Jeffrey D. McCausland Volgorde van de boeken

NATO has been a "nuclear" alliance since its inception, with nuclear weapons integral to its military planning and deterrence strategy. For over 40 years, NATO allies have worked to align conventional and nuclear forces, doctrines, and strategies linking the defense of Europe to that of the United States. However, the evolving security landscape necessitates a reevaluation of tactical or non-strategic nuclear weapons (NSNWs). Two key conclusions arise from this analysis. First, since the Cold War's end, the issue of how to address weapons designed for a bygone era remains understudied, both within and outside government circles. While tactical weapons may seem less formidable than strategic ones, they pose significant security and political risks that warrant greater attention. Second, the current status quo regarding these arms is unacceptable. NATO must make decisive choices, develop a coherent strategy, and establish clear plans regarding its nuclear posture. Decisions about the role of nuclear weapons are crucial to NATO's future identity. At the Lisbon Summit in November 2010, the Alliance committed to a Deterrence and Defense Posture Review (DDPR) to tackle these challenging questions ahead of the May 2012 NATO Summit. The United States and its allies need to define future threats, clarifying NATO's identity, purpose, and force requirements. So far, NATO remains at a crossroads.

Emerging analysis of the American interagency and intergovernmental processes has underscored the nation's inability to respond effectively and coherently to contemporary national security demands. Modifications to various organizations and the overall interagency process have been recommended. These are clearly required, but there has not been sufficient attention focused on the nonmilitary human capital required to meet the challenges of the 21st century. Specifically, the Federal Government lacks a comprehensive process to ensure the recruitment, development, and retention of leaders capable of effectively integrating the contributions of specialized government agencies on behalf of larger national security interests. This new security environment requires people who are not only substantively qualified and knowledgeable of policy issues, but also possess the leadership abilities to direct large complex organizations.