Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Thesis on national security strategy
The components of a national security strategy
Thesis on national security strategy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Thesis on national security strategy
Sir B. H. Liddell Hart declared that the “Role of grand strategy – higher strategy – is to co-ordinate and direct all the resources of a nation, or band of nations, towards the attainment of the political object…” These resources are known generally as the “instruments of national power” and include the Diplomatic, Informational, Military, and Economic, (DIME) instruments of power. America’s grand strategy should be incorporated in the National Security Strategy, which includes the developing, applying, and coordinating of the instruments of national power to achieve objectives that contribute to national security. The President is primarily responsible for the National Security Policy and the conduct of foreign relations. However, for national security decisions, he also works with and considers a host of executive and nonexecutive actors, members of Congress, while also keeping abreast of special interests and public opinion. This process can be extremely challenging due to complex bureaucratic, psychological, and agency cultural factors, among others. The proper understanding of these complex factors and integrating all instruments of national power will lead to a more effective decision making process. Looking at these factors along with the instruments of national power (DIME), this paper will first evaluate the national security decision making process for selecting options during the 2010 surge into Afghanistan; then it will evaluate and compare the dealing of Iran’s nuclear program from 2009 to 2013 with the Afghanistan Surge. Furthermore, this paper will analyze the effectiveness of the national security decision making process in advancing national strategy for both cases. Shortly after winning the 2008... ... middle of paper ... ..., but so regulate their use as to avoid damage to the future state of peace – for its security and prosperity.” . Works Cited Department of Defense. Joint Publication 1-02: Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. Washington D. C.: Department of Defense, 2010. CBS NEWS. December 18, 2013. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-to-rejoin-nuclear-negotiations-after-walk-out/ (accessed December 19, 2013). Countdown to drawdown. November 30, 2013. http://countdowntodrawdown.org/counter.php (accessed December 19, 2013). Hart, B. H. Lidell. Strategy. London: Faber & Faber, 1967. Sanger, David E. Confront and Conceal. New York: Broadway Paperbacks, 2012. Wasserman. "Instructional Period 6314: Debating State Challenges to US National Security." Montgomery: Air University Press, 2013. Woodward, Bob. Obama's War. New York: Simon @ Schuster, 2010.
Barnet, Richard J. “The Ideology of the National Security State”. The Massachusetts Review, Vol. 26, No. 4. 1985, pp. 483-500
Steven Hook and John Spanier's 2012 book titled “American foreign policy since WWII" serves as one of the most important texts that can be used in understanding the underlying complexities on American foreign policies. Like the first readings that are analyzed in class (American Diplomacy by George Kennan and Surprise, Security, and the American Experience by John Lewis Gaddis), this text also brings history into a more understandable context. Aside from being informative and concise in its historical approach, Hook and Spanier also critiques the several flaws and perspectives that occurred in the American foreign policy history since World War II.
Brown, Jerold E. Historical Dictionary Of The U.S. Army. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 2001. eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 29 Jan. 2014.
Cole, D., & Dempsey, J. X. (2006). Terrorism and the constitution: sacrificing civil liberties in the name of national security. New York: New Press.
Brewer, Rodney . "Military.com - View History." Military.com - View History. N.p., n.d. Web. 3 May 2014.
Host: On September the 11th 2001, the notorious terror organisation known as Al-Qaeda struck at the very heart of the United States. The death count was approximately 3,000; a nation was left in panic. To this day, counterterrorism experts and historians alike regard the event surrounding 9/11 as a turning point in US foreign relations. Outraged and fearful of radical terrorism from the middle-east, President Bush declared that in 2001 that it was a matter of freedoms; that “our very freedom has come under attack”. In his eyes, America was simply targeted because of its democratic and western values (CNN News, 2001). In the 14 years following this pivotal declaration, an aggressive, pre-emptive approach to terrorism replaced the traditional
For the Common Defense. Allan R. Millett and Peter Maslowski. New York, NY: The Free Press, 1994.
O'Shea, Brandon J. "ARMY.MIL, The Official Homepage of the United States Army." "OPERATION POWER PACK. N.p., 20 Apr. 2010. Web. 27 Feb. 2014.
This threat to “American democratic values and way of life” prompted Bush’s preemptive National Security Strategy as the security environment is changing and terrorist groups and rogue sponsor states ability to use weapons such as weapons of mass destruction are becoming an increasing threat to the American people, American interests, and the allies of the Unites States. Finally, Bush’s National Security Strategy and preemptive doctrine are based on American values and national interests and its objectives are spreading political and economic freedoms, peaceful relations with other states, and respect for human dignity.
When the constitution of the United States was formed, the framers specifically designed the American Government structure to have checks and balances and democracy. To avoid autocracy the President was give power to preside over the executive branch of the government and as commander –in –chief, in which a clause was put into place to give the president the power to appeal any sudden attacks against America, without waiting for a vote from congress. While the president presides over the executive branch there has been ongoing debate over the role of the president in regards to foreign policy. Should foreign policy issues be an executive function by the president or should congress play a much greater role? With the sluggishness of our democracy, foreign policy issues most times need quicker response compared to how domestic policy is decided in the United States. Many believe to maintain openness and democracy both the president and congress need to agree on how the United States handles issue abroad. Although the president has been given much power, his or her power and decisions are sometimes limited based on decisions by congress and challenged and shaped by various bureaucracies throughout the government system. I shall discuss the Presidents role and the role of governmental bureaucracies (Department of Defense, Department of State and the National Security Council) that work together and sometimes not together to shape and implement American foreign Policy.
The Bush Doctrine and the emerging National Security Strategy introduced by President Obama plays an essential part in strengthening the security of the United States. However, both policies could be argued because of personal belief, perception, and interpretation and in some cases opinions about each President. It’s necessary to look at each policy in both situations and apply them to the ongoing threat and the war on terrorism and understand how this affects National Security Strategies.
In the view of global security,(2011) The military decision making process abbreviated as MDMP is a planning model that establishes procedures for analyzing a mission, developing and comparing courses of action(COA) that are best suited to accomplish the higher commander’s intention and mission. The MDMP comprise of seven stages and each stage depends on the previous step to produce its own output. This means that a mistake in the early stage will affect all the other stages that follow. These steps include:
U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Doctrine for the Armed Forces of the United States, Joint Publication 1 (Washington DC: U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, March 25, 2013), V-17.
___. Army Doctrine Reference Publication The Operations Process May 2012. Washington DC: Government Printing Office, 2012.
Office of the Secretary of Defense. “Annual Report to Congress: Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2013.” Defense.gov. Office of the Secretary of Defense-Public Affairs. 2013. Web. 3 May 2014.