Strategic Challenges for Counterinsurgency and the Global War on Terrorism Dr Williamson Murray Books by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "In March 2006, President George W. Bush signed a new National Security Strategy that he refers to as a “wartime national security strategy.” He also states in the introduction that to follow the path the United States has chosen, we must “maintain and expand our national strength.” One way to do this is to study and propose solutions to the complex challenges the United States faces in the 21st century. At the U.S. Army War College, the students have embraced this challenge and spend a year developing their intellectual strength in areas that extend well beyond the familiar operational and tactical realm to which they are accustomed."

The Future of Transatlantic Security Relations Mr Patrick B Baetjer, Dr Joseph R Cerami, LTG Richard A Chilcoat Colloquium Report by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute Sponsored by: U.S. Army’s Dwight D. Eisenhower National Security Series, U.S. Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, The European Union Center for Excellence at Texas A&M University, The George Bush Presidential Library Foundation, The George Bush School of Government and Public Service "The Transatlantic Security Relationship has been an anchor of European and U.S. foreign policy since the closing days of World War II. As the conflict drew to a close, a new one rose from its ashes. The Cold War and its many harrowing moments reinforced, time and again, the importance of maintaining close ties and mutual understanding across the ocean—a distance that has grown ever smaller in this age of globalization."

North Korean Civil-Military Trends: Military-First Politics to a Point Mr Ken E Gause Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "Unlike the study of other authoritarian regimes, first the Soviet Union and more recently China, which have given rise to a cottage industry of analysis on all aspects of things military, the same cannot be said of the Korean People’s Army (KPA), the armed forces of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). In the small world of Pyongyang watchers, articles and books devoted to the KPA are few and in most cases deal with the armed forces themselves (order of battle) rather than the high command that oversees the machinery."

Doctrine that Works Dr Douglas V Johnson II Op-Ed by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College Press " I recently spent a morning talking with a scholar who is researching material for a book on the U.S. Army’s willingness to learn about war above the tactical and operational level. His thesis echoes, to some degree, Dr. Antulio Echevarria’s monograph that concludes that there is an American Way of Battle, but not an “American Way of War,” as Russell F. Weigley’s well-studied book suggests. This scholar was asking for evidence to identify change points in the development of U.S. Army thinking about war during the decades of the 1970s and 1980s."

Canadian Defense Policy--A breath of Fresh Air Dr Alex Crowther Op-Ed by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "Canada and the United States closely cooperated in most security issues during the 20th century. In recent years, however, security relations between Canada and the United States have become strained, mainly due to disagreements on the methods used by the United States in prosecuting the Global War on Terror. The first policy issue was the Canadian government’s decision to decrease security resources significantly in the wake of the Cold War. The second issue centers on Canada’s disagreement concerning Operation IRAQI FREEDOM, as well as other U.S. policy decisions such as the use of Guantanamo Bay."

Value Projection and American Foreign Policy Dr Douglas J Macdonald Op-Ed by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "The controversies over the Bush administration’s “doctrine” of promoting democracy as a long-term goal of the Global War on Terror (GWOT) have raised once again that hardy perennial in the debate over American foreign policy: value projection. The debate juxtaposes two basic positions: the Jeffersonian idea that the United States should, when possible, serve as an active agent for the spread of democratic values in the world, and the Washingtonian idea that we should serve as a model for the rest of the world by developing democracy at home, not by taking actions to foster it abroad."

Taming the Next Set of Strategic Weapons Threats Mr Henry D Sokolski Book by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "Long discounted by arms control critics, traditional nonproliferation efforts now are undergoing urgent review and reconsideration even by their supporters. Why? In large part, because the current crop of nonproliferation understandings are ill-suited to check the spread of emerging long-range missile, biological, and nuclear technologies."

U.S. Army War College Guide to National Security Policy and Strategy, 2nd Edition Dr J Boone Bartholomees Book by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute

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."