South Korean territory. It is likely that the North would pursue a ‘cold peace’ offensive to utilize the amplitude of the pendulum. A complex picture emerges when looking back on the recent comments made by top officials from North Korea, the United States, and China. Seoul and Washington have called for Pyongyang to engage in measures for active denuclearization and reengagement in inter-Korean relations as preconditions for resuming the Six-Party Talks. North Korea on the other hand has taken precisely the opposite measures. To read what the North Korean regime has in mind we have to think of the situation not as a motionless snapshot but as a moving footage. Furthermore, South Korea must do more than just respond to North Korea’s actions. Instead it should focus on making strategically preemptive moves. For this, it is necessary to examine why the North Korean regime expanded the pendulum’s amplitude and find measures to make the leadership pursue a survival strategy that does not include huddling around nuclear weapons.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Alliance, and Conflict
Political Geography:
China, Asia, South Korea, North Korea, North America, and United States of America

458. The Taiwan Quadrennial Defense Review: Implications for U.S. – Taiwan Relations

Author:
Julia Famularo
Publication Date:
06-2009
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Project 2049 Institute
Abstract:
Although the recent cross-Strait political climate has improved, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has steadfastly refused to renounce the use of force against Taiwan while shifting the cross-Strait military balance in its favor. Faced with such challenges, the Taiwan Quadrennial Defense Review is meant to increase military transparency while convincing Taiwanese legislators, the Chinese PLA, and U.S. policy makers and analysts alike that the Ministry of National Defense is firmly dedicated to creating new strategies and engaging in reforms that will prepare the military for future challenges.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Bilateral Relations, and Military Affairs
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, Asia, and United States of America

459. Does the “Surge” Explain Iraq’s Improved Security?

Author:
Jon R. Lindsay
Publication Date:
09-2008
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
Sen. John McCain has long advocated “sustained and substantial” troop increases,1 attacking Sen. Barack Obama’s position on drawing down forces. Obama for his part recently stated that the surge has “succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated” and “beyond our wildest dreams.”2 Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, commander of Multi- National Corps Iraq during the surge, told a Heritage Foundation audience in March 2008, “I think it’s safe to say that the surge of Coalition forces—and how we employed those forces—have broken the cycle of sectarian violence in Iraq.”3 While the surge was quite controversial in its inception,4 it now seems that “success has a thou- sand fathers.” Indeed, since the deployment starting in January 2007 of an additional 30,000 troops (five addi- tional Army brigades primarily in and around Baghdad and 4,000 Marines in Anbar Province, rising to a high-water mark of 171,000 U.S. troops in Iraq by October 2007), the drop in vio- lence has been remarkable. From December 2006 to August 2008, monthly insurgent-initiated attacks have dropped from over 5,600 to 800, U.S. troop fatalities from 112 to 23, and Iraqi civilian fatalities from 3,500 to 500. Even though we’re hardly out of the woods, the troop surge is clearly correlated with a major decrease in violence.5 Correlation, of course, is not causation. Lt. Gen. Odierno is right to highlight the employment of surge forces in addition to the increase in their numbers. The renewed focus on providing security to the Iraqi population—by pushing troops out of sprawling Forward Operating Bases and proactively controlling movement within major cities—has truly been a change for the bet- ter. Nevertheless, there are factors above and beyond additional troops and better counter-insur- gency tactics that may account for the drop in violence. These include the Sunni Awakening movements that emerged in Anbar province prior to the surge, the tragic efficacy of sectarian killing in 2006, the Shia Mahdi Army cease-fire announced and renewed by Moqtada al-Sadr, and operations by other U.S. organizations not associated with the surge.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:
Iraq, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

460. Neither Pigs nor Parrots: A Military Culture that Can Win the Peace

Author:
Ryan Close
Publication Date:
05-2007
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Public and International Affairs (JPIA)
Institution:
School of Public and International Affairs (SPIA), Princeton University
Abstract:
As ongoing operations in Iraq illustrate, the nature of warfare is changing: peacekeeping and warfighting are converging as the space between military and humanitarian activity erodes. Because of the vastly different challenges of fighting wars and handling post-conflict challenges, militaries traditionally train soldiers to be either warriors or peacekeepers. This new type of conflict, however, requires soldiers who are both of these simultaneously. Unfortunately, current organizational culture – focused almost entirely on combat – may prevent the ideological shift within the military that is necessary for molding a new soldier identity. This article addresses this challenge and proposes policy measures that would help transform military culture and better match combat prowess with broad intellectual, political, and social vision. To this end, this article considers how the security environment is evolving, examines how such an environment will severely stress the U.S. military, and offers recommendations for cultural change that concern force structure, operational planning, and the selection, training, and promotion of soldiers.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Culture, and Military
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America