Taiwan is a flourishing liberal democracy and a key player in the global economy. Yet it is far from secure. China considers it a renegade province and has not renounced its right to use force to resolve the dispute. Taiwan must therefore deter China’s aggression by convincing Chinese leaders that the costs using force against Taiwan will outweigh any possible benefits. In this monograph, a team of researchers from George Mason University and the University of Waterloo suggest a holistic strategy that Taiwan can use to enhance its conventional deterrence posture. Their conclusions are simple but radical: instead of organizing its defenses around a small inventory of conventional jets, ships and tanks, Taiwan should acquire large numbers of cheap, asymmetric weapons. It should also transform its massive reserve command into a territorial defense force trained to wage guerrilla warfare. By threatening to wage a never-ending war of denial against an invader, Taiwan can more credibly impact China’s cost-benefit calculus.
Eloquent, devastating . . . packed with gimlet-eyed analysis - cultural, economic, historical - of how American life came to look the way it does . . . Edstrom's keen observational powers encompass both the physical world and social nuance." -Los Angeles Review of Books A manifesto about America's unchallenged war machine, from an Afghanistan veteran and new kind of military hero. Before engaging in war, Erik Edstrom asks us to imagine three, rarely imagined scenarios: First, imagine your own death. Second, imagine war from “the other side.” Third: Imagine what might have been if the war had never been fought. Pursuing these realities through his own combat experience, Erik reaches the unavoidable conclusion about America at war. But that realization came too late-the damage had been done. Erik Edstrom grew up in suburban Massachusetts with an idealistic desire to make an impact, ultimately leading him to the gates of West Point. Five years later, he was deployed to Afghanistan as an infantry lieutenant. Throughout his military career, he confronted atrocities, buried his friends, wrestled with depression, and struggled with an understanding that the war he fought in, and the youth he traded to prepare for it, was in contribution to a bitter truth: The War on Terror is not just a tragedy, but a crime. The deeper tragedy is that our country lacks the courage and conviction to say so. Un-American is a hybrid of social commentary and memoir that exposes how blind support for war exacerbates the problems it's intended to resolve, devastates the people allegedly being helped, and diverts assets from far larger threats like climate change. Un-American is a revolutionary act, offering a blueprint for redressing America's relationship with patriotism, the military, and military spending.
The Millennial Generation, those roughly 87 million adult men and women born between 1980 and 1997, now represent one quarter of the U.S. population, out numbering the Greatest Generation (1913-1924), the Silent Generation (1925-1945), the Baby Boomers (1946-1964), and Generation X (Gen Xers) (1965-1979). In addition to being far more likely to have posted a "selfie" on social media than other generations, the Millennials also have distinct attitudes toward a range of important foreign policy issues. With those on the leading edge of Millennials now hitting their mid-thirties, this cohort is becoming increasingly influential. Just as the generations before them, the Millennials' worldviews owe a great deal to early life experiences and the foreign policy issues that dominated their childhoods. The main drivers of Millennials' foreign policy attitudes fall into two major categories. The first category comprises the trends and events that started or occurred before the Millennials came of age and provide their historical context. This includes the end of the Cold War and the evolution of the global distribution of power, the development of the Internet, and the acceleration of globalization. The second category includes major events that have occurred so far during the Millennials' "critical period," the period between the ages of roughly 14 to 24 when people are most susceptible to socialization effects. Most obviously these include the attacks of 9/11 and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Together, these forces have led to three critical differences between Millennials' foreign policy views and those of their elders. First, Millennials perceive the world as significantly less threatening than their elders do, and they view foreign policies to deal with potential threats with much less urgency. Second, Millennials are more supportive of international cooperation than prior generations. Millennials, for example, are far more likely to see China as a partner than a rival and to believe that cooperation, rather than confrontation, with China is the appropriate strategy for the United States. Finally, thanks in particular to the impact of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Millennials are also far less supportive of the use of military force and may have internalized a permanent case of "Iraq Aversion." The rise of the Millennial Generation portends significant changes in public expectations and increased support for a more restrained grand strategy. There is no reason, however, to expect that U.S. grand strategy will become particularly coherent under Millennial leadership. Millennials, like every generation, reflect significant partisan splits over core issues. In the absence of a unifying security threat, these partisan divides ensure that U.S.foreign policy will feature as much debate and dissensus in the future as it does today"--Publisher's description.
Taiwan is a flourishing liberal democracy and a key player in the global economy. Yet it is far from secure. China considers it a renegade province and has not renounced its right to use force to resolve the dispute. Taiwan must therefore deter China’s aggression by convincing Chinese leaders that the costs using force against Taiwan will outweigh any possible benefits. In this monograph, a team of researchers from George Mason University and the University of Waterloo suggest a holistic strategy that Taiwan can use to enhance its conventional deterrence posture. Their conclusions are simple but radical: instead of organizing its defenses around a small inventory of conventional jets, ships and tanks, Taiwan should acquire large numbers of cheap, asymmetric weapons. It should also transform its massive reserve command into a territorial defense force trained to wage guerrilla warfare. By threatening to wage a never-ending war of denial against an invader, Taiwan can more credibly impact China’s cost-benefit calculus.
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.