The United States Defense Policy - Case Study Example

United s Defense Policy Introduction: Researchers and professionals have often viewed that United s’ Defense Policy is a plan or of action, a component of United States national security, a political process, and an area of study. It includes various factors such as recruitment, training, organizing, deployment, equipping and the use of military force. Current US defense policy gives more emphasis on terrorism and economic transformation. The event of 9/11 became a severe shock to the National Security System of the United States. After this, the policymakers and authorities were forced to regulate policies for the effective dealing, prevention, and deterrence of Global terrorism. The disaster energized the country especially its defense system and the administration to generate modifications in the existing defense policy. By analyzing major political transactions that occurred in the Middle East and central Asian countries it is clear that some philosophical, ethical and moral questions are involved in formulating the existing defense US defense policy. Its policies in Post Cold War period, programs against international terrorism and internal security constitute ethical and moral issues. Studies often reported that the policy is not effective to resolve various ethical and moral issues. An overview about United States’ Defense Policy: Current defense policy of the United States’ concentrates to deter aggression against the country, its allies. Another significant element that one can find in US defense policy is the programs to control most dangerous weapons and the effective implementation of Nuclear- Proliferation Treaty. Current US defiance policy underlines effective coordination of various defiance department and security agencies. The online article entitled Security System Reform and Governance gives information about Security System Reform and it rightly comments that; “SSR frameworks should therefore address both external and internal threats to people’s safety, to law and order and to state stability.” (Manning, 2005, p.22). Existing Defense policy of the United States plays a significant role in the field of international politics, immigration, and economic transactions and its programs to prevent international terrorism constitutes desirable results. United States’ Department of Defense is the central body that coordinates various agencies and supervises the process of policy making. There are a number of factors or institutions that are involved in the process of policy formation such as the Department of the Army, Navy and Air force. Other institutions are Missile Defense Agency, Pentagon Force Protection Agency (PFPA), National Security Agency (NSA), Defense Intelligence Agency (NGA) and Defense Advanced Research Projects (DARPA). The establishment of QDR process requires the formation of a well-defined national defense strategy which is constant with the President’s National Security Strategy, implementation of necessary force structure levels, infrastructure and budget plans. From the initial stage, there was an ethical background behind US defense and foreign policy. It followed an isolation policy in international affairs and after independence it had philosophical background provided by the founders. During that time, expensive defense policies were not suitable or moral. George Washington’s attitude was to make relations with European nations for the commercial purpose. After independence, he never thought that Britain is not an enemy nation but he had no compassion towards military alliances. As a new country, the US considered its prime duty is that to go on internal challenges. This domestic need was an ethically important one rather than other relations. Washington was not interested to engage in the competition of European politics, because there had existed military alliances against one another. So his aim was to strengthen his own country that is essential to protect the conditions of his nation.   Principles for the international market caused to depart US isolation policy, which was the need for growth. Present tensions on defense policy, concerned with realism and idealism, is not equivalent of the policy of the father of nation. During the time of two world wars, the US had the moral justification of her involvement for the protection of democracy and liberty. After the invasion of Iraq in Kuwait, US declared its faith in international legal principles. “Ethics were deeply involved in the resurgence of American power.” (Smith & Light, 2001, p.148). End of the cold war surely gave an opportunity to the United States to hold its moral success. However, Gulf war was a struggle for oil and to express its military domination with the disintegration of U S.S R. So there one can see self interest than principles. Washington had followed the policy that was a balanced one. Presently his ethical attitude has abandoned him due to the international entity. Three forces such as Department of the Army, Navy and Air force were the catalyst in the process of addressing ethical and moral issues. Political parties and other agencies of Federal Government play the role of promoting agencies or working as a catalyst. There exists a moral question in the US concerned with its defense policy. Observers generally argued to limit the military expense of the U S because the expense is larger than the total expense of other important military powers. It is true that present international political situations of terrorism provide a moral support to the expensive national defense policy. But the intervention in other countries is creating further enemies which are causing more challenges. However, the limited interference of US will create some other problems, because the withdrawals of US from global issues provide the chance to cross-border terrorism. The breakdown of Soviet Union produced supplementary moral responsibility before United States. Presently it is the duty of US to protect other regions of the world from anti-democratic elements like global terrorism. So there is a back ground of ethics concerned with present defense policy of the US, because of its significant role in the international politics. Increase in national expense of US has raised moral questions among the citizens, but to check on an attack like world trade centre must not be avoided. Less expensive defense technologies are the present need of US to maintain world order. Presence of her forces in different parts of the world is essential till the coming of a global unity. United States’ Defense policy raises number of ethical and moral issues such as the issues of immigrants, military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, political interactions and intentions, excessive expenditure of national income and the elimination of mass weapon. Harvey M. Sapolsky et al comment; “The drawdown in defense spending after World War II was sharp, with outlays falling at an average rate of over 50 percent each year for three years.” (Sapolsky, Gholz & Talmadge, 2008, p.62). One can comprehend that the existing defense policy is suitable for resolving some issues and it is not fully effective in other. In the case of Iraq and Afghanistan, United States could not fulfill its objectives and unbalanced military operations, death of American soldiers, ongoing human rights violations questions United States moral right to stay there. Another significant problem is that Bush’s defense policy paved the way for severe opposition from various political parties and organizations Paul J. Bolt et al remarks; “Disputes over the war on terrorism now recall the rancor of the Vietnam War era.” (Bolt, Coletta, & Shackelford, 2005, p.6). Many people believe that America forced other nations to admit its supremacy in the issue of nuclear weapon.The defiance policy that was formulated by the Federal government concentrated on various issues such as, international terrorism, economic transactions and the issue of nuclear proliferation treaty. In case of Kuwait war, United States could justify its actions and resolve ethical and moral issues. But its current policies against international terrorism are not fully capable to address various ethical and moral issues. The book entitled Putting "defense" back into U.S. defense policy: rethinking U.S. security in ... by Ivan Eland is endowed with numerous information about the moral and ethical issues that are involved in United Nations’ Defense Policy. Author states; “Current U.S national security policy fulfills none of those goals. U.S. Policy endangers the American homeland, the people in it, and their way of life.” (Eland, 2001, p.1). Existing defense policy in the United States is designed and executed by its own resources - individuals and organizations - and as a result of this defense policies always concentrate the preference of the United Sates. By analyzing the social and political events that happened in Central Asia, one cannot avoid the fact that Defense policy of the United States lost its ability to solve ethical and moral issues. United States’ policy to build nation in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia failed because of various ethical and moral issues raised in these regions. The policy provides hints for another war and that requires answer for several ethical and moral questions. The online article US Defense Policy comments that; “Hitherto, North Korea, and either Iran or Iraq, were the stated adversaries for the two wars.” (US defense policy, 2010, para.5). Military operations of US force in Afghanistan and Iraq paved the way for sever social and moral problems such as starvation, diseases, death of civilians etc. Ongoing violence and mass killing of civilians in these nations underline the failure of The United State’s defense policy. “It was there, in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) of Pakistan (which are, in fact, anything but Federally Administered), that the Taliban and Al Qaeda found refuge, in some cases with the support of the ISI, which continued to play a dangerous double game of privately supporting and publicly (sometimes) condemning militant groups, for both ideological and strategic reasons.” (Rashid, 2009, para.6). Military operations and political interactions often created frequent threats from the part of Al-Qaeda and other Islamic terrorist groups. The problem is that the Federal government often failed to overcome these threats and it continues.  The web article entitled The Quadrennial Defense Review and U.S. Defense Policy, 2006-2025 helps the reader to understand more about the current status of the United States’ defense policy. Author remarks; “Furthermore, by 2011 the QDR calls for the elimination of the 30,000 temporary personnel increase in active duty Army end strength that has been in place the last few years as part of the reaction to 9/11 and Iraq.” (Noonan, 2006, para.5). United States’ current defense policy is effective to address some of the political, ethical and moral issues that are involved. It has structured programs, human resources, effective forces, political support and effective coordination. Dr. Frank O. Mora states that; “This is smart policy and attempts to move away from past U.S. policies that were paternalistic and short-sighted.” (Dr Mora, 2010, p.3). Meanwhile some other issues remained unmoved and it demanded some changes in existing US defense policy. Conclusion: To conclude, United States’ defense policy is a course of action that concentrates the national security of the United State. United States’ Department of Defense and its various agencies are involved in the process of policy formulation. The policy involved number of philosophical, ethical and moral issues. Current United States’ defense policy is effective to address some of the issues because it’s effective policies, political support, military forces and international relations. Through military operations, international discussions, economic policies United States justified its role in Cold War, Gulf War and the Palestine issue. One can find the fact that current defiance policy in America is not capable to address the issues of international terrorism, global immigration, elimination of mass weapon and nuclear proliferation. Annotated bibliography: Ivan Eland, Putting "defense" back into U.S. defense policy: rethinking U.S. security in –Greenwood Publishing Group, 2001 The book entitled Putting "defense" back into U.S. defense policy: rethinking U.S. security in ... by Ivan Eland is endowed with numerous information about the moral and ethical issues that are involved in the United Nations’ Defense Policy.  Author helps the reader by providing relevant information. Specialty of the book is the writer’s structured analysis and evaluation of American Federal and State policies. Author states; “Current U.S national security policy   fulfills none of those goals. U.S. Policy endangers the American homeland, the people in it, and their way of life.” (Eland, 2001, p.1). Peter L. Hays, Brenda J. Vallance, Alan R. Van Tassel, American defense policy By Peter L. Hays, Brenda J. Vallance, Alan R. Van Tassel, JHU Press, 1997. The book will help researchers to better clasp and comprehend the multifaceted processes involved in making American defense policy. It will help them draw important lessons from our practices during the Cold War while also providing them with a glance of many of the more significant security challenges to come. “Unlike the realists paradigm, the defense policy process model assumes that individuals and organizations are the most important actors.” (Haya, Vallance, & Van Tassel, 1997). Paul J. Bolt, Damon V. Coletta, Collins G. Shackelford, American Defense Policy, JHU Press, 2005-The book American Defense Policy has been a foundation for instructors of courses in political science, military affairs, international relations, and American national security for many years. Reader can get detailed information about American Defense policy from this. Things are presented statically and it differentiates this book from other writings. Harvey M. Sapolsky, Eugène Gholz, Caitlin Talmadge , US Defense Politics: The Origins of Security Policy - Taylor & Francis, 2008 -This new textbook entitled US Defense Politics: The Origins of Security Policy gives explanation on how US defense and national security policy are formulated and conducted. Relevant information is the highlight of this book and the reader can find the craftsmanship of the authors in their analysis. (Manning, 2005). The online article entitled Security System Reform and Governance made a deep analysis about the processes of US defense policy formulation and the reader can understand various agencies that are involved in the process of policy formulation. The online article entitled Security System Reform and Governance rightly comments that; “SSR frameworks should therefore address both external and internal threats to people’s safety, to law and order and to state stability.” ((Manning, 2005, p.21). Reference List Bolt, P. J., Coletta, D. V., & Shackelford, C. G. (2005). American defense policy. JHU Press, p. Retrieved August 17, 2010, from http://books.google.co.in/books?id=5e_GhhBg2qcC&printsec=frontcover&dq=American+defense+policy+By+Paul+J.+Bolt,+Damon+V.+Coletta,+Collins+G.+Shackelford&hl=en&ei=mz5pTMbUKcfQcYzYoJAF&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false Dr Mora, F. O. (2010). The Top 7 myths of U.S. defense policy toward the Americas. DASD, Western Hemisphere Affairs. Retrieved August 17, 2010, from http://justf.org/files/primarydocs/100429myth.pdf Eland, I. (2001). Putting “defense” back into US defense policy: Rethinking U.S. security in the post-cold war world. Greenwood Publishing Group, p.1. Retrieved August 17, 2010, from http://books.google.co.in/books?id=3uHng9m2vQQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=united+states+defense+policy&cd=3#v=onepage&q=united%20states%20defense%20policy&f=false Haya, P. L., Vallance, B. J., & Van Tassel, A. R. (1997). American defense policy. JHU Press, p. Retrieved August 17, 2010, from http://books.google.co.in/books?id=evo4nKODKDsC&pg=PA13&dq=moral+issues+affect+american+defence+policy&cd=2#v=onepage&q&f=false Manning, R. (2005). DAC guidelines and reference series: Security system reform and governance. OECD Publishing, p.22. Retrieved August 17, 2010, from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/8/39/31785288.pdf Noonan, M. P. (2006). The quadrennial defense review and U.S. defense policy 2006-2025. Foreign Policy Research Institute. Retrieved August 17, 2010, from http://www.fpri.org/enotes/20060309.military.noonan.qdrdefensepolicy.html Rashid, A. (2009). Descent into Chaos: The United States and the Failure of Nation Building in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Central Asia. Explananda. Retrieved August 17, 2010, from http://www.explananda.com/category/politics/us-defense-policy/ Sapolsky, H. M., Gholz, E., & Talmadge, C. (2008). US Defines politics: The origin of security policy. Taylor& Francis, p.62. Retrieved August 17, 2010, from http://books.google.co.in/books?id=SecXvaUUrb4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=US+DEFENCE+POLICY&hl=en&ei=O0RpTJbINozJccbonJAF&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false Smith, K. E., & Light, M. (2001). Ethics and foreign policy. Cambridge University Press, p.148. Retrieved August 17, 2010, from http://books.google.co.in/books?id=9P7lLuHq7i4C&pg=PA31&dq=philosophical,+ethical+and+moral+questions+involved+in+U+S+defense+policy&hl=en&ei=IJViTKOxPIKwvgP8y_GdCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false US defense policy. (2010). Global Security.org. Retrieved August 17, 2010, from http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/intro/intro.htm Read More