Global militarisation

The current priority of the dominant security actors is maintaining international security through the vigorous use of military force combined with the development of both nuclear and conventional weapons systems. Post-Cold War nuclear developments involve the modernisation and proliferation of nuclear systems, with an increasing risk of limited nuclear-weapons use in warfare – breaking a threshold that has held for sixty years and seriously undermining multilateral attempts at disarmament. These dangerous trends will be exacerbated by developments in national missile defence, chemical and biological weapons and a race towards the weaponisation of space.

India's Defexpo 2010 and the Global Arms Trade

Nitasha Kaul | openDemocracy | March 2010

Issue:Global militarisation

The recently held  Indian Defexpo 2010 (described as "Asia's biggest arms bazaar") illustrates the increasing levels of militarisation both in India but also globally writes Nitasha Kaul.

 

Read more »

The nuclear-weapons moment

Paul Rogers | openDemocracy | March 2010

Issue:Global militarisation

The global effort to extinguish the nuclear peril needs to regain momentum. A bold act of leadership and imagination by one of the weapons-states could provide it.

Photo courtesy of thepretenda.

Read more »

Three connected conflicts - Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan

Paul Rogers | Oxford Research Group | February 2010

Issue:Global militarisation

Tagss:Afghanistan, Conflict, Iraq, Pakistan

At the beginning of February, ISAF sources announced that a major military offensive was about to be mounted in Helmand Province in southern Afghanistan. This was Operation Moshtarak (“together”), involving 15,000 US, British and Afghan National Army troops, and would concentrate on clearing Taliban and other paramilitary groups from two areas, one of them centred on the town of Marja. The publicity given to the operation appeared designed partly to encourage civilians to evacuate areas under Taliban influence, but would also serve to highlight the capabilities of coalition forces at a time when support for the war in the United States and Britain was fragile.

Given the size of the operation, it is likely that it will provide a major focus for western media attention for some weeks, but to get a full measure of its significance requires seeing it in the wider context of the conflicts in Iraq and Pakistan, and of the Status of the al-Qaida Movement. There have, in particular, been significant developments in both Iraq and Pakistan, with each likely to have an impact on what is now happening in Afghanistan.

Photo courtesy of Helmandblog.

Read more »

A new approach to ballistic missile defence in Europe? Demystifying the end of the ‘third site’

Andrew Futter | Oxford Research Group | February 2010

Issue:Global militarisation

ORG Exclusive

The new “Phased, Adaptive Approach” to ballistic missile defence announced by the Obama Administration will provide the US with a considerable defensive architecture in Europe, potentially incorporating numerous radars and tracking facilities twinned with hundreds of interceptor missiles, which will be far superior in terms of size and capability than the Bush Administration’s proposal writes Andrew Futter.

Read more »

Afghanistan: propaganda of the deed

Paul Rogers | openDemocracy | February 2010

Issue:Global militarisation

Tagss:Afghanistan, International politics, Taliban

The deluge of publicity about a large-scale military operation against the Taliban must be set against Afghan realities that tell a different story. The task of reaching an accurate assessment of the real state of the conflict must look beyond such public-relations campaigns from military sources.

Image source: Reuters

Read more »

Iraq's shadow over Afghanistan

Paul Rogers | openDemocracy | February 2010

Issue:Global militarisation

Tagss:global security, globalisation, International politics

The current surge in United States military forces in Afghanistan part of a strategy designed to bring the war to an end from a position of strength. The great strains within the US military mean that the deployment of 30,000 troops to Afghanistan can be sustained only if forces can be withdrawn from Iraq at the scheduled rate: that is, all combat-forces out by August 2010 and the remaining (approximately 50,000) personnel by the end of 2011. The dynamics of violence in Iraq present a serious challenge to this strategy.

Washington is thus engaged in a delicate balancing-act: managing disengagement from Iraq while ensuring that the United States will retain a significant military presence in the country well beyond 2011 in order to exercise a maximum degree of influence.

Read more »