Study Guide for US DEFENSE POLICY FIRST EXAM
Study Guide for US DEFENSE POLICY FIRST EXAM POL 349
Popular in U.S Defense Policy
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Political Science
This 51 page Study Guide was uploaded by Juliana Carvajal on Monday April 6, 2015. The Study Guide belongs to POL 349 at University of Miami taught by June Dreyer in Spring2015. Since its upload, it has received 214 views. For similar materials see U.S Defense Policy in Political Science at University of Miami.
Reviews for Study Guide for US DEFENSE POLICY FIRST EXAM
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 04/06/15
JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES 7 1 E JL 7 JLfl l 7 7 HIL E alum NJL 7 Hi 7 7 TL 7 1 7 a E JL ill lit ti if 4l g llllll plCll pill ll tul all ll llwillCll g ll llil ll life lll it adapting defense policy to the postCold War period 2 12 wars to two regional confrontations to oneand then readapting to the post9 11 world 4 deter 2 counterattack 1 go to capital if necessary togreat uncertainty at present January 2012 quotPriorities for 21st Century Defensequot document appears to envision one war but never quite says so gt Policy Cold war Assymetrical cut kept asking a disarmament We said to the soviet union that we wanted cuts Gorbachev okay we will cut to an equal level Soviet Union was trouble because they didn t want to reduce weapons Berlin Wall April 1991 warsaw pact was disbanded Soviet military is very powerful 1991 they made coupt d etat to Gorbachev Therefore the Soviet Union was falling apart Japan gives rusia money rusia gives something to japan New leader in Rusia caused various problems the leader was awful the nancial states worse there was a gap betweeb rich and poor military officers begging on the streets In the US we read about communism O O L lll l Today not happy with Mr Putin States have nuclear weapons We have a concern with Iran and North Korea North Korea bankrupt and the chinese keeping the fueled if the actually use nuclear weapons that would be the end of the Kim Dynasty Terrorist Groups how you indentify them and deal with them gt We don t do anything we would never know gt Dilema for policy makers because if defense budget is up people will be complaining US military is acknowledged as world39s best but internal critics charge it is dangerously complacent in 1 strategy 2 adapting Pentagon budgets and programs to new mission of quotpreventive defensequot llll l JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES 3 rethinking defense organization and management 4 reorganizing the defense economy after September 11th a rethinking of defense strategy but with no consensus does the doctrine of preemption genuinely make America safer are we prioritizing correctly are we overstretching our resources and alienating other countdes US military is highly respected the public opinion alone is higher than the supreme court The superiority has to be earned constantly Defense has been getting very ancient George bush 43 the US had a budget de cit is not his fault but everyone blames him anyway Defense budget people who oppose Terrorist Chinese They feel things are too expensive gt US is criticize for not having a strategy gt Politicians are complainig about cutting the fat in the defense budget there is no such thing Industrial and techonological base Colodwar defense department and US is ow commercializing COTS Commercial off the Shelf Technology describes software or hardware products that are readymade and available for sale to the general public Sometimes quality control in some countries are not as good ill OOOJ relationship between foreign policy and defense policy a a a Defense policy and foreign policy they are different but necessary together Country builds this to defend a foreign policy Persian Gulf Doctrine Afghanistan Carter said that the US would use military force if necessary to defend its national interest in the Persian Gulf Defense department knows that the US is unable to defense themselves if Russians decide to go to Afghanistan Mismatch with foreign policy and defense policy in Carter Adminsitration JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES l lllllllll llllllllllllllll lllll 195060 s US foreign policy had the idea that they had to ght Soveit Union and China because they were communist lran Greece Fight all of this people got drafted with this idea Women were excluded People have not been having babies because of the depression This meant that they were fewer men for drafting Taxes we levied to pay for equipment being used for defense People were really worried about the soviet Union 1960 Foreign policy Chage it recognizws hat at that time China will most likely ght Rusia than the US At that time the chinese said quotcan webe friendsquot Chinese wanted US and SU to ght and we just watch Chinese were no longer a threat China and the Soviet Uniot had different opinions Cuba Peple were wandering wether we needed a defense policy Homeless people modernize our production facilities We bomb Japan There were resilient nations We build those factories We enable them to be better than the US Defense deparment in favor of invading Kuwait 1990 s Could we prepare to a half war Or two wars there was an ongoing controversy without consensus Sadam Hussein OIL is still under our interest People dindt like the idea on spending money and American lives to defen Kuwait Why are we defending them We came human rights and we agree with Saudi Arabia They had an inhumane punishment Samurai bamboo sword Paul wellstown believed in solving poverty and education in our country he could not think of saying yes when should the US consider armed intervention or war Weinberger doctrine the armed intervention must be a last resort must be undertaken only for vital national interests must have the support of Congress and the American people must have clearly de ned objectives JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES force should be used only if it is used 39wholeheartedly and with a clear intention of winning gt When and under what circumstances should we consider intervention of war 0 Direct threat to a resource 0 Threat to national security 0 To American people gt Criteria for armed intervention Weinberger doctrine the armed intervention 0 Must be last resort 0 Must be undertaken only for vital national interest 0 Must have the support of congress and the American people 0 Must have clearly de ned objectives 0 Use only if its used wholeheartedly and with a clear intention of winning Bush 41 manipulate media and congress Hollywood making lms criticizing American foreign policy We can be manipulated and we have how do we manage this support jhonson lied to congress Clearly de ned objectives objectives change due to circusntances Iraq second time with the good of getting sadam Hussein Sadam Hussein was stale ad we created a mess gt Wholeheartedly and with a clear intention of WINNING o How do we de ne winning gt Must be a last resort 0 North korea kepps us talikg they even have nuclear weapons and say that s okay gt Resonable people can disagree in what is national interest lllll these sound good in the abstract but are hard to de ne concretely politics and defense policymaking a bureaucracies take their formal powers seriously bthey also attempt to get around the rules to amass more power for themselves gt Domestic structure of national security government agencies that are formal and informal gt Policy gt Temporary issue gt Presidents can undo a policy directive if they are no aboard JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES ill ill After spe 911 Homeland security was created Heads of agencies what to get the most out of their agency Fair amount of of ux back and forth of some agencies that are weaker that others not always true After WW2 there was a present congress had less in uence meanwhile you need a strong hand If there isn t a check and balance we become a dictatorship Today we need instant response Other side or countries are saying that we are building an imperial presidency Judiciary don t want to get involve in political issues executive branch bureaucracy concerned with national security policy l ill lllll 1 presidential staff usually people he trust or from his home state and informal advisers Clinton friends from Arkansas BushTexans President has the choice he can have them as payroll or informally Some people don t want totake the job because of lack of privacy and they cannot say what they want Presidents spouse is an informal advisor and never gets payroll Spuses are always criticize Clinton controversial Pay staff small but got expanded After Watergate there was an effort to cut people 2 Executive office of the president in the constitution of statutory legitimatenot necessarily in uential if democrats gives money to labout or republican appoint a mourmon of an evangelical christian including aNSC only as powerful as president wants it to be National Security Council head is the president advisor on security affairs people are chosen by the president gt FDR rossevelt was ill he diesd he had 4 different VP gt Truman was kept ignorant from what happened and the atomic bomb gt So this is the reason of why the national security council was created and also because of cold war gt Principle members 0 Secretary 0 lndersecretary 0 Head military JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES ill a 0 Head of CIA o NSC president advisor They serve functions such as 0 Coordinate policy with the president only on policy 0 Provide options for the president 0 Policy planning long term for 20 years and short term 0 A knowlable plan not objective 0 Shortterm is called contingency planning response if Russian troops took over ukrine or if NK decides to launch a missile Policy legitimization every decision the resident does is controversial lf president says I have decided this it gives the decision more legitimiation Einsehower war heroe o Commanding general 0 Believer n team work Kennedy crisis mangrment team Kissinger Nixon He thought he knew more than the defense department There is friction betweent the defense deparmtnet and the NSC cryptography bOMB funding requests cCEP Council on International Economic Policy dCAeach service have their own function eNSA National Security Agency enourmous own facility in Maryland AID 3 relevant departments and agencies of the cabinet aDefense Department bState Departmentetc c Commerce department gt Ambassadors nominated and approve by congress 23 gt Treaties with advise and conset of senate gt Executive treaty order gt Jimmy carter abrigade a treaty gt Supreme court refused to this so kind of means that they have the right gt President responsible for making sure rule are made gt Responsible for all national security gt Current worries jU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES gt OBAMA he does not have detail knowlege to make decision on national security if Obama had any material management or foreign policy experience prior in to office notably a more strategic than tactical orientation more trust in is team gt bureaucracy gt presidents say they feel hindered gt Truman gt Lydon jhonson CIA is like milking a cow 4 legislative branchmost important are a House Appropriations Committee bSenate and House Armed Forces committees c quot Foreign Affairs committees djoint Intelligence Oversight Committee They are all hieg expierence 5 various policy study groups think tanks etc representing spectrum of leftright center views think tans they don t have an objective analysis rather a favorable analysis 6 media not objective the main problem is that there is too much transparency or not enough transparency problems in coordinating all of these 0 Pace and Burns reading shows how friction can arise between White House and DoD head 0 as does the quotwithering critique of Obama s NSCquotRothkopf says Susan Rice has abrasive personality is reactive rather than strategic quotlike her bossquot to lack knowledge of Asiabut this is one person s judgment bottom line personalities do matter and can change the way an organization or a country39s defense policy workor work less well if lack of transparency is a problem in assessing other countries39 policies North Korea for examplethe process may seem more transparent than is good for national security since potential enemies are aware of ssures and options but sometimes the system is more secretive than we would like Iran Contra affair what Snowden has told the world about what NSA was JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES doing eg Orjust create confusion as in case of wouldbe bomber Abdul Mutallab on a Christmas Day 2009 ighthis father actually went to the US embassy in Nigeria six weeks before the attempt to warn them Yet he was allowed as Schiphol to board a Delta ight for Detroit 39 UTIE AL Tl Efrem 4L 1 an 7 7 jewel lUlllllt lg lEll ll Lil for further reading Makers of Modern Strategy From Machiavelli To The NuclearAge ed Peter Paret and Felix Gilbert Princeton NJ Princeton University Press 1986 library call number UU162 M25 1986 see also the suggestions at the end of chapters in Baylis study of strategy as currently understood began at end of 19th century gt Strategy depends on budget technology and geopolitics gt Strategy comes from the greek leader of troops gt Considered art of eder gt Until the end of the 19th century there was not much to study about strategy 0 before then handbooks for generals a Marshal de Saxe Reveries on the Art of War18th century bSun Zi The Art of War4th c BC but not available in West until 18thc AD gt Culture area often common sense gt Tactics just because you don t have a name for something it dosent mean it dosent exist the art of disposing armed forces in order of battle and of organizing operations 0 17891815 period of French revolution and especially Napoleonic wars gt interest in strategy 0 nature of war had changed Sheehan 4247 aemergence of quotnation in armsquot larger armies than before barmies return to living off countryside lvin off land forag ruthlessly in the territories through which it marched c leaders appeal to mass emotions re democracy nationalism gt ideological war the complete overthrow of the enemy the objective war became massive gains or even annexation gt purpose of war was to seek battle and to impose ones will on the opponent through violence Clausewitz JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES l till l till gt victory would come when the opponent centre of gravity the focal poiny of his power was captured or destroyed Clauswitz the modern construction of strategy came with the French Revolution 17891815 napolenic wars whole nation under arms napolena everyone is going to be a soldier in one way or another no more laundry cooking tents so that the army could move faster all citizens felt they were part of the war nationalism Antiaristocrats betroven ludwicj and bethoven because van is against aristocrat Napoleon nationalism and equality for all raised emotions Standing military success arc of triumph Mlitary genius how could he win victories and why This was what brought attention to clausewits Prussian 0 Karl von Clausewitz German vom Kriege 0n War 1832 Paret Mahnken 6367 awar the continuation of policypolitics by organized violent means bhence war should be controlled by political leadership c KvC opposed predecessor von BUlow s excessive reliance on 1 geography 2 mathematics dfelt vB ignored human element actions of enemy physical psychological gt war is an extension of politics gt political leaders are incharge gt he takes into consideration the human factor gt part of the pictue is geography and math but don t ignore the psychological factors of enemy effects of the ghting etheory must constantly be tested against reality gt Mao dogma a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true not good for anything f war has tripartite nature 1 violence 2 chance quotfrictionquot the danger posed by the enemy the effort required of ones forces the diffcultiesn uncertainties in general 3 politics gnoted tendency for war to evolve into absolute war gt he has been criticized for ignoring naval warfare gt most of what he wrote is abtract enough to apply it JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES gt he dosent take into account the systematic changes in technology and economy gt ignored ethics and didnt discuss ethics of war it was not his intention War is a normal part of poltics dif ng only in its mean War is an act of violence designed to achieve otherwise unattainable goals Each age created it own form war War is something in which the entire nation must take part Since war involves people it it inherently unpredictable Victory is of no vlie inless it is a means to achieve a political objective gt Other things being equal numbers are ultimalty decisive gt Succesful strategy is based on idetifyng political goals assessing ones comparative advatange relative to the enemy calculating costs and bene ts and beneftis carefully and examining the risks and rewards of alternative strategies AntoineHenri Jomini Swiss Pre cis de Arte de la Guerre 1838 amore certain than Clausewitz that a valid theory of war could be ascertained bstrategy controlled by invariable scienti c principles the art of war is founded on certain xed principles wich are by their nature invariable gt all strategic combination are faulty if they do not conforom to the basic principle of operating wit hthe greatest possible force in a combined effort against the decisive point c key to victory offensive actions by massing forces against weaker enemy forces at some decisive point ddecisive point place whose attackcapture would badly weaken enemy ll ll ll eemphasis on interior lines of communicationoperation gt interior lines of communication shortest distance how to get their faster and don t spend so much energy gt interior lines of not concentrating all forces rst against one French army strategic maneuvers gt lines of operation are understood to mean WHERE an armed force ghts for WHAT objective in WHAT force relative to the total available military power 10 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES gt Natural kind rivers mountains seacosts oceanspoitica boundaries naval bases and road networks Strategic choice within the range of chose allowed by the prewar environment where to th what purpose in what force natural territorial actual strategic chose maneuver accidental inner or interior line of operation it refers to the simple idea that one side may have a position between inside separated enemy forces with such interior position it is possible to strike rst one part of the enemy foce then the other defeating each in turn gt interior agiandt exterior lines f a gov t should choose its best military commander then allow him to wage war on scienti c principles gov t must not meddle in professional military matters gt commander should look for the enemies information make yourself master without the enemy nding out and when you achieve this you make the enemy helpless gt diagrams appear in military eld manuals gt jomini and Clausewitz pesimitic and tedious gt Con dence that discovering itself is best by packaging gt By isolating strategy from its political and socal context jomini helped to foster a mode of thinking about war that continue to haun us gNapoleon s genius was in applying scienti c principles to war gt Two views why napoleon was genius gt Jomini said sciti c principles of war hcommanders need not have great learning but must know the few principles of war very well gt clauswitz against statement of bright leaders gt jominin criticisms were that he was too reductions and based on prescriptions reduce relevant factors of his analysis gt methodology jomini dosent deal with historical example that reforce his theory gt jomini should said why theory is ne he said new weapons can never change the principels of strategy gt Contradictory victory depnds on prescription till l l 11 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES l lllll Ill l l till lllll He did not became the bible because they found Clausewitz more applicable he was later rediscovered US DEFENSE STRATEGY Robert E lee used jomini He was brilliant strategist an a Mexican border Attack santa and army fro mthe back Union had more troops and he was winning Used lines of communication lee was able to use it effectively and gure out how to apply them effectively Two more scholarly civil mokenan y otro Brant and Sherman used succeful clauswitz to anilate enemies armies and eliminate everything from the way They chose this strategies because they were strategic thinkers American civil war encourage the study of strategy also around the world American government were getting request from japan and Germany SUN TZU in the art of war there are no xed rules Victory without bloodshed war as a search for comparative advatange successful strategies are those tham ephazie in psicology and deception kow the enemy and know yourself 1 Attack enemy strategy 2 Attack opponents alliances 3 Destroyin enemies armed forces MAIN outcome of a war can be known in advance if the leader makes a complete estimate of the situation IMPORTANCE IN INTELLIGENCE naval warfare Alfred Thayer Mahan The In uence ofSea Power Upon History 16601763 1890 Sheehan 4749 aconsciously applied Jomini s principles to naval warfare mahan naval strategy and naval warfare importance of sea lines communication and value on interior lines ships were disappearing bnava quotchoke pointsquot decisive points command the entire world of communications 12 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES gt gt gt gt gt gt gt gt gt lllllll c rejected French jeune Ecoe s emphasis on guerre de course commerce raiding gt swiss canal mediteranian sea Singapore spice trade Panama canal trade bene ts Nicaragua canal controversies chinese control Logical conclusion destruction of enemy armed force is the rst stratey gt gt gt gt gt dpropounded guerre d e scadre eet engagements o experienced seaman o enemy battle eet so that you get control of seas 0 big heavy nasty ships Naval strategy Navies were not at the same level Limited because of Weather ships Capac y Currence speed not the same in the ocean Location of the ships and where the enemy ship was going to be Chance and friction Romans corvas crow gt Get next to the enemy and then ban this corvas into the decking and your guys can use this to get into the ship gt But if one goes down the other goes down to and therefore both loose the balance of the 7 ship gt Naval warfare British cotton of south united states Force china North industrial potential Steven luce we need to pay more attention to this Creation of naval military college Naval strategy Air war college technological developments change What strategies to employ quotthe logic of war and strategy isvaid at all times and in all placesquotMahnken 61 aindustrialization of warfare Sheehan 4447 bdevelopment of submarine torpedo 13 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES 0 technology changes and therefore strategy 0 commerce raiding more attractive c advent of air power Douhet Billy Mitchell 0 airplanes rst planes 0 before ballons but airplanes you can control 0 Sheenan pg 52 exception people alaws bee invesitve in warfare 0 Medieval warfare very invenUve Catapulta breat the war gt 3 types gt stirrup Parthians gt Airfore red baron gt Planes were capable of carrying a heavyload gt Plane that can carry guns gt Plane that can be carried on a ship gt Way that US took texas and Arizona gt Mitchell not a saint advance the ski jump catapult in a place post World War II assumption that war might begin without warning US initially relied on nuclear power containment v rollback debate containment won Deter communism from advancing militarily PearlHarbor Bring the boys home At that point only ones with nuclear weapons contain contain where they are or roll back forget Geopolitical speci cation come into place Attack cities lndia US president traveled twice to india Asia major rives rise in tibeth less water ill till 19451950 Soviet cities targeted quotcity bustingquot or countervaue gt American strategy 50 s target soviet 14 jU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES II l llllllll American planners became concern in defending western democratic values Nationalist china had collapse China communist allied with the Soviet Union Korean war persuades stalin to invade south korea Communism people worried something distasful Soviet nuclear attack Assessment of threats Concerning taking out soviet nuclear arsenal Countervalue an equivalent or equal especially in military strategy 19501960 debate on countervalue General Hoyt Va ndenberg v counterforce target enemy s industrial potential General Curtis LeMay SOP devised 1959 distinguish from psyops Single integrated operational plan optimum mix government target for destruction in a single attack different from psyops psyshcological operations that made psychological inferences of the enemy inject show and awe with the enemies gt in Iraq all general call all of them on phone US tends to rely on technology Soviets on mass 9 Conterforce force target enemy industrial pontential disarm or destroy facilities not people a If we say we are not going to attack your civilians and you neither 9 Lack of trust between both 9 Did not work because of technical and operational problems have massive and accurate siultaneos raids of the installation and destroy all at the same time a Set of railroads acks 9 planes surveillance show pile of dits of a abandones missile site load a Soviet union small number of population a Soviet union infrastructure a US major highat Atlanta 3 major interstate take out this area nad will make a difference a Soviet Union had one railroad transsiberian a 1 Industrial capabilities a 3 retardation a 2 Counterforce targets soviet bases small and concentrated 15 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES 9 195060 Nuclear arsenal of the US a both counterforce and countervalue a Dbeate in airforce and navy a Airforce given control of nuclear weapons 9 Navy about to deploy rst ballistic msile submarine with a nuclear weapons 9 Destroy soviet cities 9 Adminsitration set up a commission to discuss a Commission has to hire staff a By the time report is done it would be a year later and public opinion is mad for something else gt SIOP revisited 196174 Single Massive simultaneous attack gt This is to rigid bad gt Answer exible miss something provides in withholding attack in different situation and places 1NW targets 2 3 Industrial provided an option to withhold attack on small cities exible dpends trust in soviet unon if government is up to something the other side will mybe now llllll IV 197489 strategic triad landbased submarinebased airborne missiles technology not always an acceptable substitute for mass eg Vietnam gt Landseaair gt Too much techonology and not always an acceptance substitute for mass quot boots on the groundquot army strategy the AirLand battle leapfrog technique attack behind enemy s front line to cripple second echelon forces resupply capabilities Airland battle army attack behing enmy fronyline to cripple second echelon dorce the resupply capabilities Army helicopters army has no places there are Vulnerable Supply routres Vehicles Weaken the underpinnings of the enemy If this works then it reduces the casulaties if it dosent work is prolonged ear chaos and casualties 16 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES Enemy make sure you get capability soviet union using mass over tehcnolgy That was what gernmany war was about navy the Maritime Strategy take battle to enemy s waters attack them outside territory water naval chokepoints submatines and ships GlUk Greenland iceand united kingdom EAST COAST SU air force SDI Strategic Defense Initiative aka Star Wars airforce a10 attack plane ies slower ground target thunderbolt wartag Using in Syria attack insurgent SDl Strategic Defense lnititive Enemies misili through space To ability to destroy military and nonmilitaty Avoid nukes Going in home water Soviet Union mostly concentrated in home ater Cohen new warfare dosent work initially the old one is better it takes a liftmes to master SDI lets not be sure that it dosent work Every new weapons development Premise somebody always has one Russia insecure border sweds invade Russia and were pearson warriors Soviet Union world 2nCI largest arms Ability of quantity over qualirt SU ww1 huge number of sivets soildiers overhelmed quality of german soildiers of 12 years old US strategy relies heavily on technology Technology is not always a substitute for mass Soviet union had 20 illion killed by stalin most of them Communist system The red army drafting people require for every physicallt able male that was Russian strategy 1 Quantity over quality 2 Focus on mass 3 Conservatism Premise an assertion or proposition which forms the basis for a work or theory authoritarioan regimes tend to discouragr advancement of technology US defeat soviet union by overvaluing them Spend 9 million a day in cuba SU Close to the US Spending afghanist oil SU comprise with muslims 17 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES THE PROBLEM IS HOW MUCH MONEY DO YOU HAVE TO SPEND BANKRUPT Gorbachev meant the concialiatory stiff It was easy to tack soviets submarines because they were nosy Submarines being dranwback we saw this Russia agreed to assymetric cuts boht sides spend less money SU agress 10 percent cuts still leave SU at a disadvatange Vienna SU of cers mad and thet coup d etat gorbachev arrested End of the soviet union USA has to come up with another strategy 1981 berlin wall goes down IV 1989present search for a postcold war strategy 19891 present post cold war strategy clich rapid pace of change require that institutions be x this new reality how we are going to adapt it V AirLand battle initially devised against USSR continued Maritime Strategy discarded in favor of navy in a littoral role coast guard FAIREST IF IT WORKWIT SOVIET Iraqui airforce has been taken out Navy does not like this Black shoe navy commercial Browns navy coast lllll Bottom Up Review BUR 1992 prepare to ght two regional wars gt Examine from bttom up national defense panel comes Up gt iraqiran north korea gt unconventional war assymetrical argument gt transformational stratrgy beginning in 1997 Quadrennial Defense Review QDRs discarded questions remain about if it s the right thing to do December 1997 National Defense Panel describes two regional war strategy as obsolete DoD s arsenal as quottoo overwhelmingquot personnel should be trained to ght unconventional wars against forces that quotlook for new ways to match their strengths to our weaknessesquot suggest quottransformation strategyquotformally abandoned in 2001 although there are doubts as to the wisdom of this 18 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES gt RMA SYSTEMS OF SYSTEMS OVERBOARD the ultimate pontential of the new technologies if not their actual achievement gt Systems integration describe the art of putting together a complex techbologies to achieve a purpose gt Some people think overboard is too focus on hightechnology instead that focus in re power man power leading the US military to wrong direction gt US defeat enemies at rst current buzzwords the Revolution in Military Affairs RMA and asymmetrical warfare M a quotsystem of systemsquot involving the fusion of sophisticated remote sensing systems with precisionstrike weapons and automation assisted C3 smaller military forces using synchronized near simultaneous operations throughout the theater of war but the RMA isn t going to solve all our problems ait can t help much in peacekeeping operations b quot end nuclear proliferation c quot stop terrorists and since 911 US strategy has had to concentrate on exactly these three issues some argue that our RMA has gone too far in its assumptions that technology can substitute for troops this kind of argument actually long preceded the advent of the RMA since US excels in maneuver warfare intelligent enemies will use asymmetric strategies and tacticsthey will not engage us in the kind of war we would prefer 39the enemy gets a vote 0 it is relatively easy for US technology to defeat an enemy in the initial encounterbut a determined enemy will then reorganize re arm and if provided with a sanctuary from which to regenerate will attack again 0 we need a 39real RMA which will not be totally military but integrates all aspects of national power asymmetrical warfare avoid opponent s strengths while focusing your side s advantages against enemy s relative weaknesses tends to emphasize unconventional or nontraditional methods how worried should the US be about asymmetric warfare In theory at least the stronger side can practice asymmetric warfare at least as 19 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES well as the weaker sidealthough the weaker side may have fewer scruples than the stronger one about using some of its techniques particular if they involve high civilian casualties high tech vs low tech hla 1 Types arf Armaal HAVE ma rtg 3393 km mngal High flachnrlaggr available rngr 1a m39iar lamaairs and Ehair allliaaj Law Ewialallf a39ura39ilabla 39latll39hnllag ff l r l la ul ll all quotHi 1 4 gal ifmrl H1h Law Habhjp ia racial airplanaas gt determine whether the enemy is going to reorganize regenerate gt Afghanistjungle gt The enemy is not going to ght the war that you want gt Aquiles enemy look at your weak point gt Asymmetrical warfare avoids opponents strengths while focusing your sides advantages against enemys relative weaknesse gt Senior general unrestricted war western rules of warefare so that thet can device the same type of rules gt China does not have to play by the riles serious in waging ar in an unconventional way gt Change in climate that will hurt the enemy would be interesting to see gt Gill gamesch Mesopotamia gt There is no evidence of capability of climate change gt 15 years ago china didn t want to get involve in arms race with the US gt assymetric weapons gt Brtish expected that any attack will come from the sea gt Cannin prepare for an attack by swa gt BUT the japenese came by land gt German vs France French lowground rathe than high ground gt Information warfare cyber gt Culturally condition of killing people civilian in a position with weapons for example women and children with weapons sad Hussein so US did not want to kill this civilians gt Assymetric con ict 911 fully fueled planes gt Ammtrack gt Terrorist plan to strike again they will nd different ways gt Assesing technological change is wether what one is witnessing is a change in quantity or a change in quality gt QUANTITIVE increases in speed protection mobility or payload 20 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES QUALITATIVE to take just a few design parameters should not bring radical changes in war sometimes incremental improvement auguris Cohen 144146 is skeptical that asymmetric challenges can reduceeliminate technological advantages llllll l l a Assymetric Challenges quotModern guerillas and terrorist make use of cell hpones electronic trigerring devices and extremely sophisticated explosives for their bombs those countering them use even more shopisticated forms of electronic sweeping and neutralizations Technology remains critical even in lowintesity con ict and technological competitions between bommaker and bomb seeker between guerilla in ambus and convoy readt to ght its way through between those protecting voting places and those seeking to prevent elections to persiti Cohen modern guerrillas use cellphone and sophisticated explosives lsraeli vs Palestinians cellphone tecnhniques Using UVAs Methods you can use assymetric warefare Colombia tracking sustem high tech or low tech RAND Longrange high technology useful for countries engaged in con ict in which they have clear air superiority they are expengve Longrange low technology lranian Abadil it uses basic radio remote control to allow un manned ight and video recording they use materials that are available at hobby shops Shortrange high technologycommercial airlines technology is available for civilians the requirements for target recognition and successful attack mean that any such systems could only be manufactured by a wealthy and technologically adavanced military power Shortrange lowtechnology radio controlled model airplanes have been widely available commercially for many decades Cohen conclusion technology remains critical Technology sophisticated defeated by population incentive or pressure of will More concretely in September 2002 Bush announced a new national security strategy whose salient points were 1 the US will make no distinction between terrorists and those who knowingly harbor or provide aid to terrorists 21 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES 2 sanctioning preemptive strikes quotWe must be prepared to stop rogue states and their terrorist clients before they re able to threaten or use weapons of mass destruction WMD against the US and its alliesquot 3 the US will seek the support of the international community but is prepared to act alone if it cannot get that support Bush s 421 principle for US military It must be able to deter in four places counterattack in two 0 if necessary go to the enemy s capital in one of these two all of these have caused controversy quotare you safer now than you were before 911quot Obama gt promised too much gt Afghanistan got worse no correlation gt Taliban taking control of afghanistan gt lSlS killing people gt lSRS intelligence surveillance reconnaissance and strike systems able to operate far off land and sea bases to counter efforts to inhibit freedom of navigation intimidate our allies gt Integrate the Taliban in afghanistan gt Araba spring north Africa emulated because of corruption gt Iran and north korea Obama visited Australia new strategy pivot to asia rebajarle al middle east and concentrate in Asia Obama took some time before articulating a strategy in November 2011January 2012 the pivot to Asia 0 this employs a strategy that was developed a bit earlier the AirSea battle 2010 means intelligence survillence lSRS in other words paralysis misile that destroy bases and then it will paralyze rat and annihilate later that is the logo gt this was heavily criticize strengthen highliners in china gt what is the alternative what is it 0 China has made advances in weapons technology that surprise and concern our defense plannersintent seems to be anti accessarea denial AAA2meaning exclude US from AsiaPacific region 0 the 2012 document stresses security in Asia unspoken China threat as well as cyberspace defense special operations forces and intelligencesurveillancereconnaissance 22 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES speci cally lSRS intelligence surveillance reconnaissance and strike systems able to operate far off land and sea bases to counter efforts to inhibit freedom of navigation intimidate our allies missiles to strike air elds air and missile defense sites naval battle groups temporary paralysis then xedwing aircraft andor cruise missiles destroy the basesaircraft carriers before the paralyzed sites can be brought back on line quotparalyze rst annihilate laterquot gt dEVELOPMENT OF DIFFERNET WEAPONS gt Ballistic missiles anti acces aerial denial push out of the paci c gt Has this strategy being applied Very politly Article sent by email US troops Darwin Australia New navy deployement to sigapore Cooperation with US and philipines ill however no noticeable progress or strategy for dealing with Iran North Korean proliferation what does this mean in terms of grand strategy some critics argue US hasn t had a grand strategy since Cold War endednor even the capacity for meaningful net assessment and planning 0 if US doesn t have the will and the means to continue its international activism it will lost its position of primacyat least to niche regional competitors Cohen 157 imagines the future of military technology as 1 new organizations operational conditions incentives to strike rst 2 war in cyberspace 3 advances in a nanotechnologiesstudy of small things rearranging molecules of things used for god things detect cancer cells in a person self stream nano object attack speci c deadly cells regulate the beat of you heart battle bullet proof armor airplane skin see through walls osama bin landen shot him counterfeiting north korea detect the bad chanel bag ll llllll 23 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES gt molecular con gurations b robotics japanotaku robots communicating with each other unlikely humans will leave the battle eld more ghthin small intelligent machines spy devices such as bugs camaras yaround bug things untraceable weapons of mass destruction network cameras face recognition online shopping gt very dif cult walking robots c arti cial intelligence trading stocks buy sell gt Use to control robots toys gt Allocating transplants gt Help pilots by making decisions gt Takes over human instinct gt Replacing human brains insticts danger gt Maybe mind control gt lllll till though it s unlikely that humans will leave the battle eld completely llllll Future in military technology moving into space Navigationinformation predicting climate Space store different things banning weapons in space Weapons into space lasers blind satellites drones transformative warfare or not depends Policy makers and experts have descrived armes UAV as revolutionizing the way nations conduct war and as being game changers putting their development in the same category as the advent of airpower or even atomic bomb Are they really transformative With the exception of nuclear weapons no single new weapons system itself changes the fundamental nature of warfare BUT new systems sometimes offer signi cant changes that do alter warfare to different degrees The present of revolutionary weapons should tilt the battle eld in favor but may not win the war by themselves If armed UAVs are revolutionary weapons then their pres ence on one side but not another should decisively tilt the battle eld in favor of their possessor though they may not win the war by themselves The possessor is likely to also need to make 24 jU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES doctrinal changes and develop supporting technologies to make the systems transformative In the end any judgment is likely to be subjective to some degree Historians hotly debate whether the tank and blitzkrieg was a revolution or simply an evolution in tactics But if armed UAVs rise to the level of tanks and blitzkrieg a case in which the technology and associated doc trine dramatically increased German military power until adver saries particularly the Soviet Union developed a commensurate capacity then we will judge them to be transformative Fulhla I Eumimairjr uni rmadl lunar E i and limit Slater Jill Eaaaa aura Afghanislan Tc aian willI U5 mapall FFCII IEE Anaar Dina India Tarrariai camp in Fakialan Iran Saudi ralaia Al WEI UE hamaaland Al Wanda linked Dapluyad LIE ll39 lJl39QE E39Lgquot laraaai F a ihll Lilli Diarulal39 al Gaada TIEgal lBtIElEI39EI39IlP than air maparf nga r lB 39ElBI39EI39IlP Symbolic mapalm la larrar39 l aims Elrilra Saudi military and paliliaal iriraalmizlura TIEgal apnlmlia iriraalmalura Elrilra I15 lam quotr1 IHJllta swarm lElaimmarrd diamalian Lawrial iriarlrari ia n Targal diacrirn39rlalim Faraa adm39lalianaa Laaai mmignly inlrirgamari ll39 illl39l allarndia39aaa Eammand d39 malian Targal diacrirni lalian Farm adqafaliana Flaw allamafiaraa EGI39I39II39I39IDI39EEI diamalian Targal diacrirn39rlalim Farm adw39laliana Enaia39laa lastsaudit infamnlian llinar damage In group ii maFul Faliliaal damm39 lralian al llama all aalian i39 Laaa palatial r39 la airmaldian Minar damage ii maid Kill Emaham Payahabgiaal impact Small syslama migd rl fanl ar dalnnaiaa Kill Amariaarla her clamp ayalarna lint ara may la mplaaa Niarnaliara ayal arna axial haa InsularHal aamlarmuraa Taliban aauriarrnaaauraa Lma capabilin iar uaa lgllaniahn imam anuiraa aanlinuad LIE aupparl Niarnaliara ayal arna axial Fallanlial Iillilai39ealraarIjr aaunlarrnaaawaa Elminr dmamad Falialani air dalanaaa Same allarna r39rra axial aaldian mmidanaa rial gmran r aad Niarnalhaa aria wizaaaraim ar auirida hamlaing SaudifUEL air dalanaaaa likaly la dalad and dawn airEraFl Dim minaralzllar la air dalanaiaa P any aaaiar diarnaliaraa Hal a garnawinnar Haal39F Linilad IIIFl ijl39f for ma Ernal ayafama Fuck laaa larger syalama hardar Iai acquirer and ma Linilad lafl39ralily rial dmlapad by adm39aariaa 1iiiJuliarvizllaila Ian Elil39lEF aauriarrnaaauraa Cohen pointers of future of weapons in space kinetic weapons gt Cyber weapons blind satelittes on cyberwar Amy Chang s major concern seems to be with Chinese efforts to quotexfiltratequot data from US but there are other even more serious aspects of war in space 0 April 2014 Russians reportedly severed connection between a US drone in Crimea and its operators january 2015 China announced establishment of a school of cyberengineeering in Xi an 25 jU LIANA CARVAjAL YEPES till i Cyberwar chinese ex ltrate data form the US China school form cyber engeenering Cyber war China BOTH US AND CHINA HAVE COMPLETE DISTRUST FOR EACH OTHER China s foreign policy behavior including itscyber activity is driven primarily by the domestic political imperative to protect the longevity of the Chinese Communist Party CCP Ensuring domestic stability territorial integrity moderniza tion and economic growth while simultaneously preparing for the possibility of militarized cyber con ict in the future are all objectives that directly or indirectly support the continuation of CCPrule Beijing s thinking about cybersecurity and its cybersecurity strategy consists of three main com ponent drivers economic political and military Important manifestations of those drivers are 0 Maintaining economic growth and stability which involves industrial economic cyber espio nage of US and other foreign targets 0 Protecting the governing power of the Chinese Communist Party through information control propaganda and targeting of domestic sources of potential unrest 0 Using computer network operations to signal dissatisfaction with foreign powers over develop ments outside of China eg maritime territorial disputes foreign allegations of Chinese hacking activity that negatively affect China s reputation 0 Preparing for military scenarios and ensur ing military superiority in the event of cybered con ict with an adversary through military modernization computer network operations research and human capital cultivation o Studying and understanding potential adver saries military infrastructures motivations objectives capabilities and limitations in the cyber domain 0 Advancing alternative narratives of government control overhandling of cybersecurity interna tionay eg promoting sovereignty of states to control the Internet within a country s borders and domestically eg justifying domestic sur veillance information control gt cybersecurity strategy remains fragmented and its bureaucratic structure remains disorganized char acterized by competition for stakeholder resources and in uence on policy direction gt China s network security strategy aspires to protect and promote its domestic economy aows sufficient latitude for maintaining 26 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES domestic security through infor mation control measures and promotes military development providing direction for both defen sive and offensive measures gt Industrial cyber espionage where countries and non state actors ex ltrate large amounts of indus trial economic information including trade secrets research and development and products occurs at a massive scale in China gt The Chinese government worries that unrestricted Internet access or uncontrolled information or dissent might pose a signi cant risk to the Chinese communist regime s stability and hold on power gt China considers US cybersecurity strategy to be hypocritical and threatening to Chinese interests Chinese analysts have highlighted how the United States uses its network and information technology to interfere in the internal affairs of other nations and how US hegemony in the network domain endangers China s political network cultural and military security10 gt Snowden intelligence leaks in May and June 2013 and the US Department ofJustice indictment of ve PLA officers for economic espio nage in May 2014 indicate that regardless of the avenues pursued to change China s behavior mili tary diplomatic and criminal in these instances US behavior modi cation efforts that threaten the existence of the CCP are likely to provoke undesir able reactions gt United States has confronted China on several occasions about transparency and cyber intrusions allegedly aimed at ex ltrat ing US commercial and military data Efforts to resolve these differences have stalled with US classi ed intelligence leaks from former US government contractor Edward Snowden which revealed extensive surveillance and espionage programs that included Chinese targets and Chinese discontent over the Department ofJustice indictment of ve PLA hackers on drones RAND says that the more sophisticated varieties give the US quotsome signi cant advantagesquot 0 no combat risk to the pilots can be called in to loiter identify targets where enemy or its weapons caches are or are moving 0 generally cost less some problems arise given the increasing number of states possessing UAVS 20 now there are questions about how the existing rules of war apply 27 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES for example if country X shoots down a UAV over its territory is that an act of war More sophisticated varities give the US so means under international law If you shoot act of war if it s a drone is an act of war US strategy right now Critics strategy until the end of the COLD war US Operational Use of UAVs and International Norms on Use of ForceUS operational use of armed UAVs generally have been cases in which the adversary has limited air defenses but with impor tant variations In some cases US use has been in war zones in some cases not Sometimes use of force has been authorized by Congress other times not Sometimes armed UAV strikes have been conducted by the Central Intelligence Agency CIA other times by BOB Finally the types of targets have va ed I till T l l ILL5 BEE ll nned HERE Il WHIIILIE MIME lulu hi Farm Rnngnl d flangrlu39innull Eun l i 39 War I m hcuihl rilm nn Eill TaraIii IlulrgalIItrlgi EHMI39IHII39 Mdmni un Ya Ta AM Haifacl LEI IEUEII pmsat j Cmbal unh Signuhm Embal Suppmt Pathhm Mn VH3 1iJamicl L39 l ImeEnls 59mm 5th Iraq HIDFly Ya Ta Cmbal39unh Gumball Suppart gum 2mgquot Iraq Gumbo Ya Ya Suppart EDIE Iraq CHIN I as T55 AM VBI IHEI l39n39l EDIE Elm Cmbul unh E39gnulurE Eunhcll SuppEH1 I39Emarl Ha Ha List EDI and E ll hamgunk Syn mm I EE Mu Cmbal unh Eunhnl Support E ll Smnliu Ha Ha L39 l EDI lhsugmls quot3 Mull ramJ r ml mm quotILIr In Earrul un tquot mriml r minus In llamai anklesLn nanmu mmmudr gt Challenges for US Efforts to Shape International NormsWhile a majority of Americans albeit a shrinking majority support the use of armed UAVs international public supportis quite weak55 Public concerns and international controversy may make it more difficult for US democratic allies to acquire and use armed UAVs in USsupported military operations while also making it more difficult for the United States to effectively criticize acquisition and use of armed UAVs by US adversaries Moreover this lack of international support for the way the 28 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES United States is using its armed UAVs could make it harder to take the lead in shaping international norms consis tent with US practices gt Past and Current Efforts in Designing International Norms for Military TechnologiesAs in past efforts to de ne international norms for speci c weapon systems another challenge will be balancing thetwin goals in military operations of operational exibility and restraint In the case of armed UAVs there is the speci c issue of clearly de ning norms that preserve the rights of countries to use these systems in legitimate ways against legitimate threats gt eg senior al Qaeda af liated terrorists while constraining illegitimate uses eg political dissidents gt The Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons the Mine Ban Treaty and the DoD Directive on Autonomy in Weapon Systems are examples of technologies where this has been attempted albeit with mixed results But they provide useful background for the issues that the United States will need to consider in addressing armed UAVs including how much of a leadership role that it will wish to take For each of these regimes Table 4 describes their guidelines on the use of the new technology whether the United States played a leader ship role in developing norms and whether US actions may have affected the actions of other states In these examples two kinds of norms predominate norms that emphasize transpar ency and norms that restrict use Tulblle it New Tedhnmlugf s and Iln llerniiinnl Hams US liliullll quotin null null ILLS lnhmm nnnl lrnhrmiu nnul Humml miiamil in iiifitting lhgiin I lGillilcllllr39il39illn nilI LLquot Dw npmnmi liniiirnnliimnuil lulll Hlindin Emmr jn an Caitlin thibil use Inf Imam dasignntl fu an 39lmn pas Tm Imam Cmr und mum pannmunf blindnam ul39hEH Wm Imam rid FEEIT39iEl39BiEI nlipanmmal Mina Ham Hun an Innquotiridian used Eg imfl39 Mr Unclear Inndmintm SEW pa pl mli vahids minram rant 1 Inlyd Mbnmm Ellnu Dimdi va m1 Hum 39 dmlnplm naHthir quotFEE TED mupm in Haupm uubnmiuus mpun Farm and minim Brahma asltlluIid39l Euidalina tit use lquot Ll l I H hll nJ IIII I5Il I a IJ I1I amrL laI1i lam Ifi ur n JZI I rFI I Colin Gray Beware of those who are addicted to the use of the thoroughy misleading concept the foreseeable future The future is not foreseeable period 29 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES gt PREEMPTIVE STRIKE gt INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION INF NOT UNILATERAL This being the case does the US actually need a grand strategy If we had one could it be counterproductive Unit 3 Defense Budget Cold war It of money for the defense budget Pece dividend a payment divided among a number of people eg members of a cooperative or creditors of an insolvent estate Sadam Hussein invaded Kuwait North korea testing nuclear weapons 1992 china unilaterally annex all of the ilsands in the south china sea Balkans etnic dispute 199092 world remains dangerous Defense Budget how big Insurance policy to small it will expose yourrcounty to danger III II III Den Tepline item 2020 TED Pregeetetl Levels SEED 325 H EH1 Pi BE CH t T HE H 1 Pi MD gtT E3 id if F ii bu 3 P QB P5 P E H3 H3 39 i Hi be 5 5 E PH 39 39 EH1 F F f t Ei 5 31 MEI Hi HE HE i H3 1amp1 in H51 ME M M r you 7 7 7 or 7 7 E FTii Ff i Ffi Fi4 F 5 Ff FfiT Ff F 9 Ffl FTII F12 F13 Ff14 F15 Ffi FTIT F1E F19 Ff elleete F H lEneetetl level exeuding vSeueetretien Members may eel see fee re mending Current Dellere in Eiillienel quotdefense dividendquot never as much as people thought it would be although sharp cuts were made after the end of the Cold War 30 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES two most common ways of looking at budgets by category of expenditure 0 by military department 2016 President s Budget Dollars in lBilliens Personnel and lllilleiiritenelnee Procurement RDTEtE 3th er may nail WEE 10 llE1 0 ll ll 3 Air Force l 1 51 lDelfe nee Wide 940 34 Numbers may not add clue In rounding Base Budget Request 5343 Billion many ways to looking at the defense budget of which the most common are 0 in constant ie in ationadjusted or current nonadjusted dollars 0 include the base budget only or total the base budget and supplemental budget OCO overseas contingency operations in which case the budget looks larger 0 as a percentage of the overall federal budget 0 as a percentage of national income GDP 0 Number of different ways of looking at the budget Contstant dollars not in ation o 1 lsr graphic current dollars in ation 2 Base budget only constant dollars base fail because all classes of weapons failing o Oe tHERE IS MORE OVERSEAS CONTEGINCY OPERATIONS IF you do not include them the budget looks larger 0 3 percentage overall budget 31 jU LIANA CARVAjAL YEPES 4 percentage of national income Gross domestic product 0 budget deficit partly because department of defense because in afghanistan 1in constant dollars base defense budget after reaching a peak in 2010 fell sharply over next 5 years due to sequestration spending in line with taxes congress effort if you cannot come to an agreement impose a system where every program is going to be cut an equal amount drawdown from Iraq and Afghanistan is now projected to rise again due to apparent abandonment of sequestration The supplementary budget has also decreased gt where to cut the federal budget gt Defense department declining 2as a share of the federal budget if up or down tells us about government s priorities currently 16 percent to go to 12was 28 during Reagan administration due to cold war contrast this with entitlements 48 now projected to go to 53 in ten years 3 as a share of GDP 35 percent now projected to be 26 in 2019 typically the entire federal budget consumers 20 percent of GDP 0 major entitlements are 10 percent of GDP the defense budget itself can be analyzed according to allocations either 0 by category of expenditure 0 personnel 0ampM procurement RDTampE the big 4 military construction a catchall other 0 by military department army navy includes marines air force defensewide consideration the rst the categories notice that the increases in personnel and constructionfamily housing are small those for operations and maintenance are doubledigit and the RDTampE somewhere in the middle a note about the US defense budget v those of other countries beware of comparisons with other countries military budgets since 0 often they don t include the same items US eg includes retirement health costs housing other countries may not 32 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES ill ill costs differ in different countries saaries in India Vietnam China are very low in Japan Sweden France etc are substantially higher China 1989 budget increase in defense in double digit Military 77 increased because other things got slashed Chinese come with better bombs 2010 it did not increase FY2016 16 OF THE FEDERAL BUDGET OCTOBER 1ST Projected to be down 12 percent Reagen 28 percent How to contrast with other items Entitlements 48 percent increase to 53 percenet social security and medicare Entitlement 10 of GDP By category of expenditure 0 Personal 0 Operation 0 Research development testing 0 Military construction and other Allocations of services 0 Army 0 Marines o Airforce 0 Navy Military rase 13 percent depending on the in ation operations maintanace US defense budget compared to other countries often they don t include the same services US include child care lodgin places housing allowances Personal includes social security Chines buying weapons to rusia they did not included this in their budget India and China Personal payed differently Better payed japenese military get paid really well Swedish lllllllll ll as for how the Overseas Contingency Operations OCO supplementary budget is allocated gt gt gt gt Overseas contenginct operations Operations interventions Operations and maintance pay for Health care facilities 33 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES gt Cost of fuels and repairs of military aircraft gt salary of 9 thousand of DoD pays for drivers secretaries etc gt 60 million supply operations every years moving munitions gt research development tester gt develop it but not test it Not practical idea 2 16 000 Funding mailers in Eillliene By Operation 3y Apprepriaean RDTEEi Military GTIPF andl ERI I P re eu reme i lllli Dperailliiana 13 INlHElREllllllT 39V RESDLTUE f peratien QR FREEDDM S 53 SENTIN EL 7 DFS and 0th er V Peatl M 52135 Uperatien and Dperatien 39 39 Maintenanee N EW DAWN 402 N U Activities 2M Request 9 billion ETF39F Eeun e enre lem Partnerships Fund ER European Reaeeuranee initiative what are the aims of FY 2016 budget ve key priorities acc g to DoD report are 1 rebalance to AsiaPaci c 2 maintain strong commitment to security and stability in Europe and the MidEast 3 sustain global approach to countering violent extremists 4 prioritize and protect key investments in technology 5 reinvigorate efforts to build innovative partnerships 6 looking at allocations by service after WW N there was a meeting at Key West 1948 to devise some gures for allocation of the budgetthe air force which used to be part of the army was now a separate service the gures they arrived at were 28 for the army and 36 apiece for the navy including the marines and the air force 34 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES OCD advances in technical procedures commercial space station spins of spins off COTS Civilian over the Counter technolohy open to the public spin off RDTampE Key west 1948 DoD plan to spend the FY 2016 budget proposed FY 2016 budget total 4404 B for the three services 29 army 36 navy 35 air force meaning these gures have remained relatively constant over the years how speci cally does DoD plan to spend the FY 2016 budget 57 Joint Strike Fighters 106 billion 16 P8 aircraft 34 B Poseidon 5 E2 D aircraft 13 B Advanced Hawkeye KC46 tanker 30 B for in ight refueling longrange strike development 12 B 9 ships unspeci ed 116 B regularly scheduled overhaul of the CVN George Washington 678 M strategic submarine development replacing the Ohio class 14 B improvements in the capabilities of littoral combat ships like the Zumwalt class 55 M enhancements to cyber capabilities 55 B upgraded reliability for groundbased interceptors 16 B modernization of army helicopters replace Hueys of VN war fame 45 B procurement of Reapers MQ9 821 M MQ9 increased emphasis on technological innovations including 0 high speed strike weapons I assume this means hyposonic weapons 0 railguns 0 high energy lasers 0 advanced sensors communications capabilities and munitions for power projection cyber securities 4 points 35 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES investigations on cyber attack 0 MUNK cyber hunters 0 Increase emoahsis in technology innovation 0 Congress quotnation securityquot more expect many criticisms of the budget from congress think tanks and others on both the left and the right Unit 4 Strategic Arms Control suggested further reading wwwfasordnukecontrol Federation of American Scientists wwwiaeaorg International Atomic Energy Agency wwwuscusaorg Union of Concerned Scientists wwwdefenselinkmilnews Department of Defense website arms control not the same as disarmament gt DisarmamentO the reduction 0 abolition of armament it may be unilateral or multilateral general or local controlled or uncontrolled Arms control restraint internationally exercised upon armaments policy wether in respect of the level of armaments their character deployement or use Disarmament tries to get more rid of weapons Arms control certain control legitimate to have weapons History of mostly failure US and Russia have always had problems since the cold war Iran and NK currently having negotiations 1979 debate carter if we don t approve this agreement we will have a huge arms race The issue between Russia and the US was that neither sinde wanted equivalence of weapons First strike w ab Second stricke w ba No clear attack anymore non declared nuclear powers terrorist Dirty Bomb not considered nuclear weapons because it does not involve nuclear ass radiology weapons 1900 people were actually concern Gillbert and Sullivan utopia llllll l llllll l ll arms control has a disappointing history 36 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES two Hague conferences 1899 and 1907 limitations on developing and testing and creating weapons also reducing existing 0 Washington Naval Agreement 1922 Certain capital ships 0 Geneva Protocol 1925 0 Geneva Disarmament Conference 1927 KelloggBriand Pact 1928 outlawed war a till l l l a a a a a One thing they all had in coomo was that was full on elegant language but did not have any mechanism to ensure compliance There was also a gap between the country representative when they signed and that did not meant it was a deal because it needed to be ratify When countries do agree they could get out by building something less to no over the limit For example Washington naval treaty Japense fell humiliated we are going to modernize They Built a large number of ships under the limit of the treaty at this time national self interest and ambition for power increased there was no certainty for peace countries could not seem to agree on what constituted the balance of equipment cold war soviet union had a larger army and more tanks the US more superior navy how to compare they could not compare or agree on a speci c amount to be equal negotiation involving more than 2 who is ally tha n who and under what circumstances tricky business allies agreement lussia was distrusted by Russia and viceversa because Soviet union had killed polish officers massacres never be sure if you can count on an ally if there is war imperative to make sure that a deployement of nuclear weapon don t happen again 1945 Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear weapon deployement advent the arrival of a notable person thing or event of nuclear weapons gave new urgency to effort a Horizontal nuclear ploriferation the spread of nuclear weapons tomore states or other international actors is creating new threats to the international security enviromrnt as an increasing numbers of states obtain these weapons Vertical nuclear ploriferation an increase in the number of nuclear weapons quotFirst Nuclear Agequot 19451991 US v USSR Walton p 197 37 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES gt 194548 US was popping economy of china france and UK we had our votr and those 3 US control of weapons until an agency was created Other plans became to be suggested but the issues of rati cation Russia must not be trusted gt Russia thought that allowing weapons to be inspected by the US military is like letting spys in gt Soviets refuse to agree at any inspection formula gt Shift towards a limited kind of agreement Baruch Plan 1946 UN would take charge of destroying Nuclear Weapons and all other nations will be under jurisdiction Antarctica Treaty 1955 signed by 12 nations prohibits use of Antarctica for military purposes they are various research facilities national geographic problem is that is getting messy and in Antarctica garbage dosent melt gt As fair a we know is not being use for military purposes so we may somewhat think that the treaty is being enforced Hot Line Agreement 1963 allowed for US and the Soviets to have direct communication 0 Limited Test Ban Agreement 1963 prohibits nuclear weapons test quotor any other explosion in the atmosphere outerspace underwater Does not prohibiy UNDERGROUND france Outer Space Treaty 1963 prevents arms race in space Seabed Treaty 1972 prohibits deployment of nuclear weapons in the seabed tm ground under the sea the ocean oor rati ed by 66 ABM AntiBallistic Missile Ballistic Misilie they carry a payload of conventional or WMD warheads carry independently targetablr warheads Treaty 1972 included in SALT l Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty l NTM national technical means SALT l 1972 1962 cuban misile cris so the soviet union had inferiority gt Stalin never said nothing like that gt Soviet say they have to build repecursion US is looking at this gt End of 60 s soviet union had deployed a lot of missile that could survive US rst stike gt Nixon suf ciency doctrine means enough force to in ict a level of damage on a potential aggressor suf cient to deter him from attacking US acknologes the existence of likely nuclear weapons US has better satellite and sensors NTM inspection a nation can use it own technical means to inspect weapons ill 38 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES lllllll It It i l III III There was a fear of a large scale of depolyement destabilize the agreement MUTUAL ASSURED DESTRUCTION it was assumed that both the US and the SU would not use nuclear weapons if they believed that no matter how successful a rst sticke might be it would lussiastane to eliminate the ability of the other power to execute a devastating retaliatory strike Fear is that this could destabilize it Sticking points 1 numerically quality of vehicles SU rejected it because the argued the had more but theirs were less accurate Soviets are behind and afrad the other huge concer is China Williniki letters Zaar Nicholas of Russia cousing of germant Kaize wrote each other miki warning niki about yellow Soviet Union offering prices for soviet mothers motocycle Food very scarce Russian women no having babies Etnic minorities muslim Russian population declining US does not want to sign a treaty Strategic weaponary nw desined ro be used on targets as part of a strategic planc strategic deterrent Tactical nuclear weapons intended for use in battle against troop concetrations ships or similar targets submaries Strategic nuclear weapons delibered at very long ranges by intercontinental ballitic missile submarienelaunched ballistic missiles of heavy bombers these weapons can strike deep into enemy territory thousand of miles from the point at which they we launched Soviet Union nuclear system capable of striking opponents territory US trap includes delivery sstem to support the NTU Stationed in ally countries If the US agreed it would be bad After 30 moths and 3 separated agreeemtns where made 1 ABM TREATY 1971 5 YEARS This agreement barred both countries from constructing comprehensive national missile defense 2 INTERIM AGREEMENT 3 PROTOCOL INTERIM AGREEMENT End US and SU made concession US drop numerically equally soviets agreed ti out of SBS limits on offensive and defensive weapons simultaneously 39 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES a a Difference between nonproliferation and counterproliferation both relate to efforts to prevent horizontal proliferation of weapons Nonproliferation reference to international legal arrangements such as the NPT Conterproliferation refers to the ENFORCEMENT of the NPT conterproliferation can involver a variety of measures including military force SALT ll never rati ed withdrawn by Carter 1980 agreed on inde nite extension of the ABM TREATY and limited 2400 strategic nuclear vehicle SLMB heavy bombers also banned construction and conversion fomr and sea air light to heavy a ill ill l a a a bid disagreements the US wanted to coint soviet bomber treaty was controversials and debates in the US the real issue we did not trust the soviets to comply with the treaty SU was building arms and tanks They were also using Cuban proxies quotcastors ideaquot They were black t in the local population in Angola and Zimbawe Portuguese They were active in the middle eadt Brigade to cuba TRUST When the soviets invaded lussiastan carter withdrew from the SALT Reagen was against the SALT he think Rusia was an quotevil empire very dif cult to negotiate Russia leader was ick and died Then came gorbachev he showed willingness to negotiate He agreed to onsite inspectionINF Treaty START START talks start Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty limit them to 2000 it had an expiration for 19912009 nonnuclear weapons INF Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty 1988 USSR accepts onsite inspection ll BUT the Soviet Union disintegrated we had a treaty with a country that dosent exist anymore Bush 41 Soviet union wasi n terrible nancial debts Russia Yaltson made money illegaly he was an alcoholic Soviet Union japan never signed a peace treaty because of the islands Russians took islands military did not let them go island wee choke points 40 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES ill ll ll a a At the time Russian economy was decreasing condition were right to get a deal Loose nukes nuclear weapons not well guarded therefore can be sold stolen or detonated we want to get rid because we are afraid of what can happen Russia had some nuclear weapons in their territorial but Belaris Kazakstan and Ukraine that were before part of the SU had stockpiles START 2 crisis it is an issue more of money Multi war head vehicle us wanted those gone Cruise missiles counted as totals rather by being miscounted issue in SALT Cruise missiles a missile with an air breathing motor in essence a small pilotlrdd aircraft carry nuclear tip Dictator gov came into power again 1972 ABM treaty American congress dominated by republicans they prohibited cutting nuclear weapons until Russia rati ed the treaty DUMAcasa del president Russia rati ed 2000 START 2 IT DIDN NOT WNET INTO FOCE THEREFORE IT WAS NOT FlNALlZED START lll died because it was linked to the 2 US Clinton Poland nuclear weapons he arms Poland and says that this is to protect Poland from iran attack This is perceived as offensive from lussia START I II and Ill SORT aka Moscow Treaty US USSRRussia to cut strategic nuclear arsenals by 40 0 nuclear arms control involves more than just US USSRFSU lllllllllll l Obama get arms reduction and woned the noble ptize quotfor his personal engagement for nuclear disarmamanetquot nuclear arms deployed slowly soviet union deploy in 1949 Britan 1952 China 1962 Nuclear Club lsrael 196869 and India 1974 South Africa 198081 Pakistan1986 India 1986 First 5 vetos announce and came clear The other denied until 1988 only india nuclear 1979 US reconosaince satellite Commercial pilot saw mushroom Israel too small Taiwan testing in soth Africa 1978 contest who could develi a nuclear weapoce pricetone 41 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES Second Nuclear Age 1991 a a a a gt there are no bene ts in announcing nuclear status gt neighboring countries will have to have pressure on the country Walton p 200 When soviet union disintegrated deterrence might not work using nuclear weapons is foolish don t know anymore what to do Nonproliferation supported by Russia more nuclear weapons more to happen Danger becausequot Super power status control of territories Terrorist can obtain them 0 horizontal proliferation now more important than vertical proliferation o in addition to France Britain China and most recently India and Pakistan N Korea there are also undeclared nuclear powers Israel South Africa formerly Libya which later indicated a desire to quotcome cleanquot admitted getting info from Pakistan Algeria and others may be threshold states We thought Iraq had WMD but have not been able to nd them Iran unstable dangerous regimes o nonstate actors like terrorists NMD assuming technical problems can be solved NMD could be useful against rogue states who will have relatively few missiles to attack us with but one shouldn t expect it to protect against an attack with massive numbers of weapons such as Russia and China will be able to launch NMD assuming technical problems can be solved NMD could be useful against rogue states who will have relatively few missiles to attack us with but one shouldn t expect it to protect against an attack with massive numbers of weapons such as Russia and China will be able to launch organizations dealing with nonproliferation issues see also IISS list IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency founded in Vienna 1957 NPT Nuclear NonProliferation Treaty came into force 1970 nw state parties and non nuclear weapons state parties 100 membes peaceful energy on site inspection specifies that energy must not be use for nuclear weapons voluntarily 42 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES I till I II III II III a a a a Not in the treaty Pakistan india north korea China Pakistan north korea from where do this countries go the energy and intelligence of obtaining nuclear weapons IEAE IN ALL NON NUCLAR ACTIVITIEES EXCEPT NUCLEAR SUBMATIES PROPULSION submarine SAFEGUARDS Various effort for nuclear prolifetaros NPT and IAEA Signed to this treaties dosent mean they obey them Look other way when israel took our material India Israel and Pakistan never signed on to any of these treaties ot required to obey Concern with Pakistan is an Islamic state and fair amount of feeling that islam has an enemy in the west sothey have to have deterrence to stay in west maybe they will transfer this AQKON he sayed he did it he is a heroe It did not pleae the United States Issue for anybody in a decision making capacity we odnt like Pakistani we stop foreign aid what happens preferable to try to keep cropping the government so that it dosent take by Islamic fundamelist Israel cannot sign out Norht korea did signed but withdraw compliance is voluntary in any case The provision foro n site inspection are weak you have to give the county notice so they can set you up No real mechanism for punishing violators If you are caught in the violation no one to prove Goes to the security council and there is no country that dosent have an ally in the SC Pakistan dosent need afraid of india but you are afraid of india Israel of nuclear weapons fear is not going NPT nuclear suppliers group techonology is something that can gure out this Lets control this material 31 countries never sure despite signing this agreement 0 Missile Technology Control Regime voluntary arrangement under which the 29 member nations agree to restrict exports of ballistic missiles capable of carrying a payload of at least 500 kg to a range of at least 300 km as well as key missile components and technology to nonmembers of the MTCR Contains no sanctions mechanism even for violators who are members 43 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES NSG Nuclear Suppliers Group 31nation effort to harmonize strengthen export controls of nuclear suppliersincuding peaceful nuclear purposes 0 Zangger Committee similar to NSG in restricting exports of nuclear and dualuse equipment but allows exports to any facility under IAEA safeguards even in countries with unsafeguarded nuclear facilities NSG is more restrictive requires that all nuclear facilities in the recipient country be under IAEA safeguards gt Additional protocol to NPT IAEA access to any facility but acceptance on state is voluntary North korea is hostile Iran is hostile Iraq was hostile believed had nuclear weapons it was behaving when we went in we didn t nd any gt Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence just because you dindt nd it it dosent mean it wasn t their Libya Algeria was know to be working on this weapons there was an Islamic government 12 years ago that look it was elected US make sure this did not happen gt Led by radical leaders who have been hostile to the US or regional allies if they have a small numbers on nuclear arsenal it is a threat to US security the rogue state issueand thusfar available tools to obtain compliance diplomacy arms control and export controls unilateral incentives and disincentives counterproliferation efforts such as interdiction have done little to deter rogue statesso would US feel safer abrogating nuclear primacy gt Rouge states states that have leaders that are too ideoligcal or religious a lot depends on how effective antiballistic missile defenses can be made If a state has only a small number of nuclear weapons it s possible that they could all be intercepted by a welldesigned missile defense system gt South korea destroying the north korea nuclear installation not an attractive action gt lsrael destroy Baghdad buried ssile material gt nORTH KOREA reactor hapoen to have in border with china maybe the fallout we are not sure we can do that radioactive clouds drifting around north korea is very small probably killing a lot of people ill a a 44 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES gt Japense very concern about nuclear explosion radioactive cloud goes in their direction west not east whenever the chinese di a nuclear explosion the japense payed for this gt Stuxknet American and isreaeli cyber attack agisnt iranina nuclear facility alert the iranina government that we have the ability to do something like this gt Work backwards scientist iran can trail so that they can do it too gt US set a counter tracking unit ldaho sensitive to any virus gt The bombing thi slow down the iraqui program on the other hand you can rebuild something according to Montiero and Debs only 9 states currently possess nuclear weaponsso there are far fewer proliferators than pessimists expectedwhat makes states acquire them Their conclusion only two types of states acquire nuclear weapons 1 powerful but highly threatened states does this t lndia 2 weaker states whose territory is progected by an ally they deem unlikely to remain present in the longterm which means Japan should have acquired nuclear weaponsbut it hasnT gt switch focus from the supply side to dermand side gt only 9 states are now known to posses nuclear weapons another factor not all our enemies are states 0 could a nuclear weapon be assembled and detonated within the target country quotloose nukesquot what about quotdirty bombsquot which aren t the same as nuclear weapons 0 principal type of dirty bomb or RDDradiological dispersal devicecombines a conventional explosive with radioactive materialmore people likely to be killed by the explosive than the radiation 45 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES till l ill l l a a 0 even though this is technically nota nuclear weapon it could create major fear and panic Figure 1 The Strategic Logic of Nuclear F rulifaratimn firmer till w mane Erm w r quot 7 I p ml iit g fr 1 Equot E il r li ljrillil I 39 739 mu l V a quotW94 M illtr E 539 f a quotL7 HEIFIIJ1II piggl a mquot A i mm j mp proliwamn rill lflij lr i i quot willl g i A moralii emta RH W W l 39idE m intervening DEII39IEIIIEIEI39IEE dEprand Ent re ies ri i M 39il i ifnljrliEIE WHITE The dotted lines rfEr fun the affect of allian aa clan proliferation 4 factors independent variables the level of the security threat the decision maker perceive how scrared potention prolifetor power relative to its adversary stronger than enemy how much the weapons cost level of allys commitement 2 type of states acquire nuclear weapons 1 powerful but highly threatened states depends on de nition of threat who is india threatened by pakistan China 2 weaker states whos territory is protected by an ally the feel is unlikely to actually protect them in the even what ally needs to security treaty e will protect this islands but we have no psotion on who owns them we are concern by nuclear proliferation major worry is conventional sells of Russia not people building but buying nuclear weapons of ssile material going back to Russia controversy over ABM treatywhich US said it needed to get rid of before it could perfect antimissile shieldresolved w Putin at time SORT signed SORT Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty aka the Moscow Treaty rst signed 502 US rati ed in 303 US Russia agree to reduce operationally deployed warheads to 17002200 46 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES Leaks from Israel to china Chinese gure out by themselves but it have taken them years Sales of nuclear equiments by china to other countries Israel selling materials to the middle east and maybe this countries may be even using them against them Comprehensive test ban treaty senate refused by a relatively narrow margin to ratify it gt Historic failure it eowuld be tempting to blame US domestic politics but is not that simple START treaty expired in December 2009 o initiated in 1982 but not signed until mid1991 right before USSR disintegrated Obama supported renewing it and making additional sharp reductions negotiations then stalled bc Russia views US plan for antimissile shield in Europe as directed against it 0 US denied this said shield was to defend against missiles from Iran till i New START treaty entered into force Feb 5 2011within 7 years each side limited to o 1550 deployed strategic nuclear warheads 800 deployed and nondeployed strategic launchers 700 strategic launchers and heavy bombers unresolved questions 0 what level of warhead reduction is compatible with US national security probably not zero or even a few 0 what if anything should be done about nuclear proliferators options aren t good 0 what realistically could be doneand how not much Obama administration New START to be rst step in further USRussia reductions others disagree suggestions a reduce warheads to 1000 b put limits on non strategic nuclear weapons and nondeployed nuclear warheads Also separately the CTBT should be rati ed some analysts members of congress wouldn t support a treaty that imposed deeper reductions object to CTBT rati cation Hence even though they supported New START believing it wouldn t harm US security they oppose the further extension of Obama s arms control agenda gt Is this treaty going to deprive US from modernizing or maintaining its nuclear capabilities 47 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES a it it ill l ll it i till till That odes mean other countries can go on doing modernizing keeping up their nuclear capabilities whether the veri cation provision are really prevent states frometting nuclear weapons this was not a debate about whether the treaty with uphold the consensus of proliferantion comprehensive you cannot test them benefit for signing the CTBT is not going to contain is going to isolate it forge a global consensus against them abolish nuclear arsenal encourage proliferation NMD NMT ANTIMISSILE DESTRUCTIVE destroy when they come into your territory Technology has not being perfectedO it wont be perfect because of decois other people say that it too expensive two ways that NMD can be employed BMD Mid course intersection 1 very difficult kill in space before they are on their way down enemy use decois to confuse if boost face instersection 2 before it get ot the atmospheric area you would get the submunitions include this like little bombs grenades mines ll with explosive antipernnel weapons anti tank decois and decois payload would go away from you territory and hence reduce the damage can cover a wider area than the mid course any system that can defend the US can defend our allies byt has t be place near enemys launch site it wouldn t help if enemy a large country Russia india or china ABM treaty Russians said it violated this technology is so different htati t dosent apply we signed with soviet union Putin was really using ABM as a bargaining ship what he wanted was concession elsewhere 6 mohths the US had withdrew form the ABM treaty reaction Russia and china was okay this did not trigger proliferation what level is comparable with US security Argument people that want to get rid with all of them The argument how low without tempting hstile movement to match the US Russia chin or perhaps attack bc we don t have anny What can you do with nuclear proliferators lran I don t see that US can do anything to stop iran Natanayu bomb iran is not a middle east state There would be tremendous blowback 48 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES ll lll llll lll Answer not much Most expert agree that US should not reduce to 0 because this would tempt the adversary small Most adversaries are limited what the can do by nancial contraints They cannot exceed US arsenal other ptentialadversaries large and wealthy to ll large numbers of misiles lets be nice to each other exhausted the possibilities we have no good solution no consesu on anything of these best tool to get compliance diplomacy arms control negotiation we have tried a lot in this and no real responds sanctions typically don t work Putin has had sanctions hurt people anyway Panam Noriega and castro Some state 5 voluntarily accept nuclear weapons south Africa apartheid we don t need them here come take them Libya admitted and gave their weapons not deployable nuclear weapons but yes a program Concerns re Terrorism major threat is not that terrorists will acquire a working atomic bomb from poorly guarded facilities but that they will be able to buy enough ssile material to make a crude bomb themselves epicenter of the nuclear black market is the Black Sea area with its wellorganized criminal gangs US must step up its enforcement efforts there how lll lll could a nuclear weapon could be assembled and detonated in the target country Yes Could you set a nuclear weapons in a trash can Dirty bombs not same as nuclear weapons radiological dispersal device combines conventional explosive radioactive material Create major panic Black sea worlds nuclear black market Russia Nearly 2 thousand tons of highly enriched uranium in store in hundred of building in countries facilities that range from security to none Insiders we typically arrested the reason is that they now how to steal it and not how to sell it 49 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES a Different countries very difficult to be able to enforce this easy to bribe agency people Unless US steps up it law enforcement terrorist will be able to attain this material bottom line arms control works only when the politics are right if there 5 trust between the leaders of the countries in volved which is the time that arms control is least needed a till in the long run every restrictiong the sile material is likely to fail success of deterrence depends on one adversary believeing you have only the means but also to carry put a counter strike if people think US is all talk and no action gorbachev and the soviet union not much if there is trust among leaders involve CBM con dene building measures 3 aproachees to arms control a a Disarment arms control counterproliferation weak state is likely to acquire nuclear weapons only when it pos sesses a powerful ally that is neither willing to offer reliable future protection guarantees nor able to issue consequential threats of immediate abandonment Our theory highlights ave hitherto underappreciated patterns of nuclear proliferation First states that do not face a highlevel security threat have not acquired the bomb Second weak states that did not beneat from the protec tion of a powerful ally committed to retaliating against an eventual preventive strike such as contemporary Iran have not acquired the bomb10 Third states whose security goals are subsumed by their powerful allies own aims have not acquired the bomb Among states that possess a powerful ally only those whose security goals are not entirely covered by this ally have acquired nuclear weapons Fourth US threats of abandonment are effective in curtail ing proliferation only by prot g s that are relatively weak visavis their ad versaries Such was the case of Taiwan and West Germany both of which Washington coerced into maintaining their nonnuclear status Fifth the spread of nuclear weapons decelerated with the end of the Cold War in 1989 EXAM 3 CHOICES BROAD TOPICS BUDGET STRATEGC ARMS AND NEG 50 JU LIANA CARVAJAL YEPES STRATEGY UNIT CHOOSE TWO 8 SHORT ANSWER QUESTION ntm is countervalue safeguards EXTRA CREDIT Not easy Current events 51
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'