Proliferation Weapons of Mass Destruction and International Insecurity
In present discussions on international security the issue of "Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)" plays an important role. The problem itself is not a new one. However, the problem is of increasing importance due to various traditional and current risks. To clearly define and control these risks is getting more complicated since the clear cut international structures of the "Cold War" era no longer exist. NATO addressed the problem in the "Alliance New Strategic Concept" in 1991 as a challenge and a risk to international security without defining the particular competence of NATO in this field. However, the Alliance obliged itself to continue and strengthen cooperative efforts to prevent or reverse proliferation. For this purpose in 1994 NATO established working groups to examine the implications of proliferation for the defense planning and capabilities of NATO and its members and to consider what measures can be taken in the defense field. The working groups are tasked to accomplish their mission by summer of 1996.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
CSWMD Case Study Series 5
Since its inception in 1994, the Center for the Study of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD Center) has been at the forefront of research on the implications of weapons of mass destruction for U.S. security. Originally focusing on threats to the military, the WMD Center now also applies its expertise and body of research to the challenges of homeland security. The center's mandate includes research, education, and outreach. Research focuses on understanding the security challenges posed by WMD and on fashioning effective responses thereto.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
China in Africa
The Naval War College Review was established in 1948 and is a forum for discussion of public policy matters of interest to the maritime services. The forthright and candid views of the authors are presented for the professional education of the readers. Articles published are related to the academic and professional activities of the Naval War College. They are drawn from a wide variety of sources in order to inform, stimulate, and challenge readers, and to serve as a catalyst for new ideas. Articles are selected primarily on the basis of their intellectual and literary merits, timeliness, and usefulness and interest to a wide readership. The thoughts and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the U.S. Navy Department or the Naval War College.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Korea and U.S. Security Strategy
The purpose of this paper is to examine the US security strategy in Northeast Asia in the post-Korean Armistice period. Although the United States has maintained a steadfast alliance with the Republic of Korea since the signing of the Korean Armistice Agreement in 1953, the decision by the United States to actively engage North Korea in direct dialogue has created the potential for increasing divergence of interest within the alliance. The United States is concerned with the nuclear proliferation issue while the Republic of Korea is concerned with being recognized as a principal party to any peace settlement.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
How Do U.S./Georgia Relations Affect U.S./Russia Relations? Can the U.S. Have Both?
U.S./Georgia/Russia Relations The United States, since its inception, has collaborated with other countries with similar regional and/or global goals. Although, all may not quite see eye-to-eye on all topics, they ultimately are working towards a common interest. Tension may arises as the U.S. works with multiple countries and those countries themselves may not get along with each other, while these countries may attempt to use their growing relationship with the United States to sway them against another country and the intended goals. Beginning with the fall of the Soviet Union, the United States has worked to build relationships with former Soviet Republics. Originally tasked to bring democracy to that part of the world, today the United States continues its relationship building efforts in order to not only spread democracy, but to also improve security in the region. So, the question is, how U.S./Georgian relations affect U.S./Russian relations, and if the United States can successfully have relations with both countries. Each country has a bilateral relationship, which affects their bilateral relationship with the other country. The key is to work with both in order to accomplish your intended goals. For the United States, their intended goals are to spread democracy and diminish terrorism. In order for the United States to achieve those goals in the Middle East, they have realized they must ensure a clear passage way. The passage is possibly via Georgia. Georgia is a fairly new independent country, although they have a long history of struggle to attain that independence. Their most recent struggle has been with Russia, who was once their ruler and oppressor, as well as provider of essential oil and gas. Since their independence, Georgia has looked for ways to lessen their need for resources from Russia.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Respecting the Threat
This paper examines how Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez threatens U.S. interests in Venezuela and the Latin American region. It proposes the U.S. policy toward Venezuela must be changed in order to contain Chavez's current influence and power as well as deter Chavez's ability to threaten U.S. interests in three key areas: democracy, economics and regional security/stability. With regard to the threat to democracy, the paper addresses Chavez's efforts to dismantle checks and balances on the executive while strengthening executive power in the country. In looking at the economic threat, the paper examines Chavez's actions that could affect U.S. access to oil as well as his efforts to attack U.S. trade policies. In the final threat area, the paper examines how Chavez threatens regional stability/security due to his interventionist tactics, lackluster narcoterrorism efforts, military procurement and strategic alliances. The paper also addresses how other regional actors perceive the threat, how the balance of power and influence in the region drives the urgency of the threat and what are the most likely threat courses of action. Finally the paper proposes three policy recommendations for the U.S. to implement in order to more effectively address the Chavez threat. These include taking a pragmatic approach toward specific bilateral relations with Venezuela, working multilaterally with other regional actors and more effectively addressing social and economic inequalities in the region.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Resurgent Russia and America's Vital Interests
This research paper addresses the relevance of Russia's resurgence as an economic, political and military actor on the world scene focusing on the implications for current US policy and objectives. It considers the changing nature of the threat to Europe and questions, not only the appropriate role for NATO in response to that threat, but the course of action the US should pursue with regard to NATO and in light of US national security interests in Europe. The paper considers the following: 1). Russia's post-Cold War decline as well as its impressive recovery over the past decade. Focusing on Russia's growing economic and regional clout, rising nationalism, increasing great power rhetoric and return to autocratic policies, the paper looks at the decline in US " Russian relations during the second term of Russian president Vladimir Putin and questions the appropriate balance the US should strike between conciliation and defending its own strategic objectives, 2). the effects of numerous issues on US " Russian relations to include: the changing role of NATO and its eastward expansion, disagreement on ethnic break-away regions to include Kosovo in Serbia and South Ossetia in Georgia, Iranian nuclear ambitions, and the US Anti-Ballistic Missile proposal for Eastern Europe, 3). a recommendation for strategic-level policy to which the US should adhere concerning its role with NATO and its need for balance on issues within Russia's geo-political sphere of influence.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
A National Security Strategy for Sweden
National security strategies should entail all instruments of power and not just the military. Furthermore, the strategy needs to identify both threats and opportunities. A national security strategy must consider the long-term if the state concerned shall stand any chance to take appropriate action and try to shape the environment in order to avoid or counter threats, mitigate undesired effects, and benefit from arising opportunities. Strategy development requires predictions of the future. A method well suited to strategy development is trend analysis. Trends are broad enough to capture all overarching patterns of change and do not include the degree of detail and speculation that scenario analysis can contain. Each trend consists of drivers and consequences. The role of strategy is to shape undesired drivers, support desired drivers, mitigate undesired consequences, and take advantage of desired consequences, in accordance with core national interests and the strategic situation of a particular country.The paper begins by identifying four foundational trends: climate change, globalization, energy transformation, and global demographic change. It goes on to describe Swedish core national values and interests, and evaluates the Swedish strategic position in the world. Finally, it develops a suggestion for a Swedish national security strategy focusing on global, regional, and local actions. The paper illustrates a method for small states to develop a national security strategy.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
China's Military Modernization
As China's power rises and its national interests expand, China will seek to maintain its own "freedom of action" in controlling threats to Chinese sovereignty and economic lines of communication. China's long-term military aims will support its vision as a regional power. With a ring of influence in the Western Pacific, China's military will have sufficient power to prevent outside efforts to intervene in China's affairs. Taiwan will remain the most likely near-term source of China-U.S. conflict, but the probability of conflict over Taiwan will diminish by 2030 as peaceful reconciliation progresses. As China's interests expand globally, protecting lines of commerce and access to natural resources may also prompt China to flex its newly developed military powers. If current economic trends continue, Chinese national power may rival or even exceed that of the United States by 2030. The lack of Chinese transparency makes it difficult to precisely assess their current strength and ascertain future intentions. However, it is plausible that the current economic trends will enable military growth to continue at a remarkable pace, and that at least regionally, China will be a dangerous military peer to the United States in 2030. As a military peer, China will create different challenges for the United States than any previous potential adversary. China's military is a complex combination of old and new-from Sun Tzu to cyberspace-but the spoils of economic success have combined with a unique military culture to produce, at least by 2030, a capable, regional military peer to the United States with particular emphasis on anti-access capabilities and asymmetric effects. This paper begins with a look at China's past and how the military evolved to what it is today. It then examines current Chinese military organization and discusses China's distinctive military strategy and culture. It then provides and overview of current Chinese military capabilities. Lastly, itanalyzes ChiThis work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
When Reality Bites
The purpose of this research paper is to show that the five Arabian Gulf States of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.), all have growing threats to their stability that may result in sudden end to our use of their military bases. For long-term stability, the ruling pro-U.S. monarchies must quickly, and decisively, Findings of this paper discuss increasing instability caused by political problems, poor economic planning, and high citizen expectations. Gulf rulers are trying to maintain popular support while balancing traditional strategies of rule with more citizen representation. Economic diversification into non-oil sectors, regardless of large oil and gas reserves, is essential for Gulf States to employ growing populations and prepare for future economic downturns. A mix of high population growth and large foreign workforces are sapping state resources, a process reversible only by lowering citizen's expectations of future state benefits and automatic public sector employment. Although many of these findings are undetectable in the modern and confident faces Gulf States project to the world today, ignoring them for the sake of short-term benefits will lead to instability and a distancing from the U.S. if weaker rulers in the future acquiesce to opposition pressures for change. Recommendations are for the Department of Defense (DoD) to understand that the invitations to use Gulf State military bases are only as good as the strength of the host nation's governments that authorized them. The DoD must be ready for quick departures from one or more nations if the governments can no longer allow us use of their facilities. Being supportive to the governments, maintaining low profiles, and being cognizant of the future, we can plan accordingly and be ready for future challenges.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
U.S. Forward Deployment Policy
Today, Americans stationed overseas support a defense structure in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Japan, and South Korea built upon past threats. This study hopefully begins a re-evaluation of this forward deployment policy by looking at the history and origins of American participation in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). It then compares the original need for forward deployment with today's associated threats, problems and costs. This study finds that while the United States remains a global power with global interests, forward deployed troops may no longer provide a cost effective means for guarding these worldwide interests. The world threat today may not require a large permanent American presence given the advent of strategic satellite warning, stealth technology, American power projection capabilities, and allied capabilities to defend themselves.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Leveraging U.S. Intelligence to Defeat Mexican Drug Trafficking Organization
According to the Mexican daily newspaper Reforma, in 2009 there were 6,567 drug-related homicides in Mexico, with over 2,100 of these killings occurring in the Mexican border town of Ciudad Ju?ƒ?癒rez. Though in many ways this extreme violence has become the face of the drug war in Mexico, it is arguably what is occurring below the surface that is of greater concern to the governments of Mexico and the United States.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Deterring Iran's Nuclear Program
By leveraging their own source of influence and rethinking their charter, Gulf Co-operation Council (GCC) members must assert their regional influence to control the Iranian nuclear program. The leaders of the GCC must use their economic strengths and cultural knowledge to provide a solution that will enable peace and security in the region. Collective action co-operation bringing together the members of the GCC, Iran, and the US would provide the international resources necessary for the common interest in peace and economic investment. A co-operative nuclear power program formed around this collective action relationship would ensure that each member has a stake in ensuring the stability and growth of the region.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Foreign Policy and a State's Hierarchy of Needs
The last 60 years saw a great change in United States involvement in the world. From an isolationist position before World War II, the United States moved to world leadership as underwriter of European security and balancer of Soviet expansionism. The reason this country bore the brunt of that huge undertaking was clear. It was in our "Vital National Interests." First, fascist aggression sought world domination, and war resulted. Then, the security of the United States was clearly tied to blocking the spread of communism through a national policy of containment. In November 1989, the Berlin Wall came tumbling down and with it Churchill's famous Iron Curtain. Just two years later, in December of 1991, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics died. The rapid fall of the Soviet Communist regime did two drastic things to international politics. First, it ended the communist threat to the US and free world. Second, the fall ended the Cold War and with it, bipolarity. Now turbulence worldwide generates as ethnic and nationalistic sentiments surface and cause civil and regional conflicts. Previously, these sentiments were buried under the mantel of communism. These conflicts present new challenges for the world and those concerned with maintenance of its order. The United States has not determined how to define these problems and the interests of this country, nor what the proper response to these events should be. The old bipolar paradigm is inadequate and a new one must be developed. This paper proposes a new model for United States involvement around the world.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
The Economic and Military Development of China and Its Implications on U.S. National Security
US, China, and Taiwan: the ties that bind The relationship of Republic of China (ROC), the People's Republic of China (PRC), and the United States exerts great influence around the globe. The growing political and military influence of China has grave implications for ROC and US security. Since China's acceptance to the UN in 1971 and the leaving of the UN body, ROC has gradually lost its diplomatic stands around the world. With China's growing influence around the globe, there are only 23 countries around the world that have formal diplomatic relationships with the ROC. In this area, a "status-quo" status between China and ROC is unlikely. Both countries are trying to extend their influences and connections, and obviously, China is winning on the world stage. China has heavily invested in Africa, and some of the countries China has invested in have severed their diplomatic ties with the ROC. The economic ties between ROC, People's Republic of China, and the Unites States are stabilizing factors that can prevent conflict from occurring. As stated by Raymond F. DeVoe, Jr, "Economics is war pursued by other means." If the strong economic ties among the three countries remain, the chances of conflicts lessen.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Strategic Mobility, the Force Projection Army, and the Ottawa Landmine Treaty
Current and emerging United States Army doctrine places great emphasis on the concepts of strategic responsiveness and force projection to meet the National Security Strategy requirements. The use or potential use, of landmines significantly increases the lethality of the Army force during deterrence and combat operations, and enhances survivability. In essence, with the use of landmines, the U.S. Army achieves an economy of force that in effect increases the U.S. Army's agility, versatility and ability to deploy. Smaller more deployable Army forces such as the medium brigade and light units can generate more combat power by using the effects provided by landmines integrated with other combat systems. However, in order to use landmines worldwide, the U.S. must move, store, or reposition landmines in, through, or to the theater and area of operations prior to, concurrently, or in conjunction with the deploying Army force. Movement of forces, material, and equipment across international borders and into sovereign nations requires the permission of those nations, or a conscious decision to violate international laws and conventions regarding sovereignty. The Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-personnel Mines and their Destruction - also known as the Ottawa Landmine Treaty - has the potential to place severe limits on the United States ability to deploy forces. The Ottawa Landmine Treaty (OLT) prohibits signatory countries from using, developing, producing, acquiring, stockpiling, or transferring anti-personnel landmines. As more countries sign and ratify the OLT, and create internal laws that enforce it, the number of countries that will allow a force that trains, plans, and intends to employ anti-personnel landmines as a matter of course to enter, pass through or over its sovereign territory has the potential to significantly decrease. The location, national strategy, and strategic alliances of non-signatory countriThis work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
The Wings of the Dragon
This analysis assesses the state of capability within the PLA Air Force, both at present and also based on a projection for 2020, in order to determine the range of options for China's leadership to rapidly project conventional force in terms of coercive, assertive or constructive actions. It is clear from the analysis that the PLAAF retains only a limited capability at present, and somewhat predictably, will possess a better capability in 2020. However, neither case presents a challenge for US and allied supremacy in the air. As far as conventional force projection capabilities in terms of airpower are concerned, any "near-peer" threat which China might represent lies well into the future, after a certain set of decisions which would need to be made by Chinese leaders with respect to developing additional capabilities beyond those currently planned. In response, the United States should focus less on countering and more on engaging China to support its growth into a responsible regional military power--while carefully watching for any sign that China is pursuing conventional airpower capabilities to act with force beyond China's near periphery.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
From Islands to Networks
From Islands to Networks A Blueprint for a Comprehensive US Security Strategy in the Asia-Pacific Region Historic precedent and power transition theory predict the likelihood of armed conflict between a rising China as it overtakes the world's leading superpower, the United States. Taiwan highlights the dilemma by exposing conflicting US and Chinese interests and the changing nature of China's power. This long-term dilemma complicates the emerging alignment of Asia-Pacific interests. A comprehensive US Asia-Pacific strategy of Assured Partnership would safely manage this dilemma by incorporating a multi-tiered, inclusive, institutional approach. The strategy will decrease the likelihood of a US-China military confrontation for several reasons. First, existing bilateral alliances give the strategy its underpinnings, providing an anchor of assurance to allies and a deterrent to the rise of Chinese hegemony. Second, the strategy transforms the ASEAN Regional Forum into a cooperative security institution, the Organization of Asia-Pacific Cooperation. It will provide continuous dialogue, a region-wide security forum, and an enhanced ability to implement preventive diplomacy, consequence management, and peace support operations. Complimenting it, the Asia-Pacific Council consists of current or developing regional powers including the U.S., China, Japan, Australia, India, and Russia. The council preserves regional power strategic agility while providing for continuous regional direction, leadership, and power balance. Third, the strategy builds military transparency, trust and predictability through an institutionalized military cooperative regime, the Partnership for Security and Peace, similar to Europe's Partnership for Peace program.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
The Elephant in the Room
This paper will assess key challenges associated with implementing the goals of President Obama's 2010 NSS with respect to America's relationship with India. It will argue that understanding and respecting the legacy of colonialism, and the Nehruvian fundamentals of India's foreign policy are paramount to the ultimate success of US and Indian bilateral and multilateral national security arrangements. Given its colonial history, and how that history is reflected in its approach to foreign policy, India will likely be resistant to entering alliances in which it perceives itself as an American satellite or as being subjugated to a great power. Moreover, the Nehruvian principle of non-aggression may make India a reluctant ally in US counter-terrorism operations and geopolitics. In order to build a successful cooperative relationship with India, the US will have to consider how to engage with India not only on the basis of what the US and India share in common, but also on the basis of how they differ. To that end, this paper examines three different issue areas through the lens of India's unique characteristics: India's major geopolitical relationships in the region, its perspective on counterterrorism, and its nuclear strategy.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Economic Sanctions
Economic sanctions are a form of non-violent warfare that has been used more frequently over the past fifty years to change the behavior or policies of a target state. This research paper will determine if economic sanctions can successfully coerce a target state to comply with the sender's military or political position without violating the principles of just war doctrine. Research and analysis of previous case studies, along with the ethical and moral implications of those sanctions with or without jus in bello applications, will help determine if economic sanctions can succeed without just war doctrine violations. Most existing literature states that when there is significant cooperation amongst senders, and the target state is economically and politically weak, sanctions are likely to be successful. However, little information exists on the success factor when sanctions are applied under the principles of just war doctrine, and more specifically, jus in bello (just conduct in war). Since sanctions are imposed under varying degrees of cooperation, the cases are separated into 3 separate categories for analysis: coincidence (significant cooperation), coercion (moderate cooperation), and co-adjustment (little to no cooperation). While it was expected to find sanctions more successful under full cooperation, the research showed that in almost every case, economic sanctions did not meet the defined success criteria and jus in bello was oftentimes violated. Given that the use of sanctions is increasing as the preferred tool of modern warfare, more needs to be done to ensure sanctions are applied without harming vulnerable members of the target society.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
China's Nuclear Forces
Recent books and journal articles published in China provide new insights into nuclear doctrine, operations, training, and the employment of the People's Liberation Army's (PLA) strategic rocket forces. The major insights come from exploiting sections of a doctrinal text published for PLA institutions of higher military education by the Chinese National Defense University, A Guide to the Study of Campaign Theory (Zhanyi Lilun Xuexi Zhinan). In the view of many in the PLA, the military power of the United States, the potential to use that power to coerce or dominate China, and the ability to threaten China's pursuit of its own its interests, presents a latent threat to China. Additionally, China's own threats against democratic Taiwan, and the fact that PLA leaders believe that the United States is likely to come to Taiwan's assistance in the event of Chinese aggression in the Taiwan Strait, magnifies the threat that PLA officers perceive from the United States. This perceived threat drives the PLA to follow U.S. military developments more carefully than those of other nations and to be prepared to counter American forces. The PLA is mixing nuclear and conventional missile forces in its military doctrine. Also, some in China are questioning whether the doctrine of "no-first-use" of nuclear weapons serves China's deterrent needs.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
The International Dimension of Culture and Conflict
This CADRE Paper contains the edited transcript of The International Dimension of Culture and Conflict Symposium held at Air University on 20 April 1990. This symposium was undertaken to honor the work of Adda B. Bozeman, whose eloquence and clarity of thought have illuminated the influence of culture on the causes, nature, and conduct of war. Today we hope to do more than simply express our homage to Professor Bozeman. We intend to show that years after the completion of her pioneering work* her ideas are still not only fresh, they are hilly relevant to the unsettled times in which we are now obliged to live and which demand of us a reshaping of our philosophical, political, and military values.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Arms Control and European Security
The following three papers comprise one of the panels from a conference on U.S.-Russia relations that SSI co-sponsored with the Carnegie Council at Pocantico, NY, from June 1-3, 2011: Carnegie Council's Program on "U.S. Global Engagement: A Two-Year Retrospective." The papers offer three contrasting looks at one of the major issues in today's arms control agenda, namely the future of the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty (CFE). The three papers were written by leading experts in the field from the United States, the United Kingdom, and Russia and provide a revealing glimpse into the very different assessments that are being made by those three governments and the difficult issues involved in attempting to regenerate the process that led to the original treaty in 1990. These three chapters also implicitly contribute to a better understanding of the intractabilities facing the major players in any effort to advance not only arms control but also European stability.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Building Security and Partnership Through African Regional Organizations
In 2002, the African Union (AU) was created with the aim of strengthening integration among member States and the voice of the African continent in global affairs. The African heads of state recognized the Organization of African Unity (OAU) framework was no longer adequate to meet the needs for greater continental policy coordination, stronger economic growth, and growing security challenges. By 2007, the United States responded with the creation of US Africa Command to be the Department of Defense (DOD) focal point for the coordination and execution of civil-military operations. This in itself is not sufficient to engage in the African theater. An additional effort is needed to mitigate current US Theater Security Cooperation limitations, coordination mechanisms and cultural mindset. It is necessary to improve the access to ground truth information in Africa, to overcome roadblocks in implementing a holistic African strategy, and best tackle its diverse and complex challenges. The US military must increase its application of soft power through renewed partnerships within the African Union and its Regional Economic Communities (RECs) to build capacity and create African solutions to African problems. The US military requires increased multilateral diplomacy to maximize common US and African strategic interests, build partnerships within Africa's diverse regions, and integrate itself as a vital partner in Africa's 2050 vision.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Assessing SOUTHCOM's Role in US Foreign Policy in Latin America
The last decade has experienced an increased role of the military in shaping and implementing US foreign policy in Latin America as the focus shifted seamlessly from fighting communism to combating drug trafficking and now prosecuting the war on terror. This paper argues that the armed forces dominate relations between the US and Latin American nations because the Pentagon has the largest official presence in the western hemisphere; hence displacing foreign affairs organizations traditionally chartered to conduct diplomacy, perform development assistance and foster understanding. However, this bleeding of civilian responsibilities to the military weakens the Secretary of State's ability to successfully conduct US relations with foreign countries and undermines the Secretary of Defense's focus on war fighting, as military solutions gain prominence over diplomacy. It cautions American leaders to understand the implications of empowering the armed forces of nascent democracies and the consequences of encouraging law enforcement roles for the military to address public order challenges. The analysis reveals the need for a more balanced foreign policy toward Latin America and the Caribbean, which demands the enhancement of civilian agencies and programs by boosting their funding to bring those levels of engagement on par with and complement humanitarian assistance, training and other foreign aid already provided by the military. Unity of effort between the State Department and the Pentagon will strengthen interagency solutions by combining the diplomatic, information, military and economic instruments of national power. In the long run, an integrated approach that addresses the symptoms as well as the causes of the many problems that afflict our neighbors to the south should not only benefit Latin American and Caribbean nations; but also improve US security and mutual regional interests.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Russian Elite Image of Iran
Since the late Soviet era, the presence of Iran has loomed large in the minds of the Russian elite. Soon after the end of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR)-and even before-increasing numbers of Russian intellectuals became disenchanted with the West, especially the United States, and looked for alternative geopolitical alliances. The Muslim world became one of the possible alternatives. Iran became especially important in the geopolitical construction of Eurasianists or neo-Eurasianists who believed that Russia's alliance with Iran is essential for Russia's rise to power. Yet, by the middle of Russian President Vladimir Putin's tenure, increasing tension with the Muslim community and the rise of Russian nationalism had led to more complicated views of the Russian elite on Iran. At present, the Russian elite does not mind using Iran as a bargaining chip in its dealings with the West, especially the United States, and as a market for Russian weapons and other goods and services. However, the dream of a Russian-Iran axis is apparently abandoned for good.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Denting the Hub, or Strengthening the Spokes?
In March 2007, Japan and Australia signed a Joint Declaration on Security Cooperation (JADSC)--Japan's first such agreement with any country other than the United States since World War II (WWII). The agreement pledges cooperation on counter-terrorism, maritime security, peacekeeping operations, and disaster relief. Prevailing international relations theories fail to adequately explain the logic for such a Japan-Australia security agreement. They also do not explain its acceptance by the United States or negative reactions toward it by China.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
The South China Sea
The economic, political and military influence of China continues to grow at a rapid rate. As China increasingly gazes outward beyond its shores, the United States is playing a complex political game attempting to control China's rise while maintaining US influence in the Pacific. Nowhere is this great power duel being played out more concretely than in the South China Sea (SCS). There are some politicians, pundits, and journalists who indicate to the world that war between China, its neighbors, and possibly the United States over the SCS issue is likely or even inevitable. A deeper understanding of the SCS issue reveals, however, that war on a large scale is highly unlikely and counter to the interests of all the players who have a stake in the issue. Regardless of how the rhetoric ebbs and flows on the SCS debate, it will likely remain a controversial, yet controllable, issue between all interested parties. The SCS will remain a source of tension, yet indicators point towards peace rather than conflict in the SCS.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Russian Nuclear Weapons
This book presents several essays analyzing Russia's extensive nuclear agenda and the issues connected with it. It deals with strategy, doctrine, European, Eurasian, and East Asian security agendas, as well as the central U.S.-Russia nuclear and arms control equations. This work brings together American, European, and Russian analysts to discuss Russia's defense and conventional forces reforms and their impact on nuclear forces, doctrine, strategy, and the critical issues of Russian security policies toward the United States, Europe, and China. It also deals directly with the present and future roles of nuclear weapons in Russian defense policy and strategy.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Will Japan Rearm?
This thesis examines the possibility of Japanese rearmament using a comparative case study approach examining the periods 1870 to 1945 and 1945 to 1976. Major actors in each period are examined in order to understand the role they play and their views toward rearmament. For the period 1870 to 1945, the actors are the Emperor, the politicians, the military, the population, and the economic sector. During the later period, these same actors together with the American Occupation force are examined. The shift of political power and influence during each period is charted in order to determine any significant similarities between the two. An examination of the literature of both periods allows for additional similarities to be drawn. It is concluded that Japan probably will continue along a course of conventional but gradual rearmament.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Is the United Nation's Current Policy in Iraq Effective? Evaluation of Economic Sanctions and the Oil-for-Food Program
The United Nations policy toward Iraq, consisting of economic sanctions and what has come to be known as the Oil for Food program, is flawed- it does not meet either the national security objectives or the humanitarian objectives it was set out to accomplish. Saddam Hussein is still a threat and the Oil for Food program, the largest humanitarian program ever administered by the United Nations (UN), has done little to stop the widespread suffering of the Iraqi people. On one hand, the policy is evaluated on its success or failure in terms of national security by the United States Administration and a number of prominent U.S. think-tanks. On the other hand, it is evaluated based on its success or failure as humanitarian intervention by the International Committee of the Red Cross, the World Health Organization, the World Food Program, and a number of non-governmental organizations. Conclusions are based on the respective 'frame of reference' thereby polarizing the issue. A comprehensive policy for Iraq must address both national security and humanitarian concerns if it is to be successful. Politics and humanitarian intervention cannot be separated.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Norway's Security Challenges in the New World
Norway has over the past century developed its security policy based on how it, as a small state in a big world, has perceived its position and its best interests. What started with idealistic neutrality proceeded to membership in what arguably has become the most successful and long-lasting politico-military alliance in the modern world. Throughout the cold war Norway's geographic position ensured focus and attention from its larger allies, which also affected its security policy and its relations to Russia. The challenge Norway faced during that time was to balance the allied activity and its own security policy to avoid provocations and further militarization in the region. After the Cold War the picture has changed considerably. The issue of security has become increasingly complex, with aspects of economy, energy, resource management and human rights. Since NATO has gone global, and other issues have emerged as larger threats than the ideological battle between the East and the West, the regional and strategic importance of Norway and its surrounding areas have diminished.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
The China-Taiwan Conundrum
United States relations with the Peoples' Republic of China (PRC) have been tainted by the long-standing dispute between the PRC and Taiwan. US involvement began with support of Taiwan after World War II as an effort to stop the spread of Communism in Asia. In the ensuing 50-plus years, US ties to both the PRC and Taiwan have grown into a tremendously different, extremely complex state. The world threat of Communism does not exist now-eliminating the main reason we supported Taiwan in 1950. Conversely, the PRC is a growing influence in both the Asia-Pacific Region and the world-especially with its expanding economic strength. The more the PRC grows in international prowess, the more motivation the United States has to improve bi-lateral relations with the PRC, but it does not seem the United States is taking advantage of the opportunity.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Jerusalem
Although there are several stumbling blocks to peace, Jerusalem is the most central, critical and contentious issue that divides Arabs and Israelis. Spiritually, demographically and politically Jerusalem is at the heart of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Both sides have made it clear that any two-state solution must include Jerusalem as the capital and seat of government for both parties. Religion and history make sharing bitterly difficult. The world has invented a multitude of peace plans, but none has stuck. A viable plan must be developed and agreed to by both sides to make any real lasting progress towards peace. The problem-solving methodology was used to conduct this research. First, research into the history of Palestine and Jerusalem and its role in Judaism, Christianity and Islam was conducted to determine how history lends legitimacy to the claims made by both parties to the land of Palestine. Similarly, research into the Zionist movement and the resulting Arab nationalist movement was conducted to understand why both people want Jerusalem as their national capital, why the hatred is so strong and how these movements make solving Jerusalem difficult.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Hard Power and Soft Power
Power is one of the more contestable concepts in political theory. In recent decades, scholars and commentators have chosen to distinguish between two kinds of power, "hard" and "soft." The former is achieved through military threat or use, and by means of economic menace or reward. The latter is the ability to have influence by co-opting others to share some of one's values and, as a consequence, to share some key elements on one's agenda for international order and security. Whereas hard power obliges its addressees to consider their interests in terms mainly of calculable costs and benefits, soft power works through the persuasive potency of ideas that foreigners find attractive. It is highly desirable if much of the world external to America wants, or can be brought to want, a great deal of what America happens to favor also. Coalitions of the genuinely willing have to be vastly superior to the alternatives.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Preparing for the Inevitable
Many lessons from the Multinational Force and Observer (MFO) mission to the Sinai and the Multinational Force II (MNFII) mission to Lebanon are relevant for future U.S. peacekeeping operations in Israel and the Occupied Territories (OT). A final peace between Israel and the Palestinians is a critical U.S. national interest and is unlikely to occur without a US-led international peacekeeping force. It is important that the U.S. begin to consider the strategic and operation requirements for this mission. Strategic conditions that assisted the success of the MFO and challenged the MNFII must be considered before US involvement in Israel and the OT. The commitment to the treaty of two viable parties, the reduction of external destabilizing influences, and the resolved leadership of the US are the three essential strategic conditions needed. The operational environment of Israel and the OT more closely resembles that of 1982 Lebanon, with its urban and populated countryside, ethnic, religious, and political factions, and militias, terror organizations, and pronounced foreign influence. The Sinai, on the other hand, presented a much larger area, with few urban areas, sparse population, and no internal divisions. Despite the differing operational environments, the MFO and MNFII still provide relevant operational lessons for Israel and the OT. Critical operational lessons are: the necessity of a clear and achievable mission, selecting an effective organization structure for the force, the importance of a unified and compact command structure, tailoring the force for the specific environment and assigned mission, the need for the force to be able to adapt to changes in the situation, and the benefit of maintaining impartiality in the conduct of the mission.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
The Philippines as a Major Non-NATO Ally and the War on Terror
The aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the US created a fundamental change in the global security environment as terrorism moved into the forefront of the challenge faced by the international community. At the same time, it became the primary driver for a reinvigorated RP-US defense relationship as the Philippines joined the fight against terrorism.President George W. Bush designated the Philippines as a US Major Non-NATO Ally (MNNA) in 2003 raising hopes that the AFP capability development and modernization be accelerated especially in the light of its active participation in counter-terror operations.The MNNA designation represents the best chance for the Philippines to accelerate its capability development and contribute in its current defense reform programs under the Philippine Defense Reform (PDR).This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Russian Foreign Policy for the New Millenium
Russian foreign policy during 2001-2002 revealed an entirely new approach as President Vladimir Putin and his Foreign Minister, Igor Ivanov, expanded the scope of Russian external relations both in terms of numbers of nations and the depth of the relationships. The preceding administration of Boris Yeltsin had alienated many people both internally and externally and there was much to do to repair the damage. The events of 11 September vaulted the Russians into a position of prominence that Putin and Ivanov could not imagine possible. A fast and firm show of support for the United States by Putin and his promise to assist in the war against terrorism in any way put Moscow at the center of the war against terrorism, both as a regional hegemon and as a U.S. partner.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
La Familia Drug Cartel
La Familia Michoacana burst onto the national stage on September 6, 2006, when ruffians crashed into the seedy Sol y Sombra nightclub in Uruapan, Michoac獺n, and fired shots into the air. They screamed at the revelers to lie down, ripped open a plastic bag, and lobbed five human heads onto the beer-stained black and white dance floor. The day before these macabre pyrotechnics, the killers seized their prey from a mechanic's shop and hacked off their heads with bowie knives while the men writhed in pain. "You don't do something like that unless you want to send a big message," said a U.S. law-enforcement official, speaking on condition of anonymity about an act of human depravity that would "cast a pall over the darkest nooks of hell." The desperados left behind a note hailing their act as "divine justice," adding that: "The Family doesn't kill for money; it doesn't kill women; it doesn't kill innocent people; only those who deserve to die, die. Everyone should know . . . this is divine justice." While claiming to do the "Lord's work," the ruthless leaders of this syndicate have emerged as the dominant exporter of methamphetamines to the United States, even as they control scores of municipalities in Michoac獺n and neighboring states.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
When Will We Listen?
The purpose of this paper is to determine if there were indicators of the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq on 2 August 1990, that were not accurately assessed by allied decision makers in time to make a difference. Moreover, based on historical precedence, these indicators were hypothesized to be available from open (not classified) sources. Using only a small sampling of the public speeches of Saddam Hussein and the pronouncements in the Iraqi press as reported by the Foreign Broadcast Information Service (FBIS), this research indicates the 2 August invasion should have been assessed as a near-certainty as early as 17 July. Furthermore, research of the memoirs of some the key participants as well as books chronicling the actions of decision makers during the weeks prior to the invasion, indicate that although the information identified during the research was available, it was dismissed as rhetoric rather than being recognized as indications of intent. Moreover, the research points to a continuing tendency by both analysts and decision makers to discount open-source pronouncements, even when they are congruent with empirical evidence from classified sources, because the decision makers and analysts believe the impending action would be "unthinkable."This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
The Virtual State
As is the case with many academic arguments, it is all but impossible to unequivocally prove the existence of the virtual state. That said, the evidence certainly indicates that a new breed of transnational actor is having a profound impact on the policies and behaviors of traditional states as they cope with a rapidly changing world. In reality, as the world changes, states are changing too. Consider the observations of Rosecrance. "The nation-state is becoming a tighter, more vigorous unit capable of sustaining the pressures of worldwide competition and they are downsizing--in function, if not in geographic form."21 "The world has embarked on a progressive emancipation from the land as a determinant of production and power."22 If it is true that states are streamlining by placing less emphasis on the importance of territory, they are in effect obviating one of the key structural components of the traditional state. With this in mind, the rise of a significant, completely borderless political actor, the virtual state, seems quite plausible if not inevitable. In this author's view, they are already among us and are likely to proliferate and grow in strength as the forces of globalization and rapidly advancing technology continue to shape the geopolitical landscape.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Potential for Normal Political Relations Between the United States and Iran Following Presidential Elections in Each Country
With Presidential elections in both the United States and Iran occurring within eight months of each other, one can suspect major changes in the political environment. This environment is not just the relationship between the U.S. and Iran, but the entire world, and more specifically the Middle East. With one new President and another possible new President in Iran, the impacts could be dramatic. The author believes that the political landscape will change, however, the unilateral relationship between the United States and Iran will not change substantially. The basic factors examined are limited, but the assumptions would be the same if the base were expanded. The major efforts are put into the history of the relationship between the United States and Iran. This history points out that despite the various stages there was once a congenial relationship. The historical review depicts that both countries have had both positive and negative events that influenced the relationships. This fact in itself would lead to believe that if it was so once, it could be possible again. The use of terrorism throughout the world has created a new paradigm for political processes and expectations by state and non-state actors. Terrorism is not a political recognized bargaining tool, but many countries are now expending millions if not billions of dollars attempting to defeat it. These efforts are wide-ranging and influence relationships across the globe. More specifically, terrorism has negative impacts in almost all countries. The use of terrorism by a state actors, or countries that expect respect is a limiting factor in this world of instant information. Terrorism is a limiting factor when trying to establish relationships, however, non-state actors can negatively influence these attempted relationship-building efforts. Nuclear weapons play a critical role in the political process. The ability to produce and delivery reliable nuclear weapons is a major bargaining chip. The full hThis work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Operational Implications of Private Military Companies in the Global War on Terror
This monograph discusses the implications of private military companies (PMCs) in the global war on terror (GWOT). The recent upsurge in the use of PMCs to support the prosecution of the global war on terror has impinged increasingly on what is traditionally seen as the state monopoly on violence. PMCs as entities on the stage of conflict are widely misunderstood and as a result, often operate in an area of scant regulation, limited oversight, and ineffective control. As PMCs become increasingly involved in operations, the implications for the military are wide ranging and planners and commanders need to be aware of the capabilities and limitations of PMCs. Currently, little doctrine and guidance exists on PMCs. Specifically, this monograph examines the myriad factors concerned with PMCs, their benefits and disadvantages. The purpose of this paper is to assess the operational implications of the employment of PMCs. It will analyze the identity and current state of the PMC industry. The hypothesis is that the current level of PMC use is not a deliberate policy decision, but a result of assumptions of the nature of the GWOT and that the current state of legislation and contractual oversight is woefully inadequate. Why are armed civilians operating with legal impunity in Iraq? How much is the military aware of this and why is there no doctrine available for commanders or planners to consult regarding PMCs? Through the application of a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats analysis, the above questions will be answered. The analysis is then presented, primarily, through the lens of the elements of operational design. The monograph concludes that the considerable utility of PMCs should not be overlooked and that they can be valuable contributors and partners in the war against terror. Currently though, numerous issues regarding PMCs need attention. The study suggests that the rapid growth of the use of PMCs is largely unregulated and not under proper control.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Toward a More Perfect Union
The international security environment is transforming in the aftermath of the Cold War. Leveraging the trends of globalization, technology proliferation, borderless finance, and communications, "super-empowered angry young men" are able to threaten nation-states as only large armies previously could, while simultaneously emasculating the nation-state's traditional tools of security. Combating these forces requires incorporating the very elements of "globalization" and the "informal society" that empower the threats. It also means embracing and addressing the sources of discontent that breed populations seeking to undermine America's preeminence. America's National Security Strategy recognizes this shifting ground, proposes a broad array of cooperative efforts aimed at addressing the root causes of conflict and terrorism, and thereby links American values of liberty, democracy, human rights, and open markets with national security. Unfortunately, the institutions, which underpin America's national security strategy, vestiges of the Cold War, remain ill equipped for implementing this strategy. Therefore, American must reconstruct its security architecture to reflect the realities of the 21st century international environment. Such an effort begins with a positive, well considered, and consistent message communicated via a magnified, coordinated and comprehensive international public affairs effort. Secondly, supporting international and domestic institutions should be developed or modified to integrate all elements of national power toward a common strategy. Thirdly, the United States must re-allocate financial resources consistent with advancing its stated strategy. Finally, Washington must develop the human resources so critical to engaging convincingly on complicated regional agendas. Constructing a national security architecture consistent with America's security strategy offers the best hope for a stable, secure environment at home and abroad. Failure to do soThis work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Defeating a Genocide
"Using the Rwandan genocide as a backdrop, this paper will show how genocide intervention requires a new way of planning, training, organizing and executing. It will attempt to provide a lens that will help government, inter-governmental and non-governmental actors more effectively view options so the horrors of 1994 Rwanda are truly experienced never again."--Abstract.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Gulf Security in the Twenty-First Century
This Document was developed to explore the various aspects of security for the countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) which includes Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman. A short review of the history of the area provides some guidance toward understanding the culture, beliefs and governing basics that apply today. The recent events in the Gulf, Iraq invading Kuwait and the US invading Iraq, requires the development and implementation of a strategic security plan that meets the needs of all countries of the area. This document addresses this situation and provides some starting recommendations which will move the countries forward toward a safe and secure future.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Proliferation of Russian Military Equipment
Russia is flooding world markets with military equipment. This flood of equipment is acting like a fuel source for terrorist organizations and countries around the world to use force against their enemies. This paper analyses the effects of this flood of equipment in four regions of the world. Russian proliferation is marginalizing the effectiveness of US airpower because the US doesn't have quick and regular access to the thousands of hot spots military proliferation creates. Our current model for airpower application is old and inflexible. It suffers from a need for access and logistic lines of supply.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Turkey and Iran
Appraises the factors affecting the power potential of Turkey and Iran in international affairs, with particular reference to the United States.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
