| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
170954
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper examines the results of assessing the scope of non-nuclear deterrence, and gives suggestions for improving the methodological approach to the choice of criteria and indicators of nonnuclear deterrence
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
144309
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Noida, HarperCollins Publishers India, 2012.
|
| Description |
ix, 241p.pbk
|
| Standard Number |
9789350299913
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 058611 | 358.4/BEN 058611 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
146318
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Recent British military interventions in Libya, Iraq and Syria have all been put to the vote in the House of Commons. This suggests a shift away from the longstanding Royal Prerogative on war-making powers towards an expectation that parliamentary authorisation is first required. As Tara McCormack argues however, there is a concurrent trend that undermines this apparent move towards greater democratic oversight of the use of military assets in conflict: the growing preference for ‘warfare by remote control’, such as the deployment of drones or military trainers. Perceived as a form of intervention with less ‘skin in the game’, such military action has so far been launched without prior parliamentary approval – and without scrutiny.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
071858
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Santa Monica, Rand Corporation, 1982.
|
| Description |
x, 47p.
|
| Standard Number |
083300462X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 023074 | 358.180973/WHE 023074 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
122252
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The dominant trend in international security over the past decade has been a move towards 'remote control': the increasing use of special forces, private military and security companies and remote systems at the expense of the engagement of large forces. Paul Rogers analyses how this trend has developed, and asks whether it can really provide an appropriate response to the likely threats against global security in the coming years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|