Search

Begin New Search Topic Military Strategy Political Geography United States of America

281. The Machine Beneath: Implications of Artificial Intelligence in Strategic Decisionmaking

Author:
Matthew Price, Stephen Walker, and Will Wiley
Publication Date:
11-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
PRISM
Institution:
Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
Abstract:
Despite the risks posed by the adaptation of AI to military affairs, the United States must seek to be at the forefront of this technology. It is unthinkable that America will cede this new territory to our competitors, such as China and Russia, who are aggressively pursuing it. Even if the United States decided to opt out of this arms race, it would have little effect, as the technologies described in this paper are inherently dual use, and the private sector around the globe will pursue them with abandon. Ethicists, weapon engineers, and military leaders are already hard at work on the challenges associated with designing and deploying battlefield lethal autonomous weapons systems. With this article, the authors hope to begin a new conversation, highlighting and differentiating the risks posed by employing strategic AI in military decisionmaking, particularly as the pace of warfare accelerates.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Military Strategy, Military Affairs, Innovation, and Artificial Intelligence
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

282. Sending in the Cavalry: The Growing Militarization of Counterterrorism in Southeast Asia

Author:
See Seng Tan
Publication Date:
11-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
PRISM
Institution:
Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
Abstract:
Philippines, which lasted from May to October 2017, constitutes a watershed moment in the evolution of the terrorist threat in Southeast Asia. Pro–Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) militants threatened to turn Marawi into “the Mosul of Southeast Asia,” with their astounding ability to operate large groups capable of controlling territory and exposing the inadequacy of the region’s security services. Although member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) had pondered the question of possible participation by their armed forces in counterterrorism well before the Battle, it is undeniable that Marawi has become the catalyst behind the regional drive to militarize counterterrorism efforts in Southeast Asia. Cooperative frameworks furnished by ASEAN have since taken on added significance, especially the defense-oriented arrangements that bring together the defense establishments and armed forces of the ASEAN countries as well as those of external powers including China, India, Japan, and the United States. The growing militarization of counterterrorism efforts will neither be easy nor straightforward, given longstanding regional sensitivities and the potentially diversive ramifications that excessive securitization could have for democratic life within ASEAN countries.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Terrorism, Military Strategy, Counter-terrorism, and Regionalism
Political Geography:
Japan, China, Asia, Philippines, North America, United States of America, and ASEAN

283. Culture, Security, and Strategy: Analysis Framework for Understanding Military Development in the Context of 9/11

Author:
Carlos Barrera
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on International Security Studies (RESI)
Institution:
International Security Studies Group (GESI) at the University of Granada
Abstract:
In recent times, in the field of international relations, there has emerged an academic current that has revived the thinking of French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu to reformulate various fundamental concepts, from the study of everyday practices, symbolic structures, and conflict arenas in which various actors define the course of world politics. This article exposes a brief revision to the theoretical and methodological framework under which an academic study is being carried out on the contemporary military development, understood and explained from the national security culture and military strategic culture.
Topic:
International Relations, National Security, Military Strategy, Sociology, and 9/11
Political Geography:
Europe, Global Focus, and United States of America

284. Use of Force: The Only Way to Stop Iran

Author:
Efraim Inbar
Publication Date:
05-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Western hopes that Iran will moderate and “engage” with the international community following the faulty 2015 nuclear agreement (JCPOA) have been gradually replaced with apprehension. More voices in the international community are joining Israel in expressing growing concern about Iran’s policies. While Iran seems to be abide by the JCPOA, it resists expanding the scope of inspections, continues its nuclear research and development (for example upgrading centrifuges) and continues to make progress on its long-range missile program. Recently it conducted a test of a missile designed to carry nuclear warheads. Moreover, Iran’s involvement in the region attests to its hegemonic plans, defying the notion, propagated by its propagandists, that it is a status quo power acting defensively. Rather, Iran is following its Persian imperial instincts that are reinforced by Muslim jihadist impulses. It already controls four Arab capitals: Baghdad, Beirut, Damascus and Sanaa; its Shi’ite militias and proxies are fighting in Iraq, Syria and Yemen and engaging in ethnic cleansing; and it is on the verge of solidifying the Shi’ite corridor from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean. Israel tries to capitalize on the new widespread global apprehension about Iran and a new American president who is not committed to the JCPOA to bring about the cancellation of the 2015 nuclear accord or its renegotiation, and the reinstating of the sanctions regime. Yet, these goals are difficult to attain and not useful in preventing a nuclear Iran.
Topic:
Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Denuclearization, and JCPOA
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America

285. Between Pyongyang and Tehran: The Need for Urgent Action against Iran

Author:
Eran Lerman
Publication Date:
10-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
The Iranian situation is both more urgent and more malleable than the almost hopeless situation with North Korea.
Topic:
Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, and Conflict
Political Geography:
China, Iran, Middle East, Israel, Asia, North Korea, North America, and United States of America

286. Confronting the Con Artists of Iran

Author:
David M. Weinberg
Publication Date:
11-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
No duplicitous decrees by supreme or smiling ayatollahs should deflect our attention from Tehran’s dangerous moves.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Hegemony, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America

287. Trump Identifies the Enemy

Author:
David M. Weinberg
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Trump’s new US national security document is a robust statement of American strategic realism; a necessary corrective to Obama-era enfeeblement and self-flagellation. There are enemies out there and the US has to lead in confronting them.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, and Leadership
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

288. Hearts, Minds, and Hydras: Fighting Terrorism in Afghanistan, Pakistan, America, and Beyond — Dilemmas and Lessons, by William Nester

Author:
Basem Aly and William Nester
Publication Date:
07-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Fletcher Security Review
Institution:
The Fletcher School, Tufts University
Abstract:
Decision makers and academics have debated for decades the most effective strategies to defeat militant groups. The absence of a clear center of gravity for conventional militaries to target creates hardships in achieving strategic objectives against non-state actors. In a conventional war, the force with a higher capability to destroy these centers of gravity — such as weapons depots and troop deployment locations — will likely win. Yet, when conventional militaries encounter non-state groups, whose centers of gravity may be well hidden or highly dispersed, the results are quite different. The Israeli wars against Hezbollah and the U.S. war in Vietnam exemplify the difficulties related to this traditional dilemma. One counterinsurgency program, suggested by classical theorists such as David Galula, says that success requires focusing on winning the support of local populations by “capturing hearts and minds.” The logic is obvious: locals living in warzones know where militants are hiding their weapons, money, and personnel. Thus, militaries need local support. In his book, Hearts, Minds, and Hydras: Fighting Terrorism in Afghanistan, Pakistan, America, and Beyond — Dilemmas and Lessons, William Nester argues that capturing hearts and minds is not enough. Rather, Nester develops two primary arguments to show that militaries need a multidimensional strategy in order to succeed.
Topic:
Military Strategy, Counterinsurgency, Non State Actors, and Book Review
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, North America, and United States of America

289. Issues of Access: A Conversation with Stacie L. Pettyjohn & Jennifer Kavanagh

Author:
Stacie L. Pettyjohn, Jennifer Kavanagh, and Robert Pulwer
Publication Date:
07-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Fletcher Security Review
Institution:
The Fletcher School, Tufts University
Abstract:
Stacie L. Pettyjohn is a senior political scientist at the RAND Corporation and co-director of the Center for Gaming. She is also an adjunct professor and Johns Hopkins University’s School for Advanced International Studies (SAIS). Her primary research areas include wargaming, military posture, Internet freedom, and American foreign policy in the Middle East. She is the author of the RAND monograph U.S. Global Defense Posture, 1783-2011 and the coauthor of several other reports, including Access Granted: Political Challenges to the U.S. Overseas Military Presence, 1945-2011, The Posture Triangle: A New Framework for U.S. Air Force Global Presence, Overseas Basing of U.S. Military Forces: An Assessment of the Relative Costs and Strategic Benefits, and Deradicalizing Islamist Extremists. Her work has also been published in academic journals such as Security Studies and International Negotiation, and her commentary has appeared in Foreign Affairs, War on the Rocks, Defense News, The National Interest, Asia Times, and The Daily Star. Previously, she was a research fellow at the Brookings Institution, a Peace Scholar at the United States Institute of Peace, and a TAPIR fellow at the RAND Corporation. She has a Ph.D. and M.A. in foreign affairs from the University of Virginia and a B.A. in history and political science from the Ohio State University. Jennifer Kavanagh is a political scientist at the RAND Corporation. Her research focuses on defense strategy and planning; trends in international conflict and military interventions; domestic and international terrorism; military personnel policy; and U.S. public opinion. She has also recently studied the resurgence of populism in the United States and its implications for U.S. foreign and domestic policy. Jennifer is also a faculty member at the Pardee RAND Graduate School and has taught research methods courses as an adjunct professor at Georgetown and American University. While completing her Ph.D., she was a Department of Homeland Security Fellow and completed a research internship at Lawrence Livermore National Lab. She was a research assistant at RAND from 2003-2006. Dr. Kavanagh graduated from Harvard University with a BA in Government and a minor in the Russian language. She completed her Ph.D. in Political Science and Public Policy at University of Michigan. Her dissertation, "The Dynamics of Protracted Terror Campaigns: Domestic Politics, Terrorist Violence, Counterterror Responses" was named the best dissertation in the Public Policy subfield in 2010 by the American Political Science Association.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, and Interview
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

290. 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.