Search

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses various articles within the issue on topics including the Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies (RUSI), the British defence industry and government policies relating to the defence industry.

The article reflects on the important dimensions of government's role as the customer of the defence industry in three countries including the U.S., Germany and Great Britain. It informs that the British military operations in the Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan stimulated the readiness of the British Ministry of Defence to be a customer and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) meet operational demand of armed forces. It mentions the Customer Product Management System in Germany.

The article focuses on the government-defence industrial relationship in three countries including Great Britain, the U.S. and Germany. It informs that the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) contracts for 50-billion U.S. dollars of services each year to the industry. It also mentions the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) in Sweden, the Customer Product Management (CPM) process and Federal Acquisition Regulations (FARs).

The article focuses on the control and regulation of defence industries in three countries including Germany, the U.S. and Great Britain. It informs that the british government controls the exports of military products by the Import, Export and Customs Powers (Defence) Act 1939 and the German government uses the War Weapons Control Act for exports of military equipment. It also mentions that the Arms Export Control Act (1976) controls the export of military equipment in the U.S.

The article reflects on the implications of the government-defence industry relationship in three countries including the U.S., Germany and Great Britain. It informs that the Defence and Security Organisation (DSO) promotes the export of British goods and services. It mentions that the defense industry should be responsive towards national-security threats and there is a need of integration between civil and military technologies.

The article focuses on a study which concludes that nuclear disarmament exist but is far behind from practice. It mentions that if the U.S. and Russia reduce their deployed strategic arsenals by 50 per cent by 2020, they would still have nuclear arsenals for their security. It mentions that the Great Britain and France have no plans to increase their nuclear weapons in future. It informs that most states gave up nuclear-weapons programmes due to the international non-proliferation norms.

The article focuses on the controversy surrounding the military operations of Great Britain in Afghanistan since 2006. It states that the outcome of Afghanistan operation will have a major effect on the burgeoning debate about national and military strategy now underway in the Great Britain. It states that the threat posed by improvised explosive devices (IEDs) is a good indicator of the changing nature of the operation.

The article discusses how deterioration of security conditions on the ground in Helmand, Afghanistan forced the British military to extend the scale of its kinetic operations in 2006. It states that this operational decision affected the efforts of Great Britain in Helmand Province. It also mentions the Joint Plan for Helmand, which was introduced in 2005 and was perceived as a real opportunity to contribute to effective Great Britain strategy for nation-building.

The article focuses on the military strategy followed by Great Britain in Helmand, Afghanistan. It states that the Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) were deployed in the north of Afghanistan under the national command and later under North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). It states that this the northern half of Afghanistan entered into a broadly compliant relationship with NATO forces .

The article presents author's views on Afghan deployment decisions of Great Britain in 2005 and 2006. As stated, during that time Great Britain lacked a credible longterm strategy for the region, and the Foreign Office was never able to answer the question regarding its long-term interests and relative priorities for Pakistan and Afghanistan. The author mentions that the national operational plan that was produced lacked credibility among the military.

The article focuses on the strategic issues related to military strategy of Great Britain in Afghanistan. It also reflects on critical inadequacies in the way the politicomilitary system operated in Afghanistan. It reports that Great Britain took the lead in the alliance operation, and commanded the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's Allied Rapid Reaction Corps (ARRC) while following the strategy.

The article focuses on the operation of Global Partnership (GP), a key international policy on the terrorist acquisition in the Group 8 countries, such as Great Britain, in working levels. It discusses several spin-off benefits of GP in reducing chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) risks, such as trust and heightened awareness. It also explores the establishment of a strong network of officials and technical experts drawn from across the GP community.

The article discusses the challenges faced by governmental departments and political aspects in Great Britain during the post-Cold War period. It says that in the middle of 1990s, the British governmental departments have made efforts on establishing international developmental and political advances and cross-departmental co-operation. It adds that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the Department for International Development have effectively implemented governmental interventions.

The article focuses on the grand strategy in Great Britain policy, which is needed to stabilise its states. It says that the Labour Party has re-started the codification of development policy by issuing White Paper in 1997 and National Security Strategy (NSS) in 2007 and Public Service Agreements (PSAs). Meanwhile, it offers suggestions for the country's cross-country strategies, such as the adoption of Stabilisation Unit's facilitation capability by the National Security Council Secretariat.

The article focuses on departmental reforms which established changes in the department levels and the centre in Great Britain. It states that the transition of the Overseas Development Administration (ODA) to Department for International Development (DFID) was the most significant change in the British government since 1997. Furthermore, information on the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC), which was formed in 2003 and focuses on international terrorism, is presented.

The article discusses how unity are attained by Whitehall departments and agencies in the government of Great Britain. It says that the Department for International Development (DFID) program plays an important role in bringing coherence in departmental sections in the country. It also adds that ambassadors must be responsible and should act as the representative present in all National Security Council (NSC) meetings which will watch and direct the execution of the coherence strategy.

The article discusses the individual and institutional development, with emphasis to the required personal qualities and skills from the civil service and military government in Great Britain. It highlights how human resource reforms and British policy impacted the supply of people and encouraged greater cross-government working. It provides information on stabilisation capability and how to address the gaps and establish a stronger sense of community with those working on national security.

The article focuses on the utilization of money by Great Britain as a response to promote stability under economic and social crisis. It examines the role of military intervention in promoting any kind of development. It says that Great Britain's federal aid to Iraq and Afghanistan proves that military action is not the only solution to shift the attitude of people towards development, instead providing services and job opportunities will promote peace and lessen possibilities of rebellion.

The article discusses the progress in giving generic guidance to fragile states in Great Britain. It ensures the timely application of the lessons learned from experience and the ability to manage and communicate knowledge in all departments. It highlights the contribution to and drawing from lessons produced by others in the international community. It offers recommendations on the better understanding of guidance for each department, cross-departmental communications, and knowledge management.

The article focuses on the initiatives made by Great Britain to improve international relations with other countries. It says that the country has developed advances in terms of its security, humanitarian, and military intervention to fragile states. It adds that actions and decision-making were formulated to lessen the challenges face by the government such as stability and structural innovations against terrorism. It mentions the political reforms and strategies which resolve conflict issues.

The article focuses on the challenges faced by the British energy sector, and discusses the right approach to the country's energy policy. It describes the nation's maturing energy stock, international obligations to meet renewables targets, and a hostile economic environment for investment. It discusses the need for an energy policy that focuses on achieving foreign investment in the renewable sector like wind power, supporting low-carbon nuclear energy and setting the carbon budget standard.

The article presents information on arguments related to the past of the west and the disputes over where the centre of western civilization lies. The arguments relate to the true representative of historical and contemporary west. The article states that the reality that lies behind the west was defined by Great Britain followed by the U.S. The article also cites various texts which contend that the present international system in the U.S. is a continuation of the English of the 17th century.

The article focuses on how should Great Britain address challenges posed by inequalities, globalization, and climate change. In tackling climate change, a new international institution is required to establish and monitor the implementation of obligations of global communities. There is also a need to deepen international cooperation within international communities to undermine high levels of inequality and the country has a substantial part in shaping international responses to these issues.