|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
124996
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The author examines the key areas of China's military policy and armed forces development from the perspective of the decisions passed at the 18th CPC Congress that met in Beijing in November 2012, in particular, modernization of the military potential, buildup of strong armed forces consistent with the country's growing international status, the CPC's full control over the armed forces, pursuit of an "active defense" strategy, and military diplomacy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
098368
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In recent years the use of private military contractors to execute national security tasks in the U.S. military has finally come under public scrutiny. The main policy question is in three parts: What is the proper division of labor between the public and private sectors? Who decides which sector performs a specific task? If private operatives perform tasks that typically fall on the public side (combat, interrogation), what is the public oversight over the private actors, and how can they be held accountable for wrongdoings? In this article these questions are addressed in relation to the privatization process in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). The article has four parts: the first suggests that the Israeli baseline is unique as the IDF has historically been entrusted with a wide array of national-civilian missions; the second explains the economic realities that probably lie behind the privatization efforts; the third describes the slow and cautious privatization process currently under way; the fourth suggests that while there is little public debate, there is civilian oversight, there are some publicly exposed rationales, and there is public support in letting the IDF, the most trusted part of the executive branch, control the process.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
026035
|
|
|
|
|
| Edition |
vol. II
|
| Publication |
London, Sage Publications, 1972.
|
| Description |
xii, 340p.
|
| Standard Number |
0803901348
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 012926 | 355.0213/SAR 012926 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
005131
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Aldershot, Dartmouth, 1992.
|
| Description |
x,143p.
|
| Standard Number |
1855213095
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 036229 | 355.0213/IKE 036229 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
115266
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Scholars of corporate social responsibility (CSR), which refers to the responsibilities of a firm to society in four domains: economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary, have typically excluded defense firms from their research, mainly on ideological grounds. This study challenges these assumptions and measures the CSR orientations of managers of defense firms. The findings reveal the orientations of defense firm managers to be consistent with those of other corporate populations, though the highly regulated environment of defense contracting causes some differences. The findings help to redeem the social standing of defense firms, and by implication, their employees and the military members who use their products, from unwarranted antimilitary biases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|