Despite being the Christmas' week, interesting articles on international politics have appeared.
Let's start with an article by Theo Milonopolous on "Clausewitz as the Last Jedi? Culminating Points of Victory, Civil-Military Relations, and Strategy in Star Wars". If you are a Star Wars fan (and you have seen the last one), you can not miss a Clausewitzian take on the George Lucas' movies. In any case, even if you are not a fan of the saga, this piece reflects on some crucial concepts of the "War Studies" research field.
Last week, the Trump Administration issued a new National Security Strategy. I have read many articles about it. No one, in my opinion, has highlighted the salient aspects such as that of Patrick Porter on "Tradition's Quiet Victories: Trump's National Security Strategy". In this article, the author highlights how the Trump administration's strategy rededicates America to a traditional orientation: unrivalled preponderance in key regions, an outsized level of military power and advantage, a continuation of traditional alliances, and a world safe for the penetration of American capital and trade. However, in one important respect, the National Security Strategy is different from the previous ones. As highlighted by Patrick Porter: "Instead of promising a harmony of interests between the United States and the rest of the world, the document is explicitly competitive". This is mainly due to the changes in the international structure: "For the first time since the fall of the Soviet Union and the coming of unipolarity, America in its written strategy acknowledges that its primacy (at least in Asia) will not be reconciled, and who have proven that the embrace of capitalism and projects of imperial domination are not contradictory".
Still on Trump, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a non-binding resolution that condemns the US for moving its embassy to Jerusalem. President Trump did not take this news well, stating that:
“They take hundreds of millions of dollars and even billions of dollars and then they vote against us. Well, we're watching those votes. Let them vote against us; we'll save a lot. We do not care”.
In this interesting article by Erik Voeten, a professor at the Georgetown University, the author explains how the US administration's hardball strategy has a very strong domestic politics rationale. Furthermore, he highlights how actually this resolution reflects consolidated positions at international level on Israel and Middle East.
Also on Trump, there is a growing debate in the United States on the delicate relationship between intelligence agencies' independence and political influence. In this regard, I would suggest two articles:
The first one highlights the violations of the barriers between politics and intelligence. Furthermore, it focuses on two possible ways how intelligences become politicized. A top-down model, when politicians pressure intelligence agencies produces analysis of their policies, and a bottom-up model, in which intelligence officers can also manipulate information for political aims.
The second article highlights this delicate relationship in the current US political landscape.
Still on the role of US intelligence and, in particular, on the threat of Russian interference in electoral campaigns and political debates in the US and Europe, this must-read report by the Washington Post focuses on counter-disinformation strategies adopted by US administrations and the reasons why they failed. In particular, the author states that the US intelligence saw the warning signs of Russian meddling in Europe and later in the US but never fully grasped the breadth of the Kremlin’s ambitions.
Moving to the European continent, an interesting and in-depth article on the French President Macron was published in Foreign Affairs. According to Ronald Tiersky, Macron is willing to leave an indelible mark on French politics. From this point of view, it has the same ambitions of the most important French Presidents, Charles De Gaulle and François Mitterrand.
Regarding Brexit, last week there was a meeting between the British Prime Minister and the Polish one. They talked about many things, including the fact that UK seeks defence partnership with the EU.
Last week's reading list had been almost completely dedicated to the PESCO agreement, which strengthens Europe's defence cooperation mechanism, both from a strategic and from an industrial point of view. However, some scholars and observers say that these developments may not be a good idea. Chiara De Franco, Assistant Professor at the Center for War Studies at the University of Southern Denmark, states that "a more muscular Europe could create rather than solve security dilemmas". In turn, "in the present context, it might well cause Russia to feel more threatened and adopt an even more aggressive posture”.
Since I’ve been staying in Italy for holidays, I have followed closely the debate on the Italian military mission in Niger. The Italian mission will be included in the broader Euro-African operation launched at the summit of Celle Saint Claud by the French President Emmanuel Macron. According to Prime Minister Gentiloni, the mission in Niger serves to stabilize the area of the Sahel, with a combination of fighting against terrorism, ensuring the stability of the borders, fighting against illegal immigration and promoting local development.
Here, Jean Pierre Darnis (Istituto Affari Internazionali) explains the salient features of the future military operation.
More broadly, Fabrizio Coticchia focuses on the implications of the future mission in Niger in the context of Italian defence policy after the Cold War.
Lastly, two interesting articles on defence industries and military procurement:
Leonardo-Finmeccanica will open 30 new marketing offices around the world in the next three to five years as it shifts its focus from the internal reorganization to export sales.
Regarding military procurement and technological innovation, Trevor Taylor reflects on Defence Innovation and the Future of Transatlantic Strategic Superiority. In particular, the author reflects on how recent changes in the defence sector, both in the United States and in the European continent, have an impact on Britain's policy in this area.
Finally, I read this interesting article on the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and (on) the importance of international criminal courts and tribunals, particularly in today's political climate.
Kommentarer