The New U S Strategic Debate

Discusses how the old, bipartisan consensus that placed containment and deterrence of the Soviet Union at the center of U.S. national security strategy has given way to a contentious debate over what constitutes U.S. security interests.

This RAND report examines the emerging debate in the United States over post-Cold War national security strategy. It discusses the ideas now clashing and competing for preeminence as our leaders seek to forge a new post- Cold War national security consensus in a changing domestic context. For the past four decades, the United States has enjoyed a bipartisan consensus in national security strategy. That consensus is now eroding as politicians and diplomats, strategists and defense planners, and scholars and the general public grapple with the meaning of the end of the Cold War. In its place a burgeoning debate is emerging about the nature of the post-Cold War world and the desired American role in it. Against this background, strategists and defense planners need, more than ever before, to be cognizant of the domestic pressures reshaping elite and public thinking. This essay should be read as a contribution to a better understanding of these factors.

“An excellent contribution to the debate on the future role of nuclear weapons and nuclear deterrence in American foreign policy.” ―Contemporary Security Policy This book is a counter to the conventional wisdom that the United States can and should do more to reduce both the role of nuclear weapons in its security strategies and the number of weapons in its arsenal. The case against nuclear weapons has been made on many grounds—including historical, political, and moral. But, Brad Roberts argues, it has not so far been informed by the experience of the United States since the Cold War in trying to adapt deterrence to a changed world, and to create the conditions that would allow further significant changes to U.S. nuclear policy and posture. Drawing on the author’s experience in the making and implementation of U.S. policy in the Obama administration, this book examines that real-world experience and finds important lessons for the disarmament enterprise. Central conclusions of the work are that other nuclear-armed states are not prepared to join the United States in making reductions, and that unilateral steps by the United States to disarm further would be harmful to its interests and those of its allies. The book ultimately argues in favor of patience and persistence in the implementation of a balanced approach to nuclear strategy that encompasses political efforts to reduce nuclear dangers along with military efforts to deter them. “Well-researched and carefully argued.” ―Foreign Affairs

"The goal of our strategic defense research program, the vision and hope of the President, is to stop Soviet missiles before they could destroy any targets, be they in the United States or anywhere else. The goal is noble and straightforward: to destroy weapons that kill people. Thus, based on a realistic view of Soviet military planning, the transition to strategic defense would not be destabilizing. In fact, any initial defensive capabilities would offer many benefits. . . . This objective is far more idealistic, moral, and practical than the position taken by those who still embrace the mutual assured destruction (MAD) theory that defenses must be totally abandoned."—Caspar Weinberger "This is basically a research program and should remain so, at least for the foreseeable future. . . . In a world that relies on an exquisite strategic balance to forestall the holocaust, it would be the worst of blunders to jolt the tightrope when the safety net is tied at only one end."—James Schlesinger "Neither Star Wars I or Star Wars II, in whatever form one considers them, is an effective response to the public's intuitive awareness of the unacceptable risk posed by our present nuclear strategy."—Robert McNamara "The goal of our innovative science and technology program is to establish scientific feasibility and engineering validation of revolutionary concepts. concepts with potential for full SDI technological development. This forward-looking office has a broad research charter which focuses on advanced directed energy concepts such as gamma-ray lasers. on novel sensing and data preprocessing techniques, on advanced materials for space applications, on innovations in spacepower, and on emerging space­science applications and ultra-high-speed supercomputing. Interest in such exotic areas of science and technology clearly illustrates that SDI has greatly facilitated the mobilization of our nation's scientific community."—Lt . Gen. James Abrahamson Prominent world leaders and scientists came together in 1985 to discuss the technological feasibility and the political sensibility of "Star Wars." Their essays, presented in The Strategic Defense Debate, provide, for the first time a comprehensive look at this timely and controversial subject. Craig Snyder's introduction and headnotes to the collection highlight the critical points of each essay, as well as their conceptual significance to the overall topic. Contributors include: Caspar Weinberger, James Schlesinger, Lieutenant General James A. Abrahamson. Robert S. McNamara, Andrew Cockburn, Richard Pipes. Stephen F. Cohen, Adam Garfinkle, Leon Wieseltier. Michael Vlahos, Franklin Long, Francis Pym, Major Simon P. Worden, Richard Garwin, Robert S. Cooper, Colin S. Gray, Robert Bowman, Alex Gliksman, and Warren Zimmerman. Excerpts from President Reagan's speech "Peace and National Security" and Ambassador Paul H. Nitze's speech "On the Road to a More Stable Peace" are also included. The essays were originally presented at a conference sponsored by The World Affairs Council of Philadelphia in late 1985. The Strategic Defense Debate will be invaluable to students, scholars and lay persons interested in politics, history. military strategy and Soviet relations.

"The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic marks the most significant, singular global disruption since World War II, with health, economic, political, and security implications that will ripple for years to come." -Global Trends 2040 (2021) Global Trends 2040-A More Contested World (2021), released by the US National Intelligence Council, is the latest report in its series of reports starting in 1997 about megatrends and the world's future. This report, strongly influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic, paints a bleak picture of the future and describes a contested, fragmented and turbulent world. It specifically discusses the four main trends that will shape tomorrow's world: - Demographics-by 2040, 1.4 billion people will be added mostly in Africa and South Asia. - Economics-increased government debt and concentrated economic power will escalate problems for the poor and middleclass. - Climate-a hotter world will increase water, food, and health insecurity. - Technology-the emergence of new technologies could both solve and cause problems for human life. Students of trends, policymakers, entrepreneurs, academics, journalists and anyone eager for a glimpse into the next decades, will find this report, with colored graphs, essential reading.

This edited volume represents the best of the scholarship presented at the 18th National Communication Association/American Forensic Association Conference on Argumentation. This biennial conference brings together a lively group of argumentation scholars from a range of disciplinary approaches and a variety of countries. Disturbing Argument contains selected works that speak both to the disturbing prevalence of violence in the contemporary world and to the potential of argument itself, to disturb the very relations of power that enable that violence. Scholars’ essays analyze a range of argument forms, including body and visual argument, interpersonal and group argument, argument in electoral politics, public argument, argument in social protest, scientific and technical argument, and argument and debate pedagogy. Contributors study argument using a range of methodological approaches, from social scientifically informed studies of interpersonal, group, and political argument to humanistic examinations of argument theory, political discourse, and social protest, to creatively informed considerations of argument practices that truly disturb the boundaries of what we consider argument.