| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
140025
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
American extended deterrence commitments span the globe. Despite extensive research on the causes of deterrence successes and failures, evidence of which US allies find what extended deterrence commitments credible is elusive. This article utilizes interviews with former Australian policy-makers to analyze the credibility of the United States to defend Australian forces during the 1999 INTERFET intervention in East Timor. While there was no direct threat to Australian sovereignty, the episode stoked concerns in Canberra regarding the willingness of Washington to come to Australia's assistance. The Howard government coveted a US tripwire force presence, and the Clinton administration's unwillingness to provide this raised serious concerns among Australian political elites about the alliance. While this says little about the separate question of whether Washington would use nuclear or conventional weapons in defense of Australian sovereignty, the Timor case indicates the existence of an extended deterrence credibility deficit regarding the more probable low-intensity conflicts that Australia finds itself in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
047306
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Brunswick, Transaction Publishers, 1999.
|
| Description |
xviii, 455p.
|
| Standard Number |
156000357X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 044737 | 355.0218/BEL 044737 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
127809
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
"Globalized" low-intensity conflicts renew debates about how leading world powers contend with evolving complexities in unconventional warfare. The "foreign entanglements" of America's imperial present have been compared with the "savage wars of peace" from Britain's colonial past.1 Beyond the template of Anglo-American civilization, however, military, economic, and cultural manifestations of power must be set in their systemic and structural context for more meaningful comparison. Britain's variegated experience of unconventional warfare stemmed from its vast colonial milieu of "small wars" and "imperial policing." America's experience reflects transformational civil-military responses to both existential and ideological threats, reinforcing the evolution of a massive "way of war" over persistent frontier warfare. Integral to reading these small war traditions is the historical method, emphasizing particularity of causation while underscoring the value of flexible, hybrid approaches against overinstitutionalized "ways in warfare."2 Operational success, delivered by blending military skills with political savvy and cultural sensitivity, not only secured populations but support and legitimacy, without which even global powers risked defeat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
107239
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The article is concerned with some typical features of future wars determined by political, social and technological changes in the world, and stemming from progress in robotics, genetic engineering and bioindustry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|