Not Congruent but Quite Complementary: U.S. and Chinese Approaches to Nontraditional Security

U.S.-China relations, difficult in the best of times, have lurched in a dangerous direction since 2009. Against the backdrop of a weakened global economy and sharpened ideological tensions, there has been a disturbing new atmosphere of crisis in East Asia over the last two years, with incidents occurring in greater frequency and sowing serious doubts about the sustainability of the long peace that this region has enjoyed for decades. Indeed, any one of the following incidents could have escalated into a serious regional crisis: the sinking of the South Korean frigate Cheonan; the collision between a Japanese coast guard cutter and a Chinese fishing trawler and the ensuing Chinese restrictions on the export of rare-earth minerals; and a string of confrontations between Chinese patrol ships and vessels from both Vietnam and the Philippines.https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cmsi-red-books/1008/thumbnail.jp

Shaping the Security Environment

Newport Paper No. 29, Shaping the Security Environment, edited by Derek S. Reveron, makes an important contribution to an unfolding debate on the global role of U.S. military forces in an era of transnational terrorism, failed or failing states, and globalization. Reveron, professor of national security decision making at the Naval War College, looks beyond the current conflicts in which the United States is involved to raise fundamental questions concerning the regional diplomatic roles of America’s combatant commanders (COCOMs) and, more generally, the entire array of non-warfighting functions that have become an increasingly important part of the day-to-day life of the American military as it engages a variety of partners or potential partners around the world.https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/usnwc-newport-papers/1027/thumbnail.jp

Prolegomenon to a Political Economy of Intelligence and Security: Can Microeconomic Analysis Explain Success or Failure in Intelligence Cooperation?

This thesis was submitted for the award of Doctor of Philosophy and was awarded by Brunel University LondonThe governmental functions of security and intelligence require a number of distinct organisations and functions to interact in a symbiotic way. Because the external environment is uncertain and complex, these organisations must constantly negotiate with each other to establish which of them addresses which issue, and with what resources. Coasian principles suggest that if there are no transacting costs and property rights are clear, then such negotiations should lead to an overall maximisation of the benefits gained (in this case better security and intelligence provision), yet this is rarely realised. By coupling the transaction cost theory devised by Oliver Williamson in 1975 with a range of alternate theoretical perspectives that impact on these areas of governance, an institutional costs approach is developed. By increasing the resolution of the analysis whilst still retaining a comprehensive overview, the frictions that hinder negotiated cooperation become apparent. The two cases of counterterrorism and defence intelligence in both the United Kingdom and the United States are then used to test and refine the institutional costs paradigm that results. These demonstrate that orthodox views of good cooperation in the former and poor cooperation in the latter are overly simplistic, as neither is necessarily more disposed to behave cooperatively than the other; rather, the institutional costs environment that their respective organisational architectures create incentivises different cooperative behaviour in different circumstances. The analysis also shows that the impact of the various factors that make up the institutional costs paradigm is in fact far more nuanced in these areas than is evident in earlier transaction costs scholarship. Their relevance differs by type as well as degree. Institutional costs analysis therefore provides the beginnings of a political economy for cooperative working in the intelligence and security spheres of governance

U.S. Landpower in the South China Sea

U.S. landpower is an essential, but often overlooked, element of national power in semi-enclosed maritime environments like the South China Sea. This monograph gives U.S. policymakers a better understanding of the role of the U.S. Army, Marine Corps, and Special Operations Forces (SOF) in the region through potential combat operations employing wide area defense and maneuver; deterrence through forward presence and peacetime operations; and security engagement with landpower-dominant allies, partners, and competitors in the region. Landpower’s capabilities are also essential for direct support of the air and sea services and other government organization’s success when operating in this theater in direct support of U.S. national interests.https://press.armywarcollege.edu/monographs/1409/thumbnail.jp