| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
130159
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
133281
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Scottish government's white paper on independence, Scotland's future, sets out its defence blueprint following a 'yes' vote. It makes clear that its defence plans would be subject to a Strategic Defence and Security Review in 2016, as well as negotiation on the division of assets with London. However, it also provides a strong indication of how it envisages its defence posture as an independent state-a major pillar of which is founded upon strong and continued defence cooperation with the rest of the United Kingdom. Is this a realistic assumption? And, if so, how would it work in practice? Contextualized by the increased emphasis on defence cooperation which sits at the heart of NATO's Smart Defence initiative, as well as the European Defence Agency's 'pooling and sharing' programme, the article assesses the benefits and challenges that might be encountered in a defence cooperation agreement between an independent Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom in the event of a 'yes' vote in September's referendum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
014376
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
1992.
|
| Description |
221-231
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
071923
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
139758
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
If there is any single proof of the transformation of US-Indian relations since 2001, burgeoning defence ties would stand out as ‘Exhibit A.’ Since the trying moments after the 1998 Indian nuclear tests—when Indian strategic entities became targets of US sanctions, when Indian weapons systems of US origin lay non-operational because spare parts were denied, and when US-Indian defence trade was minuscule — the flood of interactions that have now become commonplace mark defence cooperation as the cornerstone of the steadily strengthening bilateral relationship.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
150693
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
153061
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
At NATO’s 2014 Wales Summit, the UK and Germany unveiled two new initiatives for European defence cooperation, known, respectively, as the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) and the Framework Nations Concept (FNC). Both were the result of economic pressures and the need to exercise intra-alliance leadership, but they represented very different approaches to cooperation. The JEF was to be a UK-led contingency force for short-notice operations, selectively incorporating forces from allies and partners. The FNC sought to coordinate capability development between groups of allies, centred on larger framework nations, to develop coherent capability-clusters available to meet NATO’s force requirements. The common denominator and novelty of the initiatives was the building of forces and capabilities multinationally by having major states act as framework nations for groups of smaller allies. The UK and Germany have ownership and continue to provide leadership to these initiatives. This is one key reason why they continue to evolve to accommodate changing circumstances and are likely to endure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
065246
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
078446
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
082200
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
085570
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Indian navy and its chinese counterpart conducted a joint exercise for the first time in the seas off the Shanghai coast in November, 2003. The latest naval exercise between the two navies was held off the Kochi coast in November, 2008, just prior to the terrorist attck in Mumbai.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
139208
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Defence collaboration is on the political agenda in most western countries. Simultaneously, maritime activity in the Arctic region is growing, spurring demand for various coast guard tasks of both civilian and military characters. How can defence collaboration be applied to deal with a changing situation in the Arctic? Arctic coastal states are facing heightened risks, and their various coast guard structures have to provide extended capacities for a number of tasks. Simultaneously, most Arctic coast guards are experiencing a stretch in capabilities, as demand grows. This study asks whether it is purposeful – or even possible – to conduct defence collaboration on coast guard tasks in the Arctic. Subsequently, what are the drivers of, and challenges to, such collaboration, and what forms can it take? Canada, Denmark and Norway form the basis of this comparative study, given their status as NATO members and small-to-medium powers with prominent geographical positions in the North Atlantic/Arctic oceans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
056509
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
127744
|
|
|
| 15 |
ID:
104406
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Delhi, KW Publishers, 2011.
|
| Description |
ix, 90p.
|
| Standard Number |
9789380502618
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 056002 | 355.40954/NAY 056002 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 16 |
ID:
096016
|
|
|
| 17 |
ID:
131462
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Arab Gulf states have systematically worked to tighten their cooperation in various fields. However, progress toward increased defence collaboration continues to be slow due to a number of factors including fears of angering neighbouring countries, particularly Iran; protecting state sovereignty; and reliance on other forms of defence, such as national militaries and foreign allies. This article traces the ups and downs of defence cooperation between the Arab Gulf nations, focusing on the establishment of the GCC and the joint Peninsula Shield Force, crucial milestones in Arab Gulf security coordination. A timeline of increased and decreased cooperation is presented, including during the two Gulf wars, along with the manner in which the joint force has been employed, its associated concerns, and the potential future for defence collaboration.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 18 |
ID:
018263
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Dec 2000.
|
| Description |
854-867
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 19 |
ID:
014767
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Fall 1992.
|
| Description |
491-516
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 20 |
ID:
146375
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Delhi, IDSA, 2013.
|
| Description |
35p.pbk
|
| Standard Number |
9789382512011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:2/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 058752 | 355.033554/IND 058752 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
| 058753 | 355.033554/IND 058753 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|