Collections

Disjointed Ways, Disunified Means: Learning from America's Struggle to Build an Afghan Nation COL Lewis G Irwin Book by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute Remarkably ambitious in its audacity and scope, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) irregular warfare and “nation-building” mission in Afghanistan has struggled to meet its nonmilitary objectives by most tangible measures. Put directly, the alliance and its partners have fallen short of achieving the results needed to create a stable, secure, democratic, and self-sustaining Afghan nation, a particularly daunting proposition given Afghanistan’s history and culture, the region’s contemporary circumstances, and the fact that no such country has existed there before. Furthermore, given the central nature of U.S. contributions to this NATO mission, these shortfalls also serve as an indicator of a serious American problem as well. Specifically, inconsistencies and a lack of coherence in U.S. Government strategic planning processes and products, as well as fundamental flaws in U.S. Government structures and systems for coordinating and integrating the efforts of its various agencies, are largely responsible for this adverse and dangerous situation.

Lessons of the Iraqi De-Ba'athification Program for Iraq's Future and the Arab Revolutions Dr W Andrew Terrill Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "The presence of U.S. combat troops in Iraq has now come to an end, and the lessons of that conflict for the United States and other nations will be debated for some time to come. It is now widely understood that the post-invasion policy of de-Ba’athification, as practiced, had numerous unintended consequences that made building Iraqi civil society especially difficult following the U.S.-led invasion. The U.S. approach to this policy is often assessed as having underestimated both the dangers of increased sectarianism in Iraq and the need for strong efforts to manage ethnic-sectarian divisions. The Iraqi government’s approach to de-Ba’athification was, nevertheless, much more problematic due to its openly biased and sectarian nature. However well-intentioned, de-Ba’athification originally was as a concept, in practice it had a number of serious problems. These problems intensified and became more alarming as the de-Ba’athification process became increasingly dominated by the Iraqis and American oversight over that program gradually evaporated. At that time, it came to be viewed as an instrument of revenge and collective punishment by both the Iraqis that administered de-Ba’athification and those that were targeted by these policies. "

The Role of Small States in the Post-Cold War Era: The Case of Belarus Dr Dmitry Shlapentokh Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "The following conclusions are drawn from this analysis: 1. There is an emerging post-unipolar world. Now the United States is not the only global center, as it was during the first years of the post-Cold War era. Nor do just two superpowers—the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics—now define the course of global events. The new multipolarity implies the presence of several centers of power. This provides the opportunity for small states such as Belarus to move from one center of power to another or to engage in a sort of geopolitical gamesmanship. 2. During the last 10 years or so, Belarus moved from Russia to the European Union (EU) and back. At the same time, it engaged in relationships with Iran and China. While relationships with Russia and the EU have not been stable, this is not the case with China and Iran. Here, Belarus has always maintained a good relationship, especially in the case of China. This is demonstrated by the increasing role of Asia in the geopolitical arrangements of the present, and will be even more so in the future."

Ambassador Stephen Krasner's Orienting Principle for Foreign Policy (and Military Management)—Responsible Sovereignty Dr Max G Manwaring Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "The principal security threats of the past several centuries—war between or among major powers—do not have the urgency they once did. Two new types of threats have been introduced into the global security arena. Violent nonstate actors and other indirect political, economic, and social causes of poverty, social exclusion, corruption, terrorism, transnational crime, the global drug problem, and gangs are a few examples of “new” threats to global security and stability. Today, even more so than in the past, the evolving concept of national security implies the protection—provided through a variety of nonmilitary and military ways and means—of the popular interests that provide for the well-being of society. This broadened definition of the contemporary security problem makes the concept so vague as to render it useless as an analytical tool. The genius of Ambassador Stephen Krasner, however, helps solve the problem."

Enabling Unity of Effort in Homeland Response Operations LTG H Steven Blum, LTC Kerry McIntyre Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "Balancing authorities and responsibilities within our federal system has been a matter of continuous debate since the earliest days of the republic. Its continued relevance is exemplified in our current national conversation over how to most effectively organize and operate for homeland security and defense. Crises and catastrophic events in our homeland require Americans from different organizations, jurisdictions, and functions to work together. Yet despite considerable national effort and resources devoted to developing and improving our collective response capabilities, effectiveness in working together—unity of effort—still seems to elude us."

Conflict Management and "Whole of Government": Useful Tools for U.S. National Security Strategy? Dr Robert H Dorff, Dr Volker C Franke Book by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, Kennesaw State University, and KSU's International Conflict Management Throughout most of the 20th century, national security focused primarily, and sometimes exclusively, on military affairs. In the 21st century, this has changed as new and more comprehensive ways of thinking about, studying, and planning for national security and global security are being adopted in response to new security challenges and threats that go beyond the dangers posed by traditional causes of war and conflict. In addition to terrorism, these other threats to security are posed by, but not limited to, shortfalls of energy and nonfuel mineral resources, scarcity of food and fresh water, encroaching desertification, and cyber attacks. To some, these new challenges and threats present as much, and over time perhaps more, of a challenge and threat to security as do guns, bombs, and missiles.

Tactical Nuclear Weapons and NATO Dr Jeffrey D McCausland, Dr Tom Nichols, Dr Douglas Stuart Book by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute The role and future of tactical nuclear weapons in Europe are subjects that sometimes surprise even experts in international security, primarily because it is so often disconcerting to remember that these weapons still exist. Many years ago, an American journalist wryly noted that the future of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was “a subject that drives the dagger of boredom deep, deep into the heart”—a dismissive quip which would have remained true right up until the moment World War III broke out. The same goes for tactical nuclear weapons: compared to the momentous issues that the East and West have tackled since the end of the Cold War, the scattering of hundreds (or in the Russian case, thousands) of battlefield weapons throughout Europe seems to be almost an afterthought, a detail left behind that should be easy to tidy up.

Drug Trafficking, Violence, and Instability Dr Vanda Felbab-Brown, Dr Phil Williams Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "The rationale for this series is a reflection of the ways in which the world of armed groups has changed and is continuing to change, and the impact of these changes on threats and challenges to national and global security. Although challenges posed by various kinds of violent armed groups initially appear highly diverse and unrelated to one another, in fact they all reflect the increasing connections between security and governance—and, in particular, the relationship between poor governance and violent armed groups. The growth in the number of states with capacity gaps, functional holes, and legitimacy deficits helps to explain the resurgence of a new medievalism, and the rise of illegal quasi-governments in localized areas. The irony is that after several decades in which the number of sovereign states represented in the United Nations (UN) has increased significantly, relatively few of these states can truly claim a monopoly on force within their territorial borders."

Project on National Security Reform - Vol. 2: Case Studies Working Group Report Dr Richard Weitz Book by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, Project on National Security Reform "Our current national security system is more than 60 years old, inaugurated by the Truman administration and adjusted only periodically and incrementally ever since. Designed for a world in which the primary threat was nuclear war between the two superpowers, in today’s rapidly changing global security environment the structures and processes of the national security apparatus have become more than antiquated: they are dangerous. Though talented men and women work tirelessly to keep America safe, they struggle within a system that inconsistently supports, obstructs, and even undermines their efforts."