Recent Articles

Experimentation in Support of DoD's Homeland Defense and Civil Support Joint Operating Concept Prof Bert B Tussing Issue Paper by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership "On 23 and 24 September 2008, the Center for Strategic Leadership hosted a “Limited Objective Experiment” (LOE) in support of the validation and refinement of the Department of Defense’s (DoD)Homeland Defense and Civil Support Joint Operating Concept (HD-CS JOC). The event was the fourth in a series that envisions a total of 12 such experiments, all designed to help describe how Joint Force Commanders will conduct and support operations in this regime eight to twenty years in the future. Previous LOE’s were hosted and facilitated by the National Defense University and the Naval Postgraduate School’s Center for Homeland Defense and Security. The last two experiments have been hosted and conducted by CSL at Collins Hall."

Military Transformation Challenges: Moldova and Montenegro Prof Bernard F Griffard Issue Paper by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership "The dissolution of the Soviet Bloc and the disintegration of Yugoslavia produced 22 new independent governments across Europe and Central Asia. Prior to 1991 these countries were part of integrated economic and military structures where they contributed what was required and shared in the benefits of their closed loop systems. For those smaller entities at the lower end of the viability spectrum, independence, with the resulting disappearance of the economic and defense security blankets, has been more of a cold shower than a warm bath. "

Collins Center Update, Volume 10, Issue 4 (Fall 2008) COL Eric Ashworth & LTC Eric McEldowney, Mr. William O. Waddell, COL (Ret.) B.F. Griffard, COL (Ret.) Arthur L. Bradshaw Collins Center Update by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership

Dueling Natures Dr Antulio J Echevarria II Op-Ed by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "Election cycles make for interesting times. For one thing, they prompt debates among defense analysts and other experts over current programs, the balance (or lack thereof) among ends, ways, and means, as well as examinations of some of the basic assumptions underpinning our theories and concepts of war. One debate in particular—that regarding the nature of war—is worth reviewing because its implications are far-reaching."

Stability Operations and State Building: Continuities and Contingencies COL Greg Kaufmann Colloquium Report by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, Austin Peay State University "Basic to the concept of the colloquium was the idea that just as there are acknowledged principles of war that enhance the possibility of victory on the battlefield, there should be principles that, if applied during the state-building process, will enhance the chances of “winning the peace.” The idea that principles should comprise the foundation of state-building and that supporting policies and procedures then flow from those principles was fundamental to the colloquium’s process."

Leadership and National Security Reform: The Next President's Agenda Dr Joseph R Cerami, Dr Robert H Dorff, Ms Lisa Moorman Colloquium Report by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, with The Bush School of Government and Public Service and the European Union Center of Excellence of Texas A&M University, LBJ School of the University of Texas at Austin "This colloquium examined the contemporary international environment and American national security policy for the next presidential administration. Participants examined how threats, policies, and strategies have changed since 2001 and how the U.S., European, and other international security systems have responded to changing requirements."

State Emergency Management Staff Training and Evaluation LTC Anthony Abbott Student Academic Research Paper by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership "According to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in its recently released National Preparedness Guidelines, serious gaps exist between ‘all hazards’ risks and the resources and capabilities available for responding to those risks. Key factors such as time constraints, staff size and organization, money, and the range of possible hazards leaves state emergency management agencies with tough resource allocation decisions. State agencies must decide what hazards to plan for, how to best allocate limited financial resources, prioritize training tasks, schedule and manage time available, and identify and quantify acceptable risks to all hazards. An efficient method of prioritizing these resources along with metrics for quantifying results is needed."

The View from There Dr Sherifa D Zuhur Op-Ed by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "A new U.S. President faces huge challenges in the Middle East. Unfortunately, he will not begin with a clean slate. Instead, some uncomfortable fabric has already been cut to fit various policy situations, and a deft tailor is needed to reconsider, redesign, and refit this ghastly, bulky, and multilayered garment we call a Middle East “policy” with an ear to objections from within the region. Granted, U.S. policy goals differ from those of Middle Eastern nation-states and national entities, like the Palestinians, who have not yet achieved their own states."

The 2006 Lebanon Campaign and the Future of Warfare: Implications for Army and Defense Policy Dr Stephen D Biddle, Mr Jeffrey A Friedman Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "The future of nonstate military actors is a central issue for U.S. strategy and defense planning. It is widely believed that such combatants will be increasingly common opponents for the U.S. military, and many now advocate sweeping change in U.S. military posture to prepare for this—the debate over the associated agenda for “low-tech” or irregular warfare transformation is quickly becoming one of the central issues for U.S. defense policy and strategy. As a prominent recent example of a nonstate actor fighting a Westernized state, Hezbollah’s 2006 campaign thus offers a window into a kind of warfare that is increasingly central to the defense debate in the United States. And the case’s implications for U.S. policy have already become highly controversial. "