Search

"Ungoverned spaces" are increasingly cited as a key threat to the U.S. government and its interests throughout the world. Often these spaces are seen as synonymous with failed states, or states that are unable to effectively exercise sovereignty. A key goal of U.S. defense strategy is now to improve "effective sovereignty" in such areas, in order to deny sanctuary to terrorists, WMD proliferators, narco-traffickers, and gangsters. According to the World Bank, in 2006 the number of states lacking effective sovereignty rose to 26, from 11 in 1996. The larger project that this paper is part of proposes to analyze the concept of ungoverned spaces and determine whether they really are ungoverned and constitute threats to states. The essential issue is not lack of governance, but rather who governs these spaces. This paper aims to develop a more accurate framework for understanding contemporary security threats in a world of softened sovereignty. An improved understanding of when and how alternative forms of governance shelter or encourage hostile non-state actors has important policy implications for how states, particularly the United States, prioritize their responses to emerging threats. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will historically and theoretically study conditions under which states develop bilateral versus multilateral security alliances. Specifically, the paper will discuss a question on why the United States built mainly bilateral alliances in the Asia-Pacific region while it established a multilateral alliance, namely the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in the early Cold War period.Understanding security alliances have been the subject of major research in international relations studies. However, there has been so far insufficient scholarly attention and rigorous archival research focusing on the question I proposed above. The findings of the proposed paper will not only be historical and theoretical, but will also attempt to provide insights on how future Asia-Pacific alliance policy can be managed.This paper argues that the difference between the German rearmament and the Japanese rearmament is a key for solving the puzzle. The nature of the German rearmament is very much different from that of the Japanese counterpart, because the Japanese rearmament was far modest and limited in its nature and scope. The large-scale German rearmament generated more complex interdependent interactions among the United States and its European allies, while the limited Japanese rearmament created less interdependent relations in the Asia-Pacific region. Therefore, the Atlantic alliance developed into NATO with multilateralism, while alliances in the Asia-Pacific remained bilateral in nature. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper studies the process of gaining public consent about a security threat, or threat legitimation. Threats require legitimation because they are 'social facts' and not objective truths or subjective perceptions. Threat legitimation occurs in the public discourse through rhetoric. Political and social actors deploy rhetorical resources and strategies to construct, reproduce, and change narratives about a threat. Unlike previous rhetorical studies, this paper also argues that the influence and power of rhetoric depends on the media environment. The first section of the paper outlines threat legitimation and the role of rhetoric and the media environment. The second section investigates four cases within two different media environments, radio and television. Through these four cases, the paper demonstrates the importance of rhetorical strategies for threat legitimation in US foreign policy, and how the media environment affects the use of rhetoric. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the various impacts of contemporary globalization on national security, with special reference to the migration of the Taiwanese semiconductor industry to China and its security challenges to the United States, Taiwan and China. The paper adheres to a sectoral approach to the study of globalization-security interconnections and adopts a broadly based definition of security pertaining to the case study in question that encompasses economic, technological and defense security. The analysis of the subject matter is grounded in evidence collected in more than 140 interviews with chip industry, defense sector and government insiders in the US and Asia, as well as English-language and Chinese-language secondary data. On sectoral migration, the paper argues that the scope of the migration is extensive, the direction complicated, the cause multiple, and the outcome significant in boosting the development of the indigenous Chinese chip industry. It has been discovered that some Taiwanese non-state chip actors have violated government regulations in the process of spearheading the migration, and some have even forged business ties with their PRC counterparts associated with the PLA. As for the ensuing security ramifications, it is argued that there is no immediate security risk involved, although long-term strategic repercussions are paramount. The depth and scope of the continuous sectoral migration in years to come will determine the level of economic security risks faced by the US and Taiwan. Long-term technological and defense security repercussions need to take into account two important elements at play: technological change in the sector (increasing commercial-to-military spin-on and dual-use nature of the chip technology), and the PRC dual-track (economic and defense) grand strategy behind its resolve to upgrade its indigenous chip capability. Four pertinent aspects are analyzed: (a) concerns over the PRC chip industrial base, its contribution to the PLA modernization and the ensuing shift in the balance of power in Beijing's favour; (b) technology-related misgivings over the trustworthy supplies of chips for the US and Taiwanese military end uses, as well as the shrinking "chip gap"; (c) fear of denial of chip supply due to foreign dependency; (d) dubious implementation of export control policies at the unilateral and the multilateral level that exacerbate some of the above security repercussions. The concluding section elucidates how the case study helps to show the impact of globalization on security as far as the agency and scope of security, the autonomy and capacity of the state, as well as the balance of power are concerned. To sum up, the study offers a fresh look at the complex security repercussions of the globalization of a strategic industry that occurs in a politically sensitive region in world politics today. It not only helps us disentangle an important policy issue, but also advances our theoretical understanding of the globalization-security interconnections in international relations today. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the extent to which there has been a discursive shift in the debate over U.S. immigration policy from a right-based framework to a security-based framework. In addition to examining the discourse shaping the debate over U.S. immigration policy, the paper considers the extent to which norms that shape the debate over U.S. immigration policy have been effectively translated into legislation or implemented at the bureaucratic level. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Supreme Court's decision in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004) involved an extensive dispute over the meaning of presidential war powers and national security as these were explained and defended in The Federalist. Various opinions in Hamdi cited numerous Federalist numbers in support of the justices' own interpretation of presidential war powers regarding questions of national security. Yet the opinions of the justices obviously conflicted. Using the Hamdi decision as a springboard, this paper proposes to examine The Federalist in order to outline the political philosophy underlying the Constitution's executive war powers and their relationship to questions of national security. Since most of the Federalist numbers cited by the justices in Hamdi were written by Alexander Hamilton, I propose to examine additional writings of Hamilton's in order to more fully develop the presidential war powers and national security theory outlined by Publius in The Federalist. My paper will involve an interdisciplinary approach to the question of presidential war powers, combining the disciplines of law, political philosophy, history, and strategic studies to examine one of the most important constitutional issues confronting Americans today. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human Trafficking, Human Security and the BalkansHuman trafficking in the Western Balkan region has been addressed in numerous multilateral and regional forums, reflecting, in part, the concerns of the United States and the European Union with the spillover effects of instability and organized crime. The paper argues that despite efforts at greater exploration and dialogue between governments, nongovernmental organizations, and international organizations, the region continues to reveal deep seated challenges to resolving the problem. Anti-trafficking efforts have lost sight of broader issues of human security, focusing on narrow rule-of-law approaches of criminalization and enhanced border control while downplaying the socioeconomic dynamics that place vulnerable populations at risk for trafficking. The paper also reveals how the absence of consensus on trafficking definitions and how best to address the trafficking problem has resulted in steps geared more towards the goal of EU accession and policy practice mired in contradictions. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Advocates of a related series of ideas termed as "network centric warfare," "rapid decisive operations," and "effects based operations," see the combination of long-range precision strike, information dominance, and networked information technologies as elements changing the nature of war, from a series of sequenced battles and campaigns towards a continuous battle of shock and dislocation. However, this emphasis on the importance of time and speediness ignores the reality that time is a culturally dependent conception that has differing implications for different cultures. This paper explores cultural interpretations of time and their influence on military strategy. Analyzing national security strategy and military doctrine, this paper suggests that the U.S. conception of time leads to an overly offensive national strategy. This paper offers a vignette from the Cuban Missile Crisis to demonstrate how to escape the offensively oriented time conception. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper examines the role of the UN Charter's prohibition of force in legitimating the exercise of power and in creating a likelihood of resistance against major powers that violate it. The paper includes large-n tests that assess the level of dissent within the Security Council and the responses of other major powers following a major power's use of armed force. It also includes a brief case study examining US legal argument and their impact on decision-making processes and outcomes during the Cuban Missile Crisis. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is a consideration of what, at its core, is a state-building question: is the United States adept at creating highly centralized internal security bureaucracies such as the DHS? After the attacks of 9/11, the resurrection of a national civilian defense program, under the moniker "homeland security," has become a crucial domestic policy of the federal government. Disaster planning and civilian defense, subjects that had been relegated to the academic sub-discipline of security studies, are now the daily grist of newspapers and television news channels. There has always been a tension among the general public, state and local government, and the federal government regarding civilian defense policy and its expected outcomes. One area that is worth closer analysis is how expectations are dealt with in a large nation that is, by constitutional design, a federal republic. This essay examines the fate of the DHS in light of its place within a federal republic and the conflicting types of civilian defense that its organizational structure produces. The paper is organized in two sections. The first section outlines a conceptual problem related to civilian defense and its objective. The second section outlines how DHS organizational development perpetuates the conditions necessary for the flaws summarized in the first section of the essay. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper develops four main arguments designed to clarify the nature and purpose of ESDP. First, it engages specifically with the American IR literature which detects in ESDP signs of balancing against US power. The paper argues that such an analysis is flawed. Secondly, it argues that the true drivers behind ESDP have been the recent shifts in the tectonic plates both of history and of geo-politics. Thirdly, it analyses the recent European Security Strategy document, which it presents as a new normative approach to security policy. Finally, it argues that the distinctiveness of ESDP also derives from the peculiarities of institutional interplay within the European Union - that the policy has been generated by years of complex negotiations and compromise between and within EU institutions. Given this institutional labyrinth, any form of "heroic" strategic ambition vis-à-vis the United States would be impossible to articulate. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines how presidents were constrained by their predecessors in developing national security strategies during the Cold War. It focuses on the Eisenhower-Kennedy transition and the Carter-Reagan transition, given the change in political party and subsequent desire to craft a new foreign-affairs legacy in each case. The paper finds that although national security policies do create a general framework within which consecutive administrations operate, new presidents still have a window of opportunity to mark a new direction in foreign policy from their immediate predecessor. Perhaps the greatest consistency in foreign policy across these cases was in policy making at the United Nations, where differences in the role of the president's chief adviser at the U.N. were more stylistic than substantive. In conclusion, while the "inherited presidency" does present constraints for new presidents, the Cold War era illustrates that they nevertheless have the political flexibility to move beyond those constraints, at least in foreign affairs. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Because power defines relations among individuals and political communities, it is an important concept in the social sciences. If we accept Max Weber's suggestion that politics is essentially about allocation and distribution of power, then power is the concept of Political Science and International Relations discipline. But is power found in resources or in relationships? Is it located in structure or agency? In discussing the social nature of power, the paper will advance a conception of power based on the writings of Hannah Arendt. Understanding the nature of power in contemporary world affairs is crucially important both for the U.S. and the future of international order. The development of post-Cold War international relations, the process of European integration, and the inability of the United States to translate its material strength into desired political outcomes have put into question any conception of power based entirely on quantifiable material resources, whether military, economic, or technological. Although power is a 'contested concept', it had been absent from scholarly debate in International Relations for some time. This paper is a critical reflection of the paradox of American power and its implications for American security and global order. It focuses on the neo-conservative conception of American power that informs the foreign and defense policies of George W. Bush's Administration. According to this conception, U.S.' material preponderance coupled with America's universal values, give Washington the means and right to reshape world order. The paper argues that this view of power is deeply mistaken and can only lead to dysfunctional policies and practices. Material resources are not irrelevant to power but do not automatically produce political influence. Effective influence depends on more than military coercion. It depends on the degree to which a state's policies and practices are accepted as legitimate by other states and by international public opinion. The failure of neo-conservative policy-makers to grasp the social nature of power threatens to undermine the effective pursuit of American interests and national security, while gradually weakens the international society. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the relationship between the federal government and the state and local governments in the time period 2001 - 2005 using the 9/11 attacks and Hurricane Katrina as endpoints. The paper shows that some of the poor fedreal response to Hurricane Katrina could have been predicted by information in the ICMA Homeland Security Survey conducted in spring 2005. The paper concludes with a series of propositions about the current state of federalism in the field of homeland security police. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

National security, securitization and the Thai sex industry: is there a link? I will argue that there is a link between the US/Thai national security, securitization and the Thai sex industry beginning in the 1960s. The paper will analyse Thailand's sex industry; its inception through the R & R contract between the United States and Thailand. Additionally, it will examine how the World Bank influenced and encouraged its continuance, during the 1970s, under the auspices of Thai development policy: tourism. In both instances, the US's foreign policy drove the introduction and further development of the Thai sex industry. Furthermore, as the US rose to become a post-World War 2 superpower, its focus was to fight any additional rise of communism throughout the world. Three decades on, the US still seems intent on further influencing the industry but this time reducing the demand for it. Moreover, this recent US plan still perceives that national security issues are at stake. However, in this instance the US is couching its concern in humanitarian discourse, as anti-prostitution feminist groups lobby the US Congress to recognize prostitution as a human rights violation. Is this move presenting an existential threat to the Thai sex tourism industry and is there any possibility for agency? The feminist groups are the securitizing actors attempting to make prostitution in Thailand a securitization issue. The analytical framework for this paper will draw on both the Copenhagen School's approach to security and securitization and a critical theory perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this particular paper, I try to analyze and understand the contemporary logic of international politics -- particularly the logic of power politics. Particular interest is placed on theoretical approach of security understanding in the context of contemporary world politics. The nature of the paper is primarily theoretical and conceptual. The paper is a critical reading of current world politics or more pertinently the contemporary power politics. Particular attention is paid to the national security thinking in the context of contemporary hegemon -- the United States. At the outset, the paper examines the nature of present-day power politics and describes the essence and fundamentals of national security conception. Secondly, in the paper is taken a critical stand on this dominant conception (national security) of International Relations in the light of critical security studies including some aspects of postmodern thought, too. In a subsequent chapter, critical analysis is supported and developed by the views outlined in the orientation of critical geopolitics. Third undertaking of the paper is to provide a platform for further study in which the aim is to reflect the overall and recent security debate within the discipline of IR, and particularly the criticality of it. Regarding the last task, which is not seriously tackled in this piece, the underlying presumption is that the critical security studies particularly, but also the orientation of security studies as such has failed to produce alternative approaches to world politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study discusses President George W. Bush's narrative of 'different kind of war' presented to the military audience and the narrative's relationship to information, knowledge and information technology. One way for the military to step up efficiency for its military operations is through buzzwords such as 'transformation' and 'revolution in military affairs' in order to solve problems. Words, phrases and images are powerful 'weapons' in the current era of 'precision warfare' for the President. Effects of his 'different kind of war' are based on requirements to change the thinking and actions of American national security, which can be seen all over the world, and therefore questioned. The President's totalizing narrative of 'civilization's fight,' requesting more efficiency and performance in the form of speed and precision also raises questions over the relationship between narrative knowledge and technological knowledge, in the past, the present and future, virtual reality and local reality. This paper suggests that the President's metanarrative legitimates his military actions in Iraq because it is based on efficiency, progress, freedom and liberty which are actually legitimizations not to be disagreed upon on the narrative level. The President's 'different kind of war' narrative does not necessarily increase public knowledge but instead increases the pool of information and information technology. This paper tries to go beyond the deconstruction of President Bush's narrative in order to understand his stories through the American Revolution and exceptionalism. What this study postulates is that the changing faces of the enemy and the urgency to speed up military transformation are perpetual means the President uses with help of the past to show his version of the future, the American Dream, in the present. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that NATO can still play a useful role in providing security to its members after September 11. The alliance had been prepared for terrorist attacks politically and militarily and continues to adjust to a new security environment. As a consequence, it acted swiftly and decisively in response to September 11. In addition NATO generated two important "second image reversed" effects. First, its defense planning system coordinated and implemented common military goals and ensured interoperabililty among national forces. Second, its decisions changed the political discovered in member states. Using the example of Germany -- currently the most reluctant ally of the U.S. -- the paper shows that the discourse changed from "(self)interest" to reputation" after NATO invoked article 5. However, when important conditions are missing such as agreed contingency plans and pre-delegated authority NATO is weak and indecisive. This was the case when NATO discussed the war in Iraq and defending Turkey in case of an Iraqi attack. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the conference paper "The International Politics of Failing States" prepared for presentation at the "46th Annual Conference of the International Studies Association" held in Honolulu, Hawaii from March 1 to 5, 2005. The paper discusses the securitization of failed states with evidence from the U.S., Great Britain and Germany. The author says that the failed states discourse assists to create a bridge between development and security policy.

This paper will use the mass media theory of framing to assess three major Japanese newspapers-Yomiuri, Asahi and Mainichi -editorials (694) concerning Japan’s homeland security from 9/11/01-2/29/04. Based on the kinds of topics addressed by the editorials surveyed, I utilized five frames - national interest, cost/consequence, threat, responsibility and human interest. This period was selected because it includes 9/11, the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq, new Japanese legislation related to homeland security and anti-terrorism, PM Koizumi’s historic visit to North Korea, the killing of two Japanese diplomats in Iraq and finally the dispatch of more than 1000 ground, air, maritime SDF forces to Iraq for humanitarian and reconstruction assistance. The paper concludes by discussing the significance of this data for future Japanese homeland security. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper I seek to answer some basic questions about the process of globalization in the defense industry and the security considerations that result from it. I concentrate on two major groups of players; states and firms. In the first section I briefly lay out the definition of globalization that is commonly used in analyzing defense issues and then look at what the phrase really means in terms of the defense trade. The following section examines the manifestations of globalization in the defense trade, which are many and profound. There is a particular focus in this section on the effects of globalization on defense production, but there is also some discussion of the effects of globalization on the defense trade; the ?sharp end? of the issue. The next section examines the effects of globalization on security for the state and the firm Throughout this paper the phrase ?defense trade? is used rather than ?arms trade? this reflects the fact that much of what is now traded does not look like a defense good; it is a component, a software code, a training package or simulator, even a computer. Today?s trade is less in finished defense goods than in the components of a system. The phrase ?defense trade? captures this dynamic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper studies George W. Bush?s narrative; the relationship between U.S. national security and information technology after the painful experience of 9/11. Bush?s phrases of national security and information technology are in the nucleus of international and national political challenges, yet they are in many ways problematic and controversial. I am asking if they even are a central part of the problem of global war on terror itself. Nevertheless my intention is rather to try to understand what I suggest as Bush?s narrative of ?nightmare? by generating questions from political philosophy that challenge and open up these fundamental phrases. As President Bush is boldly able to simplify the complex phenomenon of terrorism, his acts will raise a question more fundamental in the West: how far he can go with the phrases. Colonizing a cyberspace with totalitarian surveillance activities maintains a paradoxical silence; a vast amount of information without knowledge. In this sense, President Bush has taken in his ?ride? American national security culture to the new frontiers. This has a potential to lead to the deterritorialization of national security. Using Lyotard?s thoughts, the paper discovers questions of putting the phrase ?take the battle to the enemy? into practice. On an information technology level of analysis this can be seen as total accident, in Paul Virilio?s terms, with the pragmatism of permanent cybersurveillance (Patriot Act) of the Americans and not just terrorists. It is a logical step for modernity to define information technology as a tool in this battle in which ?freedom does not come free?. On a narrative level of analysis, I suggest that phrases of information technology should be turned into recognizing a differend. These phrases put forward the unpresentable which, even though it opens up a question of the concept of ?enemy?, reveals how the United States in its travel is struggling not with the enemy but with itself. Bush?s disputable phrases of information technology occupy an important place in U.S. national security culture because of their contradictory relation between state and individual to western expansion of freedom. This is enabled in Bush?s narrative which is legitimated by a possible ?nightmare?. By ?discovering? this ?frontier? in Bush?s universe, we can better understand the modern project grounding its legitimacy in the imaginable future ? and not in 9/11. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anthony A. Loh Department of Political Science Vanderbilt University (615) 343-6046 Email: anthony.a.loh@vanderbilt.edu The events of 9/11 helped expose the underlying incompatibilities between an emerging American hegemony and the Westphalian system of international relations. In much of International Relations literature, the assumption is that the international system is given, while the distribution of power can take the form of multipolarity, bipolarity and unipolarity. Yet in the aftermath of the Iraq war of 2003, the United States has clearly consolidated its post-Cold War triumphant gains in political, economic and military leverages over the rest of the world, including its allies in Western Europe. It has sought to fill the void left by the former Soviet Union. A new systems structure appears to be emerging that is centered on the United States, and anti-hegemonial coalitions that could sufficiently balance it are becoming more difficult to assemble, although sub-state actors like Al Qaeda cell groups have risen to attempt to check the hegemon through insidious means and transnational networks. It is time for Waltzian claims to receive yet another nuanced revision or perhaps a complete rejection. At the highest level, systems structure may no longer be anarchical, whereas at the lowest (sub-state) level, it remains to be so. This paper explores the significance of these structural changes for international politics. There has been a near-explosion of IR literature on the United States becoming a new imperium. The central question addressed here is how this new American imperium differs from traditional-type territorial empires and what is its significance for U.S.-East Asian relations in the 21st century. The paper looks at the potential shifts in U.S. policies in South and North Korea, Japan, Singapore, Philippines, Taiwan, and China. These East Asian states have been watching closely the military and political outcome of the 2003 Iraqi war. The implications of American unilateralism ? with its doctrines on regime change and strategic preemption ? worry them. Some of them are authoritarian regimes and are regarded by the United States as proliferators of weapons of mass destruction. The shift in post-9/11 U.S. strategy from containing peer competitors to dealing with terrorist threats have lifted some pressures on China, but the neoconservative agenda to remake the international order will be sure to bear on regional security and stability. How will the United States deal with North Korea in light of the Iraqi campaign of 2003? Some East Asian states have already seen the need to revise their traditional relationships with the United States. South Korea, in its drive for reunification, might abandon its reliance on U.S. security umbrella and turn to China as the new power broker. Japan, America’s staunchest ally in the region, might choose to remilitarize rather than continue to rely on the U.S.-Japan Mutual Security Treaty. Still other East Asian states might be polarized into pro-U.S. and anti-U.S. camps, especially since there is little cohesiveness among them to begin with. The limits of U.S. military power are particularly felt in the East Asian context. Yet the question that concerns all of East Asia is how the U.S., with its global military supremacy, would exercise its political rule as a neoimperial power. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We must feel safe. We must feel safe not just from the threat of terror, but also from the threat of due process abuse. We must feel safe from the threats of armed terrorists; but also, from the fear that would surely follow if M1-A tanks were parked at our intersections. We want our safety; and we want our freedom. It’s about trust: who, how much, when, and maybe even how. In searching for the answers to these questions, there are certain components we must understand. Only through informed decisions can outcomes succeed. This paper addresses some of the essential elements to consider ? hopefully helping us debate the issues from an informed view point and allowing us to reach consensus in what is surely the greatest challenge of our time. There are four essential elements to consider. They are the 4-Rs: resources, rights, and restrictions resting on a foundation of risk management. We must ensure a delicate balance ? a three-legged stool: one leg representing cost [resources] (dollars, people, equipment, training); one leg representing the due process freedoms [rights]; and the third representing the degree of convenience (or lack thereof) [restrictions] we can live with. The stool must rest on a foundation of risk management: threat assessment, risk assessment, and cost/benefit assessment. We must understand the issues of each to ensure we build a capability that will allow appropriate balance; ensuring the stool does not tip too far in any one direction. As we go through the discussion, these 4-Rs will always run just below the surface; behind the decision. This paper examines these issues in a way applicable throughout the United States, but also within the context of recent efforts undertaken in the state of Alabama. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses an emerging interaction between bilateral and multilateral security arrangements for conflict resolution in Asia since the 1990s by emphasizing the correlation of Asian hegemony management with foreign policy strategies of the US, China and Japan. As protracted conflicts of the Korean Peninsula and the Taiwan Straits have threatened regional prosperity and stability, regional security institutions have become an important policy concern in the post-Cold War era. Detecting nascent multilateral institution-building in Asian regional security, this paper asks how and why US-led bilateral alliances interact with multilateral security arrangements such as the ASEAN Regional Forum and the ASEAN-Plus-Three. In order to examine this puzzle, the paper focuses on three points: (1) foreign policy strategies of three countries, (2) domestic interests concerning the feasibility and legitimacy of supplementing bilateralism with multilateralism in Asian security, and (3) impacts of Asian hegemony management on establishing regional security institutions. The paper compares the three countries’ preferences to regional security by focusing on the relationship between bilateralism of the US-led alliances and multilateralism. It then tries to demonstrate that both the dynamics of Asian hegemony management and the policy preferences concerning bilateralism and multilateralism are essential in understanding regional security arrangements in Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper builds on the paper Disarmament, Arms Control, Nonproliferation, and Couterproliferation: In Search of Synergy and Policy Coherence that was presented at the combined International Security Studies Section, ISA, and National Security and Arms Control Section, APSA, meeting at Richmond, VA in October 2002. That initial paper examined the development of the four title policy elements against the emerging international security environment as a foundation from which to examine US Government internal policy, process, and organizational factors for arms control as a policy arena. The follow-on paper proposed here would depart from the same conceptual and process development, but it would examine the external position, emphasis, and priority of the four title elements in US external foreign and security policy and its implementation. The focus here will be on analyzing and critiquing the shift from, for example, nonproliferation to counterproliferation, and from relatively more collective approaches to arms control policy to a more unilateral emphasis. A preliminary outline would be something like the following: Policy Evolution (place, role, and priority in US policy) Disarmament and Arms Control Nonproliferation and Counterproliferation; Bush Administration Policy and Rationale No Place for Disarmament, An end to Arms Control Counterproliferation first, Nonproliferation in a Supporting Role; Policy Relevance and Recommendations; Nuclear Arms Control, Nonproliferation, and Counterproliferation CBW Arms Control, Nonproliferation, and Counterproliferation Conventional and Emerging Arms Control Arenas; Crafting and Implementing a Coherent and Synergistic Approach to Arms Control [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As we await a final report from the commission investigating the terrorist attack on the US in September 2001, we know enough now to determine whetehr or not the failure to detect and thwart the surprise was the fault of America’s multi-billion dollar intelligence system or something else. The purpose of this paper will be to evaluate the intelligence activities surrounding 9/11, determine what failed and why, and draw lessons for the future from this extraordinary event. The paper will comment as well on the steps that have already been taken to prevent such surprises in the future and the laws that have been passed to protect national security, perhaps at a great cost to human rights and personal freedoms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As more states gain access to orbit, the possibility of deliberate interference, accidents and misperception has increased and now threatens the common interest in the peaceful use of outer space. Only a few states have even a rudimentary tracking capability necessary to operate safely in an increasingly populated environment. Even the United States, upon which the world relies for essential orbital information, has identified reducing the gaps in its space situational awareness as a crucial priority for U.S. space programs?the US network only tracks objects larger than 10 cm (about the size of a baseball), does not provide continuous tracking and cannot determine the cause satellite failures. Although the United States has a strong interest in developing rules of the road for space regarding traffic control and reducing orbital debris creation, the United States has yet to commit to the expanded data sharing that would be necessary for such activities. Some U.S. intelligence agencies fear that cooperation might compromise sensitive national security information. This paper considers proposals to share satellite-tracking information in support of space traffic control and debris mitigation efforts. The paper concludes that expanding cooperative monitoring of activities in outer space to mitigate the risks from increasingly crowed orbital environment and to build confidence would enhance, rather than undermine, U.S. national security interests as well as the common interest in the peaceful use of outer space. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the form and content of nation-shaping in the US post 9/11. The attacks of 9/11 provide a touchstone for tensions between global integration on the one hand, and nationalist identification and mobilization on the other. In the US, the state has clearly seen its power and centrality fortified as concerns for ‘homeland security’ take center stage. In the process, the nation, or national community, has emerged as a key vehicle for legitimizing the state, and national identity or American nationhood are functioning as a central mechanism for marking boundaries of inclusion and exclusion. The paper draws upon Roxanne Doty’s notion of statecraft to analyze the top-down dimensions of nation-shaping that occur when the American state invokes the nation as a justification for its expanding role in defending political and cultural boundaries. Meanwhile, the politics of American nationhood also filter up as individuals and groups in society use national identity and membership in a national community to secure a rightful place as protected citizens of a hegemonic state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comparing three theoretical approaches to congressional-presidential interplay in foreign policy, this paper argues that the most useful and convincing theoretical explanation of congressional deference to the George W. Bush administration national security policy focuses on three variables: a) Congress?s perception of the existence of a global threat to U.S. national security; b) presidential success in foreign affairs; and c) the presence of an undivided government in Washington (with both Congress and White House controlled by the same party). Of the three variables, a) seems to be the most significant important. Thus, this paper concludes that the 9/11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington have created the conditions for a Cold War-like consensus in the United States. The general agreement that international terrorism is a global threat that needs to be fully assessed by the U.S. government reverts back to the Cold War pattern with respect to national security affairs of a dominant presidency and a compliant Congress in U.S. legislative-executive relations. In the near future, Congress may assert its foreign policy powers to a greater degree if the White House experiences difficulties with the global war on terrorism or if the Democratic Party regains control of the Senate and/or the House of Representatives. However, it seems that as long as Congress perceives that U.S. national security is threatened by the ?global and urgent threat? of terrorism, the presidency will be able to concentrate national security powers in its own hands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the demographic representations of threats in the post Cold War security context. Fears of differential fertility between regions, countries and ethnic groups have long been a focus of U.S. national security interests. Today, these fears center on differences in population growth rates between Israeli Jews and Palestinians, Hindus and Muslims in South Asia, and more generally Islamic countries and the West. Youth bulge theories predict that a high proportion of young males within a country predisposes it toward political violence. In the current war on terror defense and intelligence strategists are pointing toward youth bulges as an instigator of violence, especially in the Middle East. The paper also examines the gendered nature of these strategic doctrines as well as their integration into other international and domestic security models, e.g. environmental conflict theory, the superpredator explanation of juvenile crime, and racial profiling. It analyzes their relationship to migration issues and changing demographic realities such as mortality from the AIDS pandemic, slowing of population growth worldwide, and the gray dawn of population aging in the West. Are there subtle differences in the understanding and articulation of these threats among different political interests, e.g. conservative unilateralists and liberal multilateralists? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The United States, Globalization and the National Security State The suicidal terrorist attacks of September 11 were an audacious demonstration of how the dark side of globalization could directly impact on the security of the US. According to President Bush, September 11th changed the strategic thinking of the US. But it is evident that a new strategic era actually began with the end of the Cold War. What happened on September 11 is that the intra-state violence of the post-Cold War period finally caught up with the US. This paper will seek to explore whether the Bush administration has really come to terms with a radical change of context in the global security environment. While acknowledging new developments in US thinking about security in the post-Cold War world, this paper argues that a Cold War phenomenon known as the national security state, in which defence and foreign policy interests essentially merged to protect the state from the threat of military force, remains largely intact. Indeed, the ideas of US global primacy and pre-emptive war, adopted by the Bush administration in 2002, have reinvigorated and extended the concept of a US national security state. It will be shown that the impact of globalization on the US worldview has been limited, amongst other things, by America’s sole superpower status, the re-positing of the Republican Party during the 1990s and the traumatic effect of September 11. As a result, President Bush’s America remains an old fashioned partisan great power, rather than a truly global power. And given the US’s enormous structural power in military and economic terms in the post-Cold War world, it could be argued that Mr Bush’s new exceptionalism is becoming a major obstacle to fashioning an international consensus on security. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PLEASE NOTE: This paper is still undergoing the required prepublication review by the U.S. Department of Defense. Upon completion of that review and clearance for public release, the paper will be posted in its entirety. You may also request a copy of the paper by emailing Dan Gressang at either Daniel.Gressang@dia.mil or Gressang@aol.com. Upon clearance for release from DoD, the paper will be emailed to you. Thank you for your patience. Bringing strategic level and tactical level analysis and prediction together are not easy tasks. Yet it is in strategic and predictive analysis that we need for effective threat recognition and effective homeland defense and security. And it is strategic and predictive analysis which are the least developed and leveraged at all levels of government. Terrorists are hard targets, constantly adapting, constantly changing, constantly threatening us and our interests in a variety of ways. The target ? terrorists ? is here, there, everywhere and nowhere. The threat seems to change daily, certainly with each new attack. Effective preparation demands broad cooperative efforts involving local, state, and national authorities. It demands the incorporation of law enforcement, intelligence, public health, first responder, and policy perspectives. It requires broad consensus on mission, goals, objectives, and processes if it is to be successful. It must, above all else, be dedicated to the predictive, the anticipatory so that threats can be identified before violent acts have a chance to highlight our shortcomings in security. Responding and reacting to terrorism is a necessary practice of government. Effective homeland defense and homeland security, however, revolve around anticipation of those threats and around efforts to disrupt and deter. Disrupting and deterring terrorists while securing the homeland from attack from within or without, in turn, requires the effective cooperation and coordination across jurisdictions, across perspectives, across levels of government. This paper examines one such effort, the Maryland Coordination and Analysis Center, and uses it to draw some operative lessons for building and operating an effective multi-jurisdiction analysis and warning effort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Case studies on Clinton Administration national security policymaking are an important area for policy relevant research. During the 1990s, there were various attempts by the Clinton Administration to innovate in national security policymaking. Innovations were attempted in peace operations, the interagency process, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Were the 1990s Clinton policy leadership efforts in stopping the threats of WMD proliferation in North Korea, India, Pakistan, Iran and Iraq all policy failures that could have been prevented? Could more effective Clinton Administration policy leadership have made US counterproliferation efforts more successful? This paper focuses on the Clinton Administration?s Counterproliferation Policy Initiative in the 1994 North Korean Agreed Framework Case. The case uses coercive diplomacy theory to examine the existence of a theory-practice gap in assessing Clinton Administration top-down leadership in the 1994 North Korean crisis. This paper?s findings suggest a relatively effective linkage of theory and practice, however, the result is a short term rather than long term policy success. Additional case studies are necessary to further assess the effectiveness of Clinton era executive leadership patterns in Counterproliferation Initiative policymaking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the applicability of the democratic peace (DP) thesis to a rapidly changing global security environment and, more specifically, to examine the motivation of the United States, the most prominent democratic power, to use force for the promotion of peace through the spread of democracy. In this paper, we distinguish between traditionally accepted instrumental, normative, and institutional use-of-force motivators that apply to democracies and non-democracies alike, but we also add a discussion of contextual use-of-force motivators which are unique to democracies. The basic assumption underlying the DP argument is that democratic states are less prone to wage wars than non-democratic states. But, if democracy makes states more peaceful, why do democratic states still use force? Illustrating each motivator in light of contemporary U.S. national security decisions shows that the DP thesis can provide valuable insight into the reasons why democracies may continue to use force and, in the extreme, wage war. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the preferences of major political factions are likely to influence policy choice on security issues, the origins of these preferences remains unclear compared to those on foreign economic policy. This paper examines efforts to explain preferences on security issues using data on congressional roll call voting. A large body of quantitative research in this area concludes that ideology drives these preferences, and that constituency economic interests have little or no effect. Unfortunately, this literature conceives of economic interests in an unrealistically narrow way, and does not consider the possibility that these interests may shape the ideology of members of congress. Using data on Senate voting on foreign policy from 1947 through 2000, this paper presents evidence that Senators’ home states’ stake in the international economic order, as well as their stake in military spending, played an important role in shaping foreign and defense policy. Although liberal-conservative "ideology" also matters, its effects are more consistent with an interest-based vote trading arrangement than with a coherent set of ideas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the issues of agency merger and managerial flexibility in the Department of Homeland Security. The mission of DHS is to prevent terrorist attacks within the United States, reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism, and minimize the damage and recover from attacks that do occur (Bush 2002b, 8). The creation of DHS reflects the confluence of two strains of thought: the key issues and strategies of homeland security and the values of strategic management, especially strategic human resources management. The remainder of the paper identifies the critical questions in each area that impact the future success or failure of DHS, evaluates the passage and implementation of the new Department, and makes recommendations for future action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My study examines the conditions under which middle power states, such as Canada, the Netherlands, and Norway, may exercise effective leadership in the realm of human security. I hypothesize that a middle power-led human security initiative is more likely to be successful if the initiative does not threaten the fundamental principles of the superpower. My paper demonstrates that although it is possible for a human security initiative to overcome American opposition that is based on political or military interests, an initiative will be less likely to succeed if it challenges the core principles of the United States. I test the hypothesis by conducting a qualitative analysis of four cases of human security initiatives where the middle powers have played leadership roles. The cases include the endeavor to create a United Nations rapid deployment peacekeeping force, which led to the formation of the Standby High Readiness Brigade for United Nations Operations (SHIRBRIG) in 1996; the campaign to ban anti-personnel landmines, which resulted in the 1997 Ottawa Convention; the struggle to establish the International Criminal Court, which came into existence in 2002; and the unsuccessful attempt to regulate the legal trade in small arms and light weapons. The United States has taken different positions on these issues. The U.S. approved of the idea of a standby UN rapid response force, but did not participate in the establishment of SHIRBRIG. Washington objected to the Ottawa Convention on the basis of a conflict with U.S. military interests, and opposed the International Criminal Court due to the influence of certain groups in the American foreign policy establishment. Finally, the U.S. rejected the adoption of restrictions on the licit small arms trade due to a clash with an American principle protected by the U.S. Constitution: the right to bear arms. By illustrating that smaller states can assume leadership on global security, my paper counters the trend in international security studies of focusing almost exclusively on great power leadership, a tendency which has been reinforced by the decades-long predominance of the realist approach to international relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses how uncertainty sharply declined during the period of the missile gap fear (1957-1961), yet public fear of a possible "missile gap" remained high and greatly helped Senator Kennedy gain the White House in 1960. While insufficient information helped create great "uncertainty" at the beginning of this period (1957-1958), "uncertainty" does not adequately explain why the "misssile gap" fear remained strong. This paper discusses the mishandling of worst-case analyses during the later part of the period, and "smoking gun" evidence of intentional exaggeration of the threat by Senator Stuart Symington--a central figure in the promotion of the fear of the missile gap. Overall, this paper argues that insufficient information does not adequately explain the exaggerated public fears (national misperceptions) of this period. Further, popular explanations of "blowback" or "strategic culture" that argue leaders already believed exaggerated estimations of the threat, also do not adequately explain this large national misperception. Intentional elite exaggerations for electoral, bureaucratic and/or organizational purposes explain the widespread overestimations of the threat in this period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a summary of the history of terrorist threats to the United States and other nations over the last few decades, and will discuss means, both technical and policy-oriented, that can counter such threats. Changing trends in terrorist attacks are discussed, together with the need to develop countermeasures to changes in the types of threats. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The United States is currently recapitalizing each delivery system in its "nuclear triad" and refurbishing many of the warheads carried by those systems. The plans for these modernization programs have raised a number of questions, both within Congress and among analysts in the nuclear weapons and arms control communities, about the costs associated with the programs and the need to recapitalize each leg of the triad at the same time. This paper covers four distinct issues. It begins with a brief review of the planned modernization programs, then addresses questions about why the United States is pursuing all of these modernization programs at this time. It then reviews the debate about how much these modernization programs are likely to cost in the next decade and considers possible changes that might reduce the cost. It concludes with some comments about congressional views on the modernization programs and prospects for continuing congressional support in the coming years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]