Constitutional Bait and Switch: Executive Reinterpretation of Arms Control Treaties

A new constitutional crisis has been thrust upon the American body politic. The crisis arises from a dispute concerning the allocation of legal authority for the interpretation, and especially for the reinterpretation, of international agreements. Once a sleepy backwater reserved for specialized scholars, the issue of treaty interpretation has drawn the President and Congress into stark confrontation and generated splashy headlines

Ideational imperatives, national identity, and nuclear deterrence theory in East Asia

Since the end of the Cold War, the emphasis on nuclear deterrence has declined. The rise of China has generated a voluminous literature on power transition theory and whether China and the United States can avoid the “Thucydides Trap.” A lacuna in this literature is the role that nuclear deterrence plays in the strategic dynamic between the United States, Japan, and China. This dissertation fills this lacuna by analyzing the role that nuclear deterrence plays in the military strategies of Japan, China, and the United States. How do China and Japan internalize and understand nuclear deterrence theory in ways that depart from the Cold War paradigm? What effect do dissimilar conceptions of nuclear deterrence theory have on the nuclear and conventional force structure and strategies of each country? To understand the reasons for variation in nuclear strategy in East Asia, I argue that contra systemic theories Japan legitimizes its military capabilities in an extended nuclear deterrence framework based on ideationally driven constitutional theory. Departing from Japan’s strategic mindset during the Cold War, China now occupies the place of the “Other” in Japanese national identity, thus in part explaining its shift to a more pro-active military posture. This is to say that it is not China’s rise that preoccupies Japan, but China’s rise that influences Japanese strategic behavior. Lastly, I argue that China’s assertive foreign policy behavior and nuclear strategy are driven not by structural incentives dictated by the international system, but by ideational and historical imperatives under the rubric of the “China Dream (zhongguo meng)” and “National Rejuvenation (minzu fuxing).” Using analyses of Japanese and Chinese language sources, e.g., official government and defense documents, newspapers, books, and journal articles, this dissertation makes two major contributions. First, departing from the dominant and acultural structural realist and game theoretic approaches to nuclear deterrence theory, it offers an alternative “thin constructivist approach” that considers distinct ideational determinants of each country’s approach to nuclear deterrence theory and their effect on nuclear strategy. Second, it uncovers dissimilar approaches to nuclear escalation that depart from Cold War-derived models

Beyond the Rubicon: Command and Control in Regional Nuclear Powers

What factors explain the origins of command and control systems in emerging nuclear powers? Why do some states implement robust administrative, physical, and technical controls over their nuclear arsenals, while others limit safeguards against nuclear use? The nature of a state’s nuclear command and control systems underpin the deterrent capacity of a state’s nuclear arsenal, determine the likelihood of accidental or unauthorized nuclear use, and affect the likelihood of conventional conflict escalating across the nuclear threshold. Despite the importance of command and control systems for nuclear stability and security, however, detailed analysis on the sources of nuclear command and control remain scarce outside the context of the Cold War superpowers. Current explanations of command and control in regional nuclear powers are largely built upon lessons from the U.S. nuclear experience, but these explanations prove unpersuasive under empirical scrutiny. In this dissertation, I analyze the origins of command and control systems in regional nuclear powers. My dissertation makes three broad contributions to the study of nuclear strategy and operations. First, I develop a typology of nuclear command and control systems that measures the administrative, physical, and technical controls that a state deploys over its nuclear arsenal. With these indicators, I identify three ideal types of command and control that categorize command and control frameworks by when political leaders delegate the capability to use nuclear weapons to lower-level commanders: delegative control systems that delegate nuclear use capability during peacetime, conditional control systems that delegate nuclear use capability early in crises, and assertive control systems that delegate nuclear use capability late in crises. Second, I provide a theoretical framework that incorporates three variables to explain variation in command and control arrangements across regional nuclear powers: the presence of a conventionally superior adversary, the severity of domestic threats to the political regime, and the level of military organizational autonomy. This framework generates specific predictions for command and control outcomes in regional nuclear powers and identifies the conditions under which each variable influences command and control systems. Third, I evaluate my argument and a series of alternative explanations with a combination of historical and primary source material. Specifically, I draw upon archival and original interview data with political and military elites from India, Pakistan, and apartheid-South Africa to describe and explain nuclear command and control arrangements in these states. By employing extensive primary source evidence to evaluate the competing perspectives, my dissertation offers the descriptive accuracy and theoretical leverage necessary to explain command and control arrangements in regional nuclear powers

Issues in Modeling Military Space

Fighter Pilots students undertake an intense 120-day training program. New classes of students enter the training program at regular interval. Students endured rigorous academic, simulator, and aircraft training throughout the program. Squadron schedulers ensure the multiple classes and students are scheduled for the activities. Simulator and aircraft training are scheduled individual for each student. Academic training are taught to the class. Aircraft utilization must also be considered. Aircraft Sortie training are also constrained by daylight hours. Additionally, students are limited to a maximum of three training events in a given day. Squadron schedulers must balance these requirements to ensure students meet their training requirements and successfully graduate. The dynamic training environment requires advanced robust schedules with flexibility to accommodate changes. A Visual Interactive Modeling approach is used to generate schedules. Current schedules are being generated manually with an Excel spreadsheet. Taking advantage of Excel\u27s Visual Basic Programming language, the Excel tool is modified in several ways. Scheduling Dispatch rules are implemented to automatically generate feasible schedules. Graphical User Interfaces are used to create a user-friendly environment. Schedulers guide the schedule building process to produce a robust schedule. An attrition environment is created to simulate attrition probabilities of aircraft sortie training due to operations, maintenance, weather, and other cancellations. Analysis of dispatch rules are analyzed

Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms

The Joint Publication 1-02, Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms sets forth standard US military and associated terminology to encompass the joint activity of the Armed Forces of the United States. These military and associated terms, together with their definitions, constitute approved Department of Defense (DOD) terminology for general use by all DOD components

Autonomous Weapons and Human Responsibilities

Although remote-controlled robots flying over the Middle East and Central Asia now dominate reports on new military technologies, robots that are capable of detecting, identifying, and killing enemies on their own are quietly but steadily movingfrom the theoretical to the practical. The enormous difficulty in assigning responsibilities to humans and states for the actions ofthese machines grows with their increasing autonomy. These developments implicate serious legal, ethical, and societal concerns. This Article focuses on the accountability of states and underlying human responsibilities for autonomous weapons under International Humanitarian Law or the Law of Armed Conflict. After reviewing the evolution of autonomous weapon systems and diminishing human involvement in these systems along a continuum of autonomy, this Article argues that the elusive search for individual culpability for the actions of autonomous weapons foreshadows fundamental problems in assigning responsibility to states for the actions of these machines. It further argues that the central legal requirement relevant to determining accountability (especially for violation of the most important international legal obligations protecting the civilian population in armed conflicts) is human judgment. Access to effective human judgment already appears to be emerging as the deciding factor in establishing practical restrictions and framing legal concerns with respect to the deployment of the most advanced autonomous weapons

The evolution of Taiwan’s grand strategy: from Chiang Kai-shek to Chen Shui-bian

The thesis explores the concept of grand strategy and applies it to the development of Taiwan’s grand strategy between 1949 and 2008, from Presidents Chiang Kai-shek, Chiang Ching-kuo and Lee Teng-hui to Chen Shui-bian. The thesis first examines the debates between the ‘classical’ war-centred and ‘neo-classical’ peace-centred perspectives in the realm of strategic studies and argues that these need not be mutually exclusive, but can in fact supplement one another. The thesis then adopts a stance of theoretical pluralism, whereby grand strategy is regarded as a process of power practice across periods of war and peace; it defines grand strategy as a cognitive state agent taking action to create and manipulate power in furthering its desired ends in a dynamic international society. This convergent perspective of grand strategy is designed to embrace these two schools of thought, since it is equally important for those who seek a better understanding of grand strategy in general and the evolution of Taiwan’s grand strategy in particular to focus both on how best to wage war and how best to preserve peace. To make sense of and to apply the concept of grand strategy, as an operational term, this thesis proposes four strategic analytical dimensions, namely, capability, choice, environment and posture, which are informed by the duality of four analytical pairs: ideational and material factors, ends and means, agency and structure, and defence and offence. Building upon this strategic analytical framework, the thesis moves to explore the perspective of leadership in Taipei against the backdrop of the politicalmilitary confrontation between the ROC on Taiwan and the PRC. The thesis investigates how and how far Taiwan’s grand strategy had been conditioned and developed by the influence of the Taipei-Beijing competition for sovereignty, changes in the international context, the unique strategic perspective of the successive presidents, domestic political developments and the asymmetry of national power between Taiwan and China. Through its investigation, the thesis argues that Taiwan’s grand strategy over the past six decades has been fundamentally driven by one prime factor: to secure the perspective of the ROC’s sovereign status as understood by Taipei’s leaders, not only across the Strait but also in international society

Taking \u3ci\u3eSteel Seizure\u3c/i\u3e Seriously: The Iran Nuclear Agreement and the Separation of Powers

This Article examines the constitutional validity of President Obama’s decision, as part of his 2015 agreement with Iran, effectively to repeal seventeen different sanctions provisions for the fifteen-year life of the agreement. Although Congress had legislated extensively in this area, the President effected this change by entering into a “nonbinding political agreement” with Iran and by aggregating individual waiver provisions in the sanctions laws into an across-the-board waiver of sanctions. We argue that the commitments made by the President in the Iran agreement violate a fundamental separation-of-powers limit on executive power—what we term the Steel Seizure principle,” after Youngstown—the Steel Seizure case. As the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed in Steel Seizure, the President does not have lawmaking power even where national security and foreign relations concerns are at stake. A vast literature has grown around Steel Seizure, especially its influential concurring opinion by Justice Robert Jackson. Yet relatively little attention has been paid to the majority view of the Justices that President Truman’s seizure order was unlawful not because it contravened any express statutory prohibition but because it flouted the congressional “plan” for addressing the particular policy issue. This aspect of Steel Seizure highlights what is particularly problematic about President Obama’s decision to aggregate authorities in the sanctions laws and to commit the United States to an across-the-board waiver of nuclear-related sanctions pursuant to his agreement with Iran. President Obama treated the waiver provisions as an invitation to end the congressionally prescribed sanctions regime for addressing Iran’s nuclear weapons program and to replace it with his own nonsanctions regime for addressing the same issue. Yet the President lacks the unilateral power to overturn Congress’s prescribed policy and to replace it with his own.The President can be viewed both as an agent and, particularly in the foreign relations area, as a co-principal with Congress. The Steel Seizure principle highlights the limits of the co-principal conception of the President’s role in foreign affairs. Once Congress has developed a legislative framework for a subject matter, that framework occupies the field; the President’s role becomes one of a responsible agent. In the Iran sanctions laws, Congress provided bounded waiver authority, acting responsibly to allow limited executive discretion rather than requiring the President to seek new legislation each time flexibility was needed. It did not, however, invite the President to override the sanctions framework altogether. An emergent literature in administrative law and U.S. foreign relations law has praised Congress’s willingness to delegate waiver authority to the President for providing needed flexibility and other policy benefits. Yet that literature recognizes that the President’s exercise of waiver authority must be carefully circumscribed to avoid enabling the President effectively to revise a statutory regime out of disagreement with Congress’s policy choices. Such limiting principles are no less necessary in the foreign affairs context, where President Obama used purported waiver authority in the Iran sanctions statutes to pursue his own policy in defiance of Congress

Science and Ideology in Economic, Political, and Social Thought

This paper has two sources: One is my own research in three broad areas: business cycles, economic measurement and social choice. In all of these fields I attempted to apply the basic precepts of the scientific method as it is understood in the natural sciences. I found that my effort at using natural science methods in economics was met with little understanding and often considerable hostility. I found economics to be driven less by common sense and empirical evidence, then by various ideologies that exhibited either a political or a methodological bias, or both. This brings me to the second source: Several books have appeared recently that describe in historical terms the ideological forces that have shaped either the direct areas in which I worked, or a broader background. These books taught me that the ideological forces in the social sciences are even stronger than I imagined on the basis of my own experiences. The scientific method is the antipode to ideology. I feel that the scientific work that I have done on specific, long standing and fundamental problems in economics and political science have given me additional insights into the destructive role of ideology beyond the history of thought orientation of the works I will be discussing