Foreign Policy And Trade Regulation

After unraveling of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the Berlin Wall, fears of war breaking out between the major powers of the United States and the Soviet Union were greatly reduced. Numerous commentaries, reports, and studies arose out of the question of what to do with the excess U.S. forces, and how to reshape them for a new era (Snider & Carlton-Carew, 1996). Since the birth of the United States, the military has been an important part of the United States. The US military has been a fundamental part of foreign policy, including fostering democracy, establishing rule of law, and assisting with economic development in territories allied with the U.S. (Ludema, 2007).

In 1958, as the United States Government sought to reorganize its defense establishment, President Dwight D. Eisenhower argued that “separate ground, sea and air warfare is gone forever. If ever again we should be involved in war, we will fight in all elements, with all services, as one single concentrated effort.” Eisenhower based his assessment on his experiences as Supreme Allied Commander in Europe during World War II, but his insight has had a tremendous influence on the way that the armed services fight. Today the armed services operate as a joint force, yet each service provides important capabilities, some of which are unique to that service alone. Through law, Congress has assigned certain roles to each service. These are the “broad

The nature of war changes, rather adapts, based on social, political and economic factors. The time period between World War I and World War II is a notable time frame for observing ways in which military organizations across the globe developed their doctrine, strategy, personnel and equipment. The paper will argue that the two most important qualities that a military organization must posses are skilled, flexible leaders and doctrine that is globally-informed and proactive. The US military benefits, and could have benefited historically, from innovative actions taken by other countries. Contextually, there is a third element which is important being the federal government's support of research and development through funding.

The foreign policy strengths for the privatized combat role includes policy flexibility, force agility, and reduced political barriers. Policy flexibility is defined as the variety of options available and the scope in which they can be applied. The resulting collection of choices which may be mapped and compared to other choices can be referred to as the option space. In the case of the military, some of the policy options available can include mission types and the variety of roles from non-combat to combat. Force agility is defined as an armed force’s scalability, physical mobility, and adaptability. Force agility is mostly understood as a tactical level capability but the potential to provide agile capabilities can

After WWI, to prevent another world war as devastating, the four allied powers (USA, Great Britain, Italy, and France) negotiated on a treaty that would determine the future of Germany after WWI. “The treaty, negotiated between January and June 1919 in Paris, was written by the Allies with almost no

The late nineteenth century marked an era in history of serious military competition, especially within the main European powers. The approach for building a powerful military was assessed in respect to neighbors, which backfired and brought about a culture of paranoia. Thus, urgency for the pursuance of alliances was widespread. It is evident that the early twentieth century was marked by the idea that because all states may use force at any time, all states must also be prepared to do so as well. This fear manifested itself in the arms race and formation of alliances during open conflicts. An overarching belief, that war was good, swept through the European nations. Little did they know a full-blown world war would break out.

NATO Secretary General Lord Ismay recognized this issue, which coupled with an increasing difficulty “to sustain popular support for defense expenditures” and the foresight of a “considerable expenditure (…) to achieve the basic objectives” of NATO strategy caused him to request a detailed reevaluation of the potential implications put forth by the “New Approach”. Following this line of thought, the United Kingdom was by far the biggest upholder of cuts in defense expenditures, as it began pressuring the rest of the Alliance to issue political guidance that would enable a reduction of conventional forces necessary using the guise of nuclear armament as more than sufficient to defend European territory.

Knowing a friendly country’s military assets and capabilities enables leaders to quickly integrate and optimize combat power. France has three branches of the military the Army, Navy, and

The Treaty of Versailles was one of the peace treaties after WWI had finished. This treaty ended the state of war between Germany and the Allied powers, and it was signed exactly five years after Archduke Franz Ferdinand's assassination. This treaty gave colonies to some countries and took territories from others. Russia and the central powers were allowed at the meeting of the treaty because they had lost the war and it would create even more tension than there already was. Many countries benefited from the treaty of Versailles while other nations who once held massive amounts of power now are weak and in need of desperate help. In this essay, I will describe Germany's, U.S.A.'s, and Great Britains different

The transatlantic discord that has emerged since the late 1990s marked a historical breakpoint not a temporary one. During the first stage between the US and European, transatlantic relations were guided by balance of power logic. The order in the Atlantic was one of the militarized rivalries, with the major countries. America steered

(Schwabe, 2001, p. 18) This policy was essentially the containment of communism spreading amongst Europe and the containment of a possible German rearmament in the future as means to appease the European community in America’s commitment to the integration of Europe. In support of this idea the Supranational structures of Europe were not very supportive and too much of the disappointment of the State Department planners in Europe. European cooperation leaned more towards intergovernmental lines. This and the reluctance of Great Britain created a barrier for the supranationally unified Europe (Schwabe, 2001, p. 27) It is for this reason that under Kenann’s influence Dean Acheson preferred to have France as the leader for European Integration and not Great Britain. The continuing fear of Pro-Soviet West Germany pushed the State Department to vehemently support European integration which would as they thought “harness” a revived West Germany to the West. This was a well-known argument in the 1960’s in favor of supranational European integration as means to deploy the idea of “double containment”. (Schwabe, 2001, p. 30) In the west the scrambling for more or less independent nuclear deterrents did not fail to influence the attempts at European integration and thus the European Defense Community (EDC) was seen as the solve all and end all that would guarantee that the idea of double containment of

After the born of ECSC, others proposals were made to integrate european states. Therefore to better defend the continent from Soviet aggressions, the United States was demanding to re-arm West Germany, but they found a strong opposition from the most of European countries, which were scared of a re-establishment of German army. In these circumstnces the French Prime Minister in 1952, proposed to create an integrated European Army. The result was the European Defence Community, which gathered together the military forces of West Germany, Italy, France and the Benelux cuontries. This option was prefered more than the idea of Germany joining NATO. In 1952, a treaty was signed by ECSC members but in 1954 the French National Assembly rejected it. After this, during the Paris Agreement in 1954 the

I have selected “Security Community Theory” to write a seminar paper. This seminar paper presents a conceptualization of NATO by exploring its role as a security community in European security. In the late 1950s, Karl Deutsch and his colleagues implicitly challenged the governing approach to security by exploring the concept of “security communities”. This was a clear break with traditional approaches to security, which emphasized the utility of military power and the inevitable nature of military threats. They gave the idea of such a community where the component states had come to reject the use or threat of force as a mechanism for resolving disputes. According to security community theory economic and cultural cooperation

NATO starts the year 2000 with the issue of concern. The European Allies' defense capability, stabilization efforts in the Balkans, and relations with Russia are at the top of a highly charged agenda.

The establishment of the European Union (EU) solidified a united political, economic, and defensive front creating a Supranational Organization (Lucas, 1999, no page). With the assistance of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the United States, the EU has developed a comprehensive security strategy responsible for leading the coalition’s objectives for mutual solidarity, global stabilization, and defense. To address security threats both regionally and globally set forth by the European Security Strategy (ESS), considerations were developed which encompass both cultural domains of geography and development.