Monographs

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."

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."

Delegitimizing Al-Qaeda: A Jihad-Realist Approach Dr Paul Kamolnick Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "During the past 2 decades, America and the world have witnessed the ignoble rise and now-pending destruction of the al-Qaeda terrorist entity, one of the modern world’s most vicious and successful transnational organizations. Scholars and national security personnel have dedicated vast resources to dissecting and analyzing al-Qaeda’s ideological, strategic, organizational, and tactical strengths and weaknesses. Notable in this entire debate, however, has been the repeated refrain among scholars and U.S. policymakers that we have yet to design and execute a successful messaging campaign that effectively attacks and delegitimizes al-Qaeda in the eyes of potential recruits. Dr. Paul Kamolnick’s monograph is designed to address that present lacuna..."

Categorical Confusion? The Strategic Implications of Recognizing Challenges Either as Irregular or Traditional Dr Colin S Gray Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "Strategic concepts and the theories they encourage and enable are discretionary intellectual constructions. Strategic concepts are not dictated to us; rather, we choose them and decide how they can serve as building blocks for the edifice of theory we prefer. When strategic theory is confusing, misleading, and not fit for its practical purposes of education and even advice, then it is akin to bad medicine that we take in the mistaken belief that it will do us good. Unfortunately, it is necessary to alert Americans to the inadvertent self-harm they are causing themselves by the poor ways in which they choose to conceptualize strategic behavior."

Once Again, the Challenge to the U.S. Army During a Defense Reduction: To Remain a Military Profession Dr Don M Snider Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "The U.S. Army has been through three reductions-in-force since the inception of the All-Volunteer Force. The first one, roughly 1972-78, actually birthed the All-Volunteer Force. The second one occurred in the late 1990s after the end of the Cold War when the U.S. Army was reduced by approximately one-third in both force structure and budget (Total Obligational Authority). The third one is just now beginning in 2011-12 as the Army returns from a decade of war in the Middle East..."

The Saudi-Iranian Rivalry and the Future of Middle East Security Dr W Andrew Terrill Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "Saudi Arabia and Iran have often behaved as serious rivals for influence in the Middle East, especially the Gulf area, since at least Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution and the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War. While both nations define themselves as Islamic, the differences between their foreign policies could hardly be more dramatic. In most respects, Saudi Arabia is a regional status quo power, while Iran often seeks revolutionary change throughout the Gulf area and the wider Middle East with varying degrees of intensity. Saudi Arabia also has strong ties with Western nations, while Iran views the United States as its most dangerous enemy. Perhaps the most important difference between the two nations is that Saudi Arabia is a conservative Sunni Muslim Arab state, while Iran is a Shi’ite state with senior politicians who often view their country as the defender and natural leader of Shi’ites throughout the region. The rivalry between Riyadh and Tehran has been reflected in the politics of a number of regional states where these two powers exercise influence."

The Strategic Logic of the Contemporary Security Dilemma Dr Max G Manwaring Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute "From the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 to the end of World War II and beyond the Cold War period, the prevailing assumption was that interstate warfare would continue to be the dominant threat to global peace and prosperity. Today’s wars, by contrast, are intrastate conflicts that take place mainly within—not across—national borders. As a consequence, the disease of intrastate conflict has been allowed to rage relatively unchecked across large areas of the world, and has devastated the lives of millions of human beings. At the same time, indirect and implicit unmet needs (e.g., poverty) lead people into greater and greater personal and collective insecurity."