Middle East & North Africa

Escalation and Intrawar Deterrence During Limited Wars in the Middle East Dr W Andrew Terrill Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "The number of declared nuclear powers has expanded significantly in the last 20 years to include Pakistan, India, and North Korea. Additionally, other powers such as Iran are almost certainly striving for a nuclear weapons capability while a number of countries in the developing world possess or seek biological and chemical weapons. In this milieu, a central purpose of this monograph by W. Andrew Terrill is to reexamine two earlier conflicts for insights that may be relevant for ongoing dangers during limited wars involving nations possessing chemical or biological weapons or emerging nuclear arsenals. "

Toward Making Practice More Perfect in Stability Operations COL George P McDonnell Issue Paper by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership "The U.S. Army’s history is replete with an aversion to stability operations regardless of the name, e.g., “operations other than war,” “peacekeeping,” or “small wars.” However, the publication of Army Field Manual 3-07, Stability Operations, in October 2008 signaled that a large category of missions – those characterized as neither strictly offensive or defensive operations – are not only part of the Army’s charter to engage in, but to win decisively and efficiently. In particular, Appendix F, Provincial Reconstruction Teams, in FM 3-07 is a significant step forward to codify an initiative from Operation ENDURING FREEDOM that the military now considers a best practice in stability operations..."

Enhancing Professional Military Education in the Horn of Africa Prof Bernard F Griffard, Prof John F Troxell Issue Paper by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership "Strategic planning is a way of thinking. It is a process of defining a national strategy, or direction, and making decisions on allocating resources (capital and people) to pursue this strategy. In today’s challenging economic environment, employing the strategic planning process is critical for a nation to fully evaluate the impacts of its identified strategic ends, ways and means."

Pakistan - The Most Dangerous Place in the World Dr Larry P Goodson Op-Ed by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "Pakistan is the most dangerous foreign policy problem facing the United States for five major reasons. First, Pakistan is a nuclear country, with at least 60 nuclear warheads (according to both journalistic and unclassified U.S. Government sources), a regular supply of fissile material with which to make more, multiple delivery systems, and a history as a known proliferator. Pakistan developed nuclear weapons because of its long and bloody history with its bigger next-door neighbor, India, to which it has lost four major military conflicts since 1947. They have not squared off again since the Kargil Conflict of 1999, and the world holds its breath over their next spat."

Criminals, Militias, and Insurgents: Organized Crime in Iraq Dr Phil Williams Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "Although organized crime has been the neglected dimension of the conflict in Iraq, both criminal enterprises and criminal activities have had a profoundly debilitating impact. Organized crime inhibited reconstruction and development and became a major obstacle to state-building; the insurgency was strengthened and sustained by criminal activities; sectarian conflict was funded by criminal activities and motivated by the desire to control criminal markets; and more traditional criminal enterprises created pervasive insecurity through kidnapping and extortion. Organized crime also acted as an economic and political spoiler in an oil industry expected to be the dynamo for growth and reconstruction in post Ba’athist Iraq."

2009 Key Strategic Issues List Antulio J. Echevarria II Document by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "Unlike other lists that generally reflect issues which are operational or tactical in nature, the focus of the Key Strategic Issues List is strategic. The spotlight is, in other words, on those items that senior Army and Department of Defense leaders should consider in providing military advice and formulating military strategy. At present, the U.S. military is engaged in a changing situation in Iraq and an increasing presence in Afghanistan, as well as efforts to restore balance in force sizing and structure."

Challenges and Opportunities for the Obama Administration in Central Asia Dr Stephen J Blank Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "In this monograph, Dr. Stephen Blank argues that a winning strategy in Afghanistan depends as well upon the systematic leveraging of the opportunity provided by that road and a new coordinated nonmilitary approach to Central Asia. That approach would rely heavily on improved coordination at home and the more effective leveraging of our superior economic power in Central Asia to help stabilize the region so that it provides a secure rear to Afghanistan. In this fashion we would help Central Asia meet the challenges of extremism, of economic decline due to the global economic crisis, and thus help provide political stability in states that are likely to be challenged by the confluence of those trends."

Preventing Iraq from Slipping Back into Sectarian Chaos Dr W Andrew Terrill Op-Ed by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "It is at least possible, if not likely, that different choices on two key 2003 U.S. decisions would have allowed the United States to withdraw most of its troops from Iraq well before the present date. The two decisions that are now widely understood to have been disastrous mistakes are the dissolution of the Iraqi Army and the decision to pursue harsh punitive actions against vast numbers of former Ba’ath party members beyond the leadership of Saddam’s regime. Both decisions alienated Iraq’s Sunni Arabs and opened the door for a strong al-Qaeda presence in Iraq..."

New NATO Members: Security Consumers or Producers? Dr Joel R Hillison Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "In reading the headlines recently, one would assume that all of our North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies are shirking their commitments to the alliance and relying on the United States to do the heavy lifting in places like Afghanistan. But the reality is more nuanced. The contributions of NATO members vary greatly from country to country, and not all NATO allies can be characterized as free riders. While burden-sharing debates have been an enduring feature of NATO since its founding in 1949, they have become more heated in recent years as the U.S. military finds itself over-stretched in Afghanistan and Iraq and facing tough budgetary decisions due to the recent economic crisis."