Suchergebnisse

AUSTRALIA CAN RIGHTLY CLAIM TO BE AT THE FOREFRONT OF DEMOCRATIC STATES WHICH DEAL WITH NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUES OPENLY AND THROUGH THE PARLIAMENT. IT WOULD BE WRONG TO SUGGEST THAT THE PATH OF NATIONAL SECURITY IN THE ANTIPODES HAS BEEN A SMOOTH AND UNCONTENTIOUS ONE, FOR LIKE MANY WESTERN DEMOCRACIES, ASUTRALIA HAS ENDURED LONG AND HEATED PUBLIC DEBATE ABOUT THE ROLE OF SECURITY, WITH A STRONG OVERLAY OF CONSPIRACY THEORIES AND TOUCHES OF PARANOIA. THIS ARTICLE EXPLORES THE PAINFUL ROUTE TO LEGISLATION-BASED RESPECTABILITY.

Analyzes the main consequences of the Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986, which centralized civilian authority and strengthened the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Role of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), required congressional reports from the DOD.

Introduction: Resourcing national security -- Resourcing national security in a democratic society -- The role of Congress in resourcing national security -- Resourcing strategy and policy : the National Security Council -- Resourcing U.S. diplomatic priorities -- Resourcing partners and allies : the United Nations -- The defense budget process -- Strategic choices in defense force structure -- Resourcing military readiness -- Programming Department of Defense strategic priorities -- Resourcing Homeland Security.

In spite of prodigious inventiveness and massive expenditures for national security, the United States has not conducted coherent research on the policy of security. A unified government program for fundamental and applied research in the field of national security would do much to unify practices and to eliminate gaps in the com munications between one security operation and another: so suggests Dr. Hutchinson from his perspective as Chief, Behavioral Sciences Division, Air Force Office of Scientific Research. The opinions he expresses are his own, and do not necessarily reflect the policies of the Air Force Office of Scientific Research or any other Air Force agency.

Abstract
Climate change is increasingly recognized as having national security implications, which has prompted dialogue between the climate change and national security communities—with resultant advantages and differences. Climate change research has proven useful to the national security community sponsors in several ways. It has opened security discussions to consider climate as well as political factors in studies of the future. It has encouraged factoring in the stresses placed on societies by climate changes (of any kind) to help assess the potential for state stability. And it has shown that changes such as increased heat, more intense storms, longer periods without rain, and earlier spring onset call for building climate resilience as part of building stability. For the climate change research community, studies from a national security point of view have revealed research lacunae, such as the lack of usable migration studies. This has also pushed the research community to consider second- and third-order impacts of climate change, such as migration and state stability, which broadens discussion of future impacts beyond temperature increases, severe storms, and sea level rise and affirms the importance of governance in responding to these changes. The increasing emphasis in climate change science toward research in vulnerability, resilience, and adaptation also frames what the intelligence and defense communities need to know, including where there are dependencies and weaknesses that may allow climate change impacts to result in security threats and where social and economic interventions can prevent climate change impacts and other stressors from resulting in social and political instability or collapse.

In 1990 John Norton Moore and Robert F. Turner, along with Frederick S. Tipson, published a National Security Law casebook covering a "new field in American law and legal education," a work designed for "use in law schools, advanced degree programs in international relations and national security, and the nation's war colleges and service academies—as well as to serve as a handy desk reference for professionals and practitioners." Since the publication of that first edi- tion the U.S. national security landscape has undergone a radical transforma- tion. Over the last fifteen years the United States has been to war in the Persian Gulf, Europe, and Afghanistan. Moreover, the world has witnessed mass executions in the name of ethnic strife in Africa and Europe, the onset of the "information age," the rise of China as a military and economic power, an increased proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and a tremendous surge in non-state-sponsored terrorism.

This survey covers Chinese research on the strategic and security aspects of international affairs, as well as Chinese assessments of their own national defence policy and environment. Most of the data and analysis are based on the author's personal contact with several Chinese institutions, specializing in security research, their staffs, and reading their publications in China during 1983-85. (DÜI-Sen)

Even if the U.S. national security apparatus can operate entirely outside of politics, it remains exposed to the effects of Truth Decay—the diminishing role of facts and analysis in American public life. Little work is being done to understand how severe the impact of Truth Decay is on national security and, more importantly, how to mitigate it.

How does one define the "national security research bureaucracy" (NSRB) in the Chinese context and are there enough empirical data to sustain an article on this topic? The definition one chooses directly determines the data base one uses and, in turn, answers the question of the viability of the topic.