Europe & Russia

Is Eurasia's Security Order at Risk? Dr Stephen J Blank Op-Ed by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "The foundation stones of European and Eurasian security are the series of treaties beginning with the Helsinki treaty of 1975 and its extension at Moscow in 1991; the 1987 Washington Treaty on Intermediate Nuclear forces in Europe (INF); the 1990 Paris Treaty on Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE), extended in 1999; and the Paris and Rome treaties between NATO and Russia in 1997 and 2002. However, some, if not all, of these treaties are apparently at risk. In 2005 Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivano, told U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld that Russia was thinking of withdrawing from the INF Treaty. Although nothing came of this gambit, a lower-ranking Russian general restated this interest in early, 2006, obviously at his superiors’ instigation."

Iron Troikas: The New Threat from the East Dr Richard J Krickus Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "There has been widespread discussion of Russia’s efforts to exploit its energy assets to influence developments in Ukraine; specifically, to put pressure on the leaders of the Orange Revolution who have adopted a Western orientation, rather than one toward the East—Russia. Less attention has been devoted to similar efforts undertaken by Russia to advance Moscow’s security objectives in the East Baltic Sea Region (EBSR). Through what the author of this monograph, Dr. Richard Krickus, calls Iron Troikas, he demonstrates how the Russian leadership has exploited its energy assets to advance its security interests in the vital EBSR—with emphasis on Poland and the Baltic countries."

Training Indigenous Forces in Counterinsurgency: A Tale of Two Insurgencies Dr James S Corum Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "This monograph examines the British experience in building and training indigenous police and military forces during the Malaya and Cyprus insurgencies. The two insurgencies provide a dramatic contrast to the issue of training local security forces. In Malaya, the British developed a very successful strategy for training the Malayan police and army. In Cyprus, the British strategy for building and training local security forces generally was ineffective. The author argues that some important lessons can be drawn from these case studies that apply directly to current U.S. counterinsurgency doctrine."

Victories are Not Enough Dr Samuel J Newland Letort Paper by US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "This Letort Paper is designed to explore these issues and provide an overview of the development of Germany as a nation and German military thought in the 19th century. It examines the origins of modern German military thinking and the concepts promoted by some of Germany’s key military and political leadership."

Getting Ready for a Nuclear-Ready Iran Mr Patrick Clawson, Mr Henry D Sokolski Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "Little more than a year ago, the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center (NPEC) completed its initial analysis of Iran’s nuclear program, Checking Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions. Since then, Tehran’s nuclear activities and public diplomacy have only affirmed what this analysis first suggested: Iran is not about to give up its effort to make nuclear fuel and, thereby, come within days of acquiring a nuclear bomb. Iran’s continued pursuit of uranium enrichment and plutonium recycling puts a premium on asking what a more confident nuclear-ready Iran might confront us with and what we might do now to hedge against these threats."

Law vs. War: Competing Approaches to Fighting Terrorism Ms Shawn Boyne, Mr Michael German, Dr Dallas D Owens, Dr Paul R Pillar Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "The readings in this volume address one of the fundamental assumptions underlying the conduct of the War on Terrorism―the nature of our enemy, whether perpetrators of terrorist activities are criminals or soldiers (combatants). Although the United States recognizes that terrorist acts are certainly illegal, it has chosen to treat, in many ways, perpetrators as combatants; but much of the world, including many of our traditional allies, have opted for a purely legalistic approach. Disagreement about assumptions is not the only basis for divergent policies for confronting terrorism, but certainly explains much of our inability to agree on strategies to overcome what we recognize as a serious common and persistent international problem."

The Strategic Implications of the Rise of Populism in Europe and South America Dr Steve C Ropp Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "Populism has received very little attention from military planners. This is understandable. As a political phenomenon, it is viewed as somewhat removed from security concerns and hence as more legitimately within the purview of those members of the U.S. policy community who deal with political issues. Furthermore, as a dynamic, unstable, and ephemeral phenomenon within seemingly stable representative democracies, it is hard to “see” and hence to study. This makes trend extrapolation regarding the growth of populist movements much more difficult than for other future security challenges such as terrorism or unconventional war."

Pseudo Operations and Counterinsurgency: Lessons from Other Countries Dr Lawrence E Cline Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "This monograph examines the role of pseudo operations in several foreign counterinsurgency campaigns. Pseudo operations are those in which government forces disguised as guerrillas, normally along with guerrilla defectors, operate as teams to infiltrate insurgent areas. This technique has been used by the security forces of several other countries in their operations, and typically it has been very successful."

The Transatlantic Defense Industrial Base: Restructuring Scenarios and Their Implications Dr Terrence R Guay Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "Today, U.S. and European defense firms are at a crossroads. Opportunities for the construction of a transatlantic defense sector are tangible, but significant obstacles may accelerate the formation of a bipolar industrial base. While market forces played a key role in the transformation and consolidation of these sectors in recent years, political considerations are largely responsible for a restructuring process that has been almost entirely among U.S. firms in the United States and among European Union companies in Europe."