| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
092954
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article considers disputes the Royal Navy and Coastal Command had with Bomber Command, the Air Staff and supporters of strategic bombing over what was the 'proper' use of air power. The disputes centred on the provision of air support for the anti-submarine campaign in the Battle of the Atlantic. This article will argue that the balance was too much in favour of strategic bombing at the expense of the security of the Atlantic convoys, but that when corporate culture and grand strategy are considered, the reasoning behind such an imbalance becomes easier to comprehend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
092952
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The central claim underpinning the Revolution in Military Affairs is that battlefield imperatives drive technical and more widely social change: that technology evolves according to a logic that starts with the relationship between the offence and defence in battle. Thus the ambition of the military organisation is to develop weaponry that can beat the adversary. A failure to grasp this essential truth leads to defeat in battle. This paper demonstrates how technology change happens in practice. By looking inside the 'black box' of the military organisation, what emerges is a more complicated picture that takes into account the way arguments for technical change are constructed and deployed within the bureaucracy based on a variety of battlefield interpretations. This shows that technology development is not necessarily driven by either frontline demands or scientific understanding but in reference to who has organisational power and how they use it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
092949
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper evaluates to what extent the improving Sino-Indian relations coincide with a mitigation of military threat perceptions. A critical review of the demilitarisation of the border, the military strategies with respect to the Indian Ocean and nuclear arms programmes, reveals that the two countries are still locked in a military security dilemma. Distrust still results in military balancing. The outcome is a complex and multi-level military balance of power that might not bring about peace but enhances stability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
092950
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Strategic historians and practitioners associated with the 32-day Sino-Indian border conflict of autumn 1962 have for long argued that India's appeal for US military assistance during the war led to the abandonment of India's foreign policy of non-alignment. By asking for military assistance, India entered into an alliance with the US. Triangulation of different accounts of the war, declassified US State Department Papers and correspondence between Indian leaders during the time of the war counter these claims. This article demonstrates how India's political elite, informed by cultural beliefs had in fact resisted allying with the US. Cultural beliefs, and not rational claims prescribing alliances, guided the strategic decision-making process in this period of national security crisis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|