Books, Monographs & Collaborative Studies

Printing is not supported at the primary Gallery Thumbnail page. Please first navigate to a specific Image before printing.

Switch View to Grid View Slideshow

A Hundred Osamas: Islamist Threats and the Future of Counterinsurgency

Sherifa D. Zuhur Dr.

This monograph takes its title from President Hosni Mubarak's prediction that American involvement in Iraq would give rise to a "hundred Osamas." The author explores "the new jihad" and the regeneration of Islamist insurgencies and extremist movements in the context of religious and political movements throughout the Muslim world. It describes the contributions of various Islamist leaders to this discourse of extremism and how their strategies of recruitment, retention and engagement function. In contrast, various U.S. responses to extremists are critiqued, and new elements of a counterstrategy are proposed.
The Mexican Armed Forces in Transition

Ian Nicholls Colonel and Jordi Diez Dr.

After the 9/11 attacks on the United States, homeland defense became the primary issue in U.S. defense policy. It was clear that homeland defense would have to become a trilateral continental issue and include Canada and Mexico. Because the United States and Canada already had developed a relatively close relationship during and after World War II, as a result of their common interests and efforts in NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) and NORAD (North American Air Defense), it became important to become more knowledgeable regarding the Mexican armed forces. The authors are well-acquainted with the Mexican armed forces, and have developed a keen awareness of the Mexican defense establishment.
U.S.-UK Relations at the Start of the 21st Century

Jeffrey D. McCausland Dr. and Douglas Stuart Dr.

Although there is widespread agreement that the United States is the world's most powerful country in military, economic, and diplomatic terms, and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future, there is little agreement as to how the rest of the world will react to America's lead. Theory has an even more difficult time explaining the relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom (UK), especially its remarkable endurance over the past 6 decades. The U.S.-UK partnership flourished during World War II, deepened during the long twilight struggle with the Soviet Union, and has prospered further since the end of the Cold War. It is likely to survive any new challenges that may loom on the horizon.
U.S.-UK Relations at the Start of the 21st Century

Jeffrey D. McCausland Dr. and Douglas Stuart Dr.

Although there is widespread agreement that the United States is the world's most powerful country in military, economic, and diplomatic terms, and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future, there is little agreement as to how the rest of the world will react to America's lead. Theory has an even more difficult time explaining the relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom (UK), especially its remarkable endurance over the past 6 decades. The U.S.-UK partnership flourished during World War II, deepened during the long twilight struggle with the Soviet Union, and has prospered further since the end of the Cold War. It is likely to survive any new challenges that may loom on the horizon.
Assessing the Biological Weapons and Bioterrorism Threat

Milton Leitenberg Mr.

It is nearly 15 years since biological weapons (BW) have become a significant national security preoccupation. This occurred primarily due to circumstances occurring within a short span of years. First was the official U.S. Government suggestion that proliferation of offensive BW programs among states and even terrorist groups was an increasing trend; second was the discovery, between 1989 and 1992, that the Union USSR had violated the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) since its ratification in 1975 by building a massive covert biological weapons program; third was the corroboration by the UN Special Commission in 1995 that Iraq had maintained a covert biological weapons program since 1974, and had produced and stockpiled large quantities of agents and delivery systems between 1988 and 1991; and, fourth was the discovery, also in 1995, that the Japanese Aum Shinrikyo group, which had carried out the nerve gas attack in the Tokyo subway system, also had spent 4 years attempting—albeit unsuccessfully—to produce and disperse two pathogenic biological agents. The distribution of professionally prepared anthrax spores through the U.S. postal system in the weeks afterwards September 11, 2001, magnified previous concerns by orders of magnitude. In December 2002, after U.S. forces had overrun much of the territory of Afghanistan, it was discovered that the al-Qaida organization also had spent several years trying to obtain the knowledge and means to produce biological agents. These new factors shifted the context in which BW was considered almost entirely to "bioterrorism." Within 4 years, almost $30 billion in federal expenditure was appropriated to counter the anticipated threat. This response took place in the absence of virtually any threat analysis. The purpose of this monograph is to begin to fill that gap.
Assessing the Biological Weapons and Bioterrorism Threat

Milton Leitenberg Mr.

It is nearly 15 years since biological weapons (BW) have become a significant national security preoccupation. This occurred primarily due to circumstances occurring within a short span of years. First was the official U.S. Government suggestion that proliferation of offensive BW programs among states and even terrorist groups was an increasing trend; second was the discovery, between 1989 and 1992, that the Union USSR had violated the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) since its ratification in 1975 by building a massive covert biological weapons program; third was the corroboration by the UN Special Commission in 1995 that Iraq had maintained a covert biological weapons program since 1974, and had produced and stockpiled large quantities of agents and delivery systems between 1988 and 1991; and, fourth was the discovery, also in 1995, that the Japanese Aum Shinrikyo group, which had carried out the nerve gas attack in the Tokyo subway system, also had spent 4 years attempting—albeit unsuccessfully—to produce and disperse two pathogenic biological agents. The distribution of professionally prepared anthrax spores through the U.S. postal system in the weeks afterwards September 11, 2001, magnified previous concerns by orders of magnitude. In December 2002, after U.S. forces had overrun much of the territory of Afghanistan, it was discovered that the al-Qaida organization also had spent several years trying to obtain the knowledge and means to produce biological agents. These new factors shifted the context in which BW was considered almost entirely to "bioterrorism." Within 4 years, almost $30 billion in federal expenditure was appropriated to counter the anticipated threat. This response took place in the absence of virtually any threat analysis. The purpose of this monograph is to begin to fill that gap.
Revisions in Need of Revising: What Went Wrong in the Iraq War

David C. Hendrickson Dr. and Robert W. Tucker Dr.

Though critics have made a number of telling points against the Bush administration's conduct of the Iraq war, the most serious problems facing Iraq and its American occupiers—criminal anarchy and lawlessness, a raging insurgency and a society divided into rival and antagonistic groups—were virtually inevitable consequences that flowed from the act of war itself. Military and civilian planners were culpable in failing to plan for certain tasks, but the most serious problems had no good solution. Even so, there are lessons to be learned. These include the danger that the imperatives of "force protection" may sacrifice the broader political mission of U.S. forces and the need for skepticism over the capacity of outsiders to develop the skill and expertise required to reconstruct decapitated states.
Transformation for What?

John White Dr.

One of the most significant of global security reassessments is currently underway, driven by Operations IRAQI FREEDOM and Operation ENDURING FREEDOM, continuing technological developments, budget constraints, and the debate associated with the 2005 Quadrennial Defense Review. To provide senior defense leaders with ideas on security transformation, the Strategic Studies Institute has joined with the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government to bring together top experts on an annual basis. For the third meeting in this series—held in November 2004—the National Defense University joined as a partner. The informed and free flowing debate at this conference generated a range of frank assessments and creative ideas about the status of security transformation. This report summarizes the debates and findings of the November session.
Victories are Not Enough

Samuel J. Newland Dr.

Since the early stages of World War II, militaries in general, and the U.S. Army in particular, have studied the German way of war, specifically as practiced in the 20th century. While acknowledging that Germany—and before that nation came into existence, Prussia—produced some excellent armies, major problems with the German way of war must not be ignored. Despite the military prowess of Germany, it lost both of the major wars of the 20th century. The author explores the reasons why a nation with such a strong military reputation was unable to win its wars and achieve its goals. He emphasizes that military power, tactical and operational brilliance, and victories in the field can easily be squandered if a nation has failed to set achievable goals and develop strategies to reach them. This failure should not be lost on modern nations as they proceed into the 21st century.
Coup D'Oeil: Strategic Intuition in Army Planning

William Duggan Dr.

Dr. William Duggan shows how to reconcile analytical and intuitive methods of decisionmaking, by drawing on recent scientific research that brings the two together. He applies this new research to the Army's core methods of analytical decisionmaking as found in FM 5-0, Army Planning and Orders Production. The result is "strategic intuition," which bears remarkable resemblance to von Clausewitz's idea of coup d'oeil in his classic work, On War. Dr. Duggan's study provides a theoretical overview of strategic intuition and practical suggestions for amending FM 5-0 to take it into account.
Fourth-Generation War and Other Myths

Antulio J. Echevarria Dr.

Fourth Generation War (4GW) emerged in the late 1980s, but has become popular due to recent twists in the war in Iraq, and terrorist attacks worldwide. In brief, the theory holds that warfare has evolved through four generations: 1) the use of massed manpower, 2) firepower, 3) maneuver, and now 4) an evolved form of insurgency that employs all available networks—political, economic, social, military—to convince an opponent's decision makers that their strategic goals are either unachievable or too costly. Further, the theory contends that this last form characterizes the terrorists' way of fighting today. Despite reinventing itself several times, the theory has several fundamental flaws that need to be exposed before it influences U.S. operational and strategic thinking. A critique of 4GW is both timely and important because examining the theory's assumptions exposes significant faults in other popular notions, such as the idea of nontrinitarian war, that might exert damaging influence over U.S. strategy and military doctrine. What we are really seeing in the war on terror and the campaign in Iraq and elsewhere is that the increased "dispersion and democratization of technology, information, and finance" brought about by globalization has given terrorist groups greater mobility and access worldwide. At this point, globalization seems to aid the nonstate actor more than the state, but states still play a central role in the support or defeat of terrorist groups or insurgencies. We would do well to abandon the theory of 4GW altogether, since it sheds very little, if any, light on this phenomenon.
Getting Ready for a Nuclear-Ready Iran

Henry D. Sokolski Mr. and Patrick Clawson Mr.

As Iran edges closer to acquiring a nuclear bomb and its missiles extend an ever darker diplomatic shadow over the Middle East and Europe, Iran is likely to pose three threats. First, Iran could dramatically up the price of oil by interfering with the free passage of vessels in and through the Persian Gulf as it did during the l980s or by threatening to use terrorist proxies to target other states' oil facilities. Second, it could diminish American influence in the Gulf and Middle East by increasing the pace and scope of terrorist activities against Iraq, Saudi Arabia, other Gulf states, Israel, and other perceived supporters of the United States. Finally, it could become a nuclear proliferation model for the world and its neighbors (including many states that otherwise would be more dependent on the United States for their security) by continuing to insist that it has a right to make nuclear fuel under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and then withdrawing once it decides to get a bomb. To contain and deter Iran from posing such threats, the United States and its friends could take a number of steps: increasing military cooperation (particularly in the naval sphere) to deter Iranian naval interference; reducing the vulnerability of oil facilities in the Gulf outside of Iran to terrorist attacks, building and completing pipelines in the lower Gulf region that would allow most of the non-Iranian oil and gas in the Gulf to be exported without having to transit the Straits of Hormuz; diplomatically isolating Iran by calling for the demilitarization of the Straits and adjacent islands, creating country-neutral rules against Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty state members who are suspected of violating the treaty from getting nuclear assistance from other state members and making withdrawal from the treaty more difficult; encouraging Israel to set the pace of nuclear restraint in the region by freezing its large reactor at Dimona and calling on all other states that have large nuclear reactors to follow suit; and getting the Europeans to back targeted economic sanctions against Iran if it fails to shut down its most sensitive nuclear activities.
Going to War With the Allies You Have: Allies, Counterinsurgency, and the War on Terrorism

Daniel Byman Dr.

Washington must recognize that its allies, including those in the security forces, are often the source of counterinsurgency problems as well as the heart of any solution. The author argues that the ally's structural problems and distinct interests have daunting implications for successful U.S. counterinsurgency efforts. The nature of regimes and of societies feeds an insurgency, but the United States is often hostage to its narrow goals with regard to counterinsurgency and thus becomes complicit in the host-nation's self-defeating behavior. Unfortunately, U.S. influence often is limited as the allies recognize that America's vital interests with regard to fighting al-Qa'ida-linked groups are likely to outweigh any temporary disgust or anger at an ally's brutality or failure to institute reforms. Training, military-to-military contacts, education programs, and other efforts to shape their COIN capabilities are beneficial, but the effects are likely to be limited at best.
Chinese National Security: Decisionmaking Under Stress

Andrew Scobell Dr. and Larry M. Wortzel Dr.

This volume represents the fruits of a conference held at the U.S. Army War College in September 2005 on the theme of "Chinese Crisis Management." One of the major debates that emerged among participants was whether all the case studies under examination constituted crises in the eyes of China's leaders. The consensus was that not all of those incidents were perceived as crises. As a result the rubric of "decision making under stress" was adopted as presenters revised their papers for publication.
Chinese National Security: Decisionmaking Under Stress

Andrew Scobell Dr. and Larry M. Wortzel Dr.

This volume represents the fruits of a conference held at the U.S. Army War College in September 2005 on the theme of "Chinese Crisis Management." One of the major debates that emerged among participants was whether all the case studies under examination constituted crises in the eyes of China's leaders. The consensus was that not all of those incidents were perceived as crises. As a result the rubric of "decision making under stress" was adopted as presenters revised their papers for publication.
Natural Allies? Regional Security in Asia and Prospects for Indo-American Strategic Cooperation

Stephen J. Blank Dr.

One of the hallmarks of the two Bush administrations' foreign and defense policies has been a growing rapprochement with India. Indeed, in June 2005 the U.S. Government signed a defense agreement with that country. In part, this rapprochement is driven by and coincides with India's increasingly visible role as a major Asian power. This monograph seeks to illuminate India's rising power and capabilities with regard to the key regions on its periphery: the Persian Gulf, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia. The author also considers the major issues pertaining to India's bilateral defense agenda with the United States. By revealing the dimensions of India's growing capabilities and interests, he also provides a strategic rationale for the development of the partnership to date and for its further evolution. Numerous analyses of current global trends point to the rise of India as a major transformation in world politics.
Precedents, Variables, and Options in Planning a U.S. Military Disengagement Strategy from Iraq

W. Andrew Terrill Dr. and Conrad C. Crane Dr.

The questions of how to empower the Iraqis most effectively and then progressively withdraw non-Iraqi forces from that country is one of the most important policy problems currently facing the United States. The authors seek to present the U.S. situation in Iraq in all of its complexity and ambiguity, with policy recommendations for how that withdrawal strategy might be most effectively implemented. They consider previous instances of U.S. military occupation of foreign countries and the difficulty of maintaining domestic support for such operations. The authors view the empowerment of a viable Iraqi central government and a security force to defend its authority as vital to the future of that country, but also suggest that there are severe constraints on the potential for the United States to sustain its military presence in that country at the current level. They conclude that the United States must be prepared to withdraw from Iraq under non-optimal conditions and that the chief U.S. goals should be to devise an exit strategy for Iraq that focuses on bolstering Iraqi government legitimacy even if this does not involve creating a Western style democracy. The authors strongly reject the idea withdrawing from Iraq by the use of a formal timetable, and call for the U.S. to continue its policy of renouncing permanent Iraqi bases.
Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, Bolivarian Socialism, and Asymmetric Warfare

Max G. Manwaring Dr.

¿Habla español?
Military Review translated this study to Spanish. View the translated study. The author answers questions regarding "Who is Hugo Chavez?" "How can the innumerable charges and countercharges between the Venezuelan and U.S. governments be interpreted?" "What are the implications for democracy and stability in Latin America?" In an attempt to answer these and related questions, the analysis centers on the contemporary geopolitical conflict context of current Venezuelan "Bolivarian" (bolivarianismo) policy. To accomplish this, a basic understanding of the political-historical context within which Venezuelan national security policy is generated is an essential first step toward understanding the situation as a whole. The second step requires an introductory understanding of Chavez's concept of 21st century socialism, and the political-psychological-military ways he envisions to achieve it. Then, a levels of analysis approach will provide a systematic understanding of the geopolitical conflict options that have a critical influence on the logic that determines how such a policy as bolivarianismo might continue to be implemented by Venezuela or any other country in the contemporary world security arena. At the same time, this analysis provides an understanding of how other countries in the Western Hemisphere and elsewhere might begin to respond to bolivarianismo's possible threats. Finally, this is the point from which one can generate strategic-level recommendations for maintaining and enhancing stability in Latin America.
Balik Terrorism: The Return of the Abu Sayyaf

Zachary Abuza Dr.

The author warns that despite the regeneration of the ASG as a bonafide terrorist organization, the primary security threat confronting the GRP comes from the Communist Party of the Philippines and their armed wing, the New People's Army. To that end, the GRP will focus on the ASG and MILF in as much as they expect it to garner U.S. materiel support and assistance. He advises U.S. Defense department and policymakers regarding institutional frailties of the GRP and institutional corruption within the Philippine armed forces. While the author suggests that training continue, he cautions about being drawn into a quagmire. Despite the MILF's ties to the ASG and JIO, he also suggests that the U.S. should continue to support the peace process and to try to wean the MILF off their relationship with terrorist organizations.
Contractors on Deployed Military Operations: United Kingdom Policy and Doctrine

Matthew Uttley Professor

Department of Defense (DoD) initiatives to use contractors on deployed military operations remains a contentious issue in U.S. military transformation. Despite the intense debates surrounding the benefits and costs of DoD outsourcing, little attention has focused on similar Ministry of Defence (MoD) initiatives underway in the United Kingdom (UK). Since the UK and United States are likely to remain close allies in future expeditionary deployments, the MoD's approach to contractor support is a salient case study for the DoD and U.S. armed services. The author examines the controversies surrounding deployed contractor support, the ways that the MoD has harnessed private sector capacity, and the lessons this provides for U.S. policymakers and military planners. In doing so, he provides important insights into a significant theme in contemporary defense and security policy.
Appeasement Reconsidered: Investigating the Mythology of the 1930s

Jeffrey Record Dr.

U.S. use of force since 1945 has been significantly influenced by the perceived consequences of appeasing Hitler in the 1930s, and from the mid-1970s to 2001 by the chilling effect of the Vietnam War. As the United States approached its second war with Iraq, proponents cited the Munich analogy to justify the war, whereas opponents argued that the United States was risking another Vietnam. Though reasoning by historical analogies is inherently dangerous, an examination of the threat parallels between Hitler and Saddam Hussein, and between the Vietnam War and the situation the United States has confronted in post-Baathist Iraq, reveals that the Munich analogy was misused as an argument for war, whereas the American dilemma in Iraq bears some important analogies to the Vietnam conflict, especially with respect to the challenges state-building and sustaining domestic public support for an unpopular protracted war.
2005 Key Strategic Issues List (KSIL)

Antulio J. Echevarria Dr.

Half a decade into the new millennium, the strategic environment continues to change rapidly, and in important ways. Some of those changes, of course, challenge U.S. interests, while others advance them. And the challenges assume regular and, increasingly now, irregular forms. Yet, while the causes of change are many, the discernable patterns are few. It is all the more important, therefore, that the U.S. Army maintain a strategic perspective—that it take advantage of the collective insights of scholars and senior-level students both within the defense community and beyond. The Key Strategic Issues List (KSIL), developed at the U.S. Army War College by the Strategic Studies Institute (SSI), helps the Army identify and bring together those insights. SSI develops the draft list, based on input from its expert researchers, and vets it with the rest of the Army War College, the Army Staff, Army Major Commands, Army Component Commands, the Combatant Commands, and the Joint Staff. The various topic recommendations and comments SSI receives are worked into the final document, either for inclusion in the general topic areas or as part of agency-specific concerns found in the Expanded KSIL. The Key Strategic Issues portion of the KSIL identifies research topics considered essential to the Armand to the role of landpower in general; many are broad enough to encompass different research approaches, and to allow researchers to modify or expand the issues as appropriate. Similarly, the Expanded KSIL enables researchers to focus on the concerns of, or to benefit from the perspectives of, individual KSIL sponsors. The KSIL is meant tube extensive, but not exhaustive. No list could capture every issue of potential concern, particularly given the identified dynamic nature of today's strategic environment. The SSI points of contact herein maintain general oversight of their topic areas, and thus can recommend individual sponsors or subject matter experts.
After Two Wars: Reflections on the American Strategic Revolution in Central Asia

Stephen J. Blank Dr.

The author explains how this newly won access to the Transcaspian has come about and describes why it will remain important to the United States. He then offers analysis and recommendations as to how we might retain access to deal with future contingencies and examines intersecting geopolitical and strategic trends.
Democratization Vs. Liberalization in the Arab World: Dilemmas and Challenges for U.S. Foreign Policy

Daniel Brumberg Dr.

The author looks at the political origins and dynamics of "liberalized autocracy" in the Arab world. Liberalized autocracy is a system of rule that allows for a measure of political openness and competition in the electoral, party, and press arenas, while ultimately ensuring that power rests in the hands of ruling regimes. This mix of control and openness has not only benefited ruling elites, but oppositions as well. It gives them room to "let off steam," to criticize regimes, and occasionally to affect public policy. Moreover, given the absence of consensus in many Arab states over national identity, liberalized autocracy has provided an umbrella by which competing groups--Islamists, secularists, Kurds, and Berbers--can achieve a measure of peaceful coexistence precisely because no group actually wields power. The United States largely has supported such hybrid systems, a fact of political life that has not changed dramatically under the Bush administration despite its rhetorical commitment to democracy. Whether the gap between words and deeds should or can be closed or narrowed is a complex question, since a sudden move from state-managed liberalization to democracy could open the door to Islamist power.
Law vs. War: Competing Approaches to Fighting Terrorism

Shawn Boyne Ms., Michael German Mr., Paul R. Pillar Dr., and Dallas D. Owens Dr.

The authors address one of the fundamental assumptions underlying the conduct of the War on Terrorism - the nature of our enemy, whether perpetrators of terrorist activities are criminals or soldiers (combatants). Although the United States recognizes that terrorist acts are certainly illegal, it has chosen to treat perpetrators as combatants; but much of the world, including many of our traditional allies, have opted for a purely legalistic approach. Disagreement about assumptions is not the only basis for divergent policies for confronting terrorism, but certainly explains much of our inability to agree on strategies to overcome what we recognize as a serious common and persistent international problem. Their insights into how our respective cultures and histories influence our definitions, assumptions, and subsequent policy decisions can assist us to respect and learn from competing strategies. They correctly surmise that our current international struggle is too important for us to ignore assumptions underlying our own and competing ideas.