The Experts below are selected from a list of 27618 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Stacie L. Pettyjohn - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Access Granted: Political Challenges to the U.S. Overseas Military Presence, 1945–2014
    2017
    Co-Authors: Stacie L. Pettyjohn, Jennifer Kavanagh
    Abstract:

    The U.S. Military depends on access to overseas bases both in peacetime and during contingencies but has faced a variety of political challenges to this access. The authors address questions about the type and severity of access problems the United States has faced since 1945, how these have changed over time, and how the United States can counter political threats to access.

  • access granted political challenges to the u s overseas Military Presence 1945 2014
    2017
    Co-Authors: Stacie L. Pettyjohn, Jennifer Kavanagh
    Abstract:

    The U.S. Military depends on access to overseas bases both in peacetime and during contingencies but has faced a variety of political challenges to this access. The authors address questions about the type and severity of access problems the United States has faced since 1945, how these have changed over time, and how the United States can counter political threats to access.

  • U.S. Global Defense Posture, 1783-2011
    2012
    Co-Authors: Stacie L. Pettyjohn
    Abstract:

    Abstract : The current U.S. global defense posture that is, the location and primary operational orientation of the nation s Military personnel and the Military facilities that its troops have access to is under increasing pressure from a number of sources, including budgetary constraints, precision-guided weapons that reduce the survivability of forward bases, and host-nation opposition to a U.S. Military Presence. These debates over the shape of the U.S. overseas Military Presence are not without precedent. As policymakers today evaluate the U.S. forward Military Presence, it is important that they understand how and why the U.S. global posture has changed. This monograph aims to describe the evolution of the U.S. global defense posture from 1783 to the present and to explain how the United States has grown from a relatively weak and insular regional power that was primarily concerned with territorial defense into the preeminent global power, with an expansive system of overseas bases and forward-deployed forces that enable it to conduct expeditionary operations around the globe. Moreover, this historical overview has important implications for current policy and future efforts to develop a U.S. Military strategy, in particular, the scope, size, and type of Military Presence overseas. As new and unpredictable threats emerge, alliance relationships are revised, and resources decline, past efforts at dealing with similar problems may yield important lessons for future decisions.

  • U.S. Overseas Military Presence: What Are the Strategic Choices?
    2012
    Co-Authors: Lynn E. Davis, Stacie L. Pettyjohn, Melanie W. Sisson, Stephen M. Worman, Michael J. Mcnerney
    Abstract:

    Abstract : The current U.S. overseas Military is largely the outcome of responses to threats as they emerged historically and over time, in Western Europe and in East Asia to the Soviet Union; in the Middle East to the ambitions, nuclear and otherwise, of Iraq and Iran; and around the world to the hostile activities of al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. 1 Today, however, the Soviet Union has transitioned from a peer competitor to something less, while China s economic standing and Military capabilities allow it increasingly to challenge U.S. global leadership. The United States has removed the threat of a weapons of mass destruction armed Iraq, but Iran s nuclear program continues to evolve. The U.S. Military relationship with its partners in the Middle East continues to grow, while prospects for change are high as a result of the Arab spring. Although al-Qaeda s putative operational leader and confirmed figurehead, Osama bin Laden, is dead, the ability of terrorist groups to acquire and potentially use disruptive technologies against the United States has grown.

Jennifer Kavanagh - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • U.S. Presence and the Incidence of Conflict
    2018
    Co-Authors: Angela O'mahony, Miranda Priebe, Bryan Frederick, Jennifer Kavanagh, Matthew Lane, Trevor Johnston, Thomas S. Szayna, Jakub P. Hlavka, Stephen Watts, Matthew Povlock
    Abstract:

    There is an ongoing debate about whether U.S. Military Presence brings stability or an increased likelihood of conflict to a region. The authors of this report analyze historical data to assess how U.S. Military Presence — in particular, U.S. troop Presence and Military assistance — is associated with the interstate and intrastate conflict behavior of states and nonstate actors.

  • Access Granted: Political Challenges to the U.S. Overseas Military Presence, 1945–2014
    2017
    Co-Authors: Stacie L. Pettyjohn, Jennifer Kavanagh
    Abstract:

    The U.S. Military depends on access to overseas bases both in peacetime and during contingencies but has faced a variety of political challenges to this access. The authors address questions about the type and severity of access problems the United States has faced since 1945, how these have changed over time, and how the United States can counter political threats to access.

  • access granted political challenges to the u s overseas Military Presence 1945 2014
    2017
    Co-Authors: Stacie L. Pettyjohn, Jennifer Kavanagh
    Abstract:

    The U.S. Military depends on access to overseas bases both in peacetime and during contingencies but has faced a variety of political challenges to this access. The authors address questions about the type and severity of access problems the United States has faced since 1945, how these have changed over time, and how the United States can counter political threats to access.

Richard L. Kugler - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Changes Ahead: Future Directions for the U.S. Overseas Military Presence
    1998
    Co-Authors: Richard L. Kugler
    Abstract:

    Abstract : Now that a new and different era of international politics is dawning, where is the U.S. overseas Military Presence headed, and how can it be steered in sound directions? These important questions are addressed here. The U.S. overseas Presence is headed toward an era of change in its core features. Tomorrow's overseas Presence likely will be pursuing new objectives and missions in new places, and it may need different forces and activities to do so. Consequently, status-quo thinking no longer applies to this important aspect of U.S. defense policy. The challenge facing the U.S. government will be to guide the coming changes in ways that produce a new and better overseas Presence, one that can deal effectively with future international affairs.

  • The Future U.S. Military Presence in Europe: Forces and Requirements for the Post-Cold War Era
    1992
    Co-Authors: Richard L. Kugler
    Abstract:

    Abstract : Research for this Report was begun on October 3, 1990, the day Germany unified. Final writing was completed on February 1, 1992, the day President Bush and Russian President Yeltsin met at Camp David to call for a new era of partnership. Both dates are auspicious, for during the intervening months, epochal changes occurred at a blinding speed, transforming Europe even beyond the monumental upheavals of 1989-1990. A major war was fought in the Persian Gulf, the Soviet state was dissolved, and a new Commonwealth of Independent States was declared. These changes raised the prospect of a hopeful future, but this period also saw disturbing events, including a bitter civil war in Yugoslavia, fighting in Georgia & Azerbaijan, mounting tensions between Russia & Ukraine, and signs of fissures in both NATO and the European Community. During this period, the much-heralded post-Cold War era was launched, and it got off to a shaky start toward an uncertain future. These contradictory trends, unfolding so dramatically in such a short period of time, raise profound questions about Europe's future. Is Europe headed toward an era of enduring peace, or is it drifting toward fragmentation and chaos, which would create entirely new and worrisome dangers? And what about the nearby Middle East and Persian Gulf? The disturbing fact that these questions are difficult to answer underscores the need to think hard and clearly about the future US Military Presence in Europe. Because the threat of a NATO-Warsaw Pact war has passed into history, the large US posture maintained to underwrite containment and deterrence during the Cold War can now be reduced appreciably. Yet the US forces that remain in Europe will have an important effect on developments within the Western alliance and on European security affairs as a whole. Because uncertainty and possible turbulence lie ahead in Europe and nearby regions, the size and nature of the US posture are an important choice that must be made wisely.

Bradford Booth - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Contextual Effects of Military Presence on Women's Earnings
    Armed Forces & Society, 2003
    Co-Authors: Bradford Booth
    Abstract:

    This article employs 1990 Public Use Microsample data from the U.S. Census, stratified by labor market area (LMA), to estimate the effect of Military Presence-defined as the proportion of local labor force participants employed as members of the active-duty armed forces-on the annual earnings of women workers in the paid labor force. Findings suggest that, other things being equal, women pay an average annual earnings penalty of approximately 5 percent per each increase of 10 percent in the local Military Presence. Military Presence is argued to constitute an influential but often unrecognized structural feature of many local LMAs in the United States. Its impact on women's earnings is also discussed in relation to the well-documented economic disadvantages experienced by Military wives. While the earnings penalties experienced by this group of women have hitherto been explained almost solely in terms of the individual human capital penalties they incur as a result of their status as tied migrants, this p...

  • THE IMPACT OF Military Presence IN LOCAL LABOR MARKETS ON THE EMPLOYMENT OF WOMEN
    Gender & Society, 2000
    Co-Authors: Bradford Booth, William W. Falk, David R. Segal, Mady Wechsler Segal
    Abstract:

    This article uses Public Use Microsample (PUMS) data drawn from the 1990 census to explore the relationship between Military Presence, defined as the percentage of the local labor force in the active-duty armed forces, and women's employment and earnings across local labor market areas (LMAs) in the United States. Comparisons of local rates of unemployment and mean women's earnings are made between those LMAs in which the Military plays a disproportionate role in the local labor market and those in which Military Presence is low. Results suggest that women who live in labor market areas with a substantial (5 percent or greater) Military Presence have, on average, lower annual earnings and higher rates of unemployment than their counterparts who live in nonMilitary LMAs. The argument is made that through the interaction of several socially situated conditions—including gender, family, labor markets, human capital, and place—the Military emerges as a source of inequality in labor market outcomes for women w...

Gary Leiser - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Adana station 1943–45: prelude to the post‐war American Military Presence in Turkey
    Middle Eastern Studies, 1998
    Co-Authors: Robert Cossaboom, Gary Leiser
    Abstract:

    The American Military Presence in Turkey after the Second World War is generally acknowledged to have originated from President Harry Truman's decision to grant substantial Military assistance to that country in early 1947 in reaction to the Soviet Union's demands on Ankara after June 1945. This aid arrived with American advisers and technicians and helped lay the groundwork for the establishment of the first joint air base at Adana Air Field (later known as Incirlik), construction of which began in 1950, and Turkey's eventual accession to NATO in 1952.' But the United States had recognized Turkey's geopolitical and Military importance before 1947. Indeed, in the midst of the war, in 1943, the United 'States had already begun to use Turkey as a base for certain kinds of Military operation. These operations were of immediate practical importance for the prosecution of the war, but they were also significant for post-war Military relations with Turkey. Because of Turkey's neutrality, these operations were sometimes clandestine. Nevertheless, they helped confirm in the minds of American Military planners the strategic importance of Turkey and represented a Military foothold in that country, a foothold that dramatically expanded in the 1950s. The initial focus of these operations was the secret 'Adana Station'. During World War II, Turkey took great care to avoid being drawn into the conflict by one side or the other. Unsympathetic to Fascism and leery of Italian ambitions, she had concluded a Military alliance with Britain and France on 19 October 1939. But for various reasons, above all the lack of Military assistance, the terms of the alliance could not be implemented, so Turkey did not join the Allies at the beginning of the war. In fact, on 18 June 1941, Ankara signed a treaty of friendship and non-aggression with Berlin as part of a strategy of 'defensive neutrality'. At the time, this action appeared to be prudent. A few months earlier, in April, Germany had occupied Greece and then some of the Aegean islands off the Turkish coast, while Italy held the others. As late as July 1941, Syria was controlled by Vichy France. And subsequently, in August 1942, the Wehrmacht, which

  • adana station 1943 45 prelude to the post war american Military Presence in turkey
    Middle Eastern Studies, 1998
    Co-Authors: Robert Cossaboom, Gary Leiser
    Abstract:

    The American Military Presence in Turkey after the Second World War is generally acknowledged to have originated from President Harry Truman's decision to grant substantial Military assistance to that country in early 1947 in reaction to the Soviet Union's demands on Ankara after June 1945. This aid arrived with American advisers and technicians and helped lay the groundwork for the establishment of the first joint air base at Adana Air Field (later known as Incirlik), construction of which began in 1950, and Turkey's eventual accession to NATO in 1952.' But the United States had recognized Turkey's geopolitical and Military importance before 1947. Indeed, in the midst of the war, in 1943, the United 'States had already begun to use Turkey as a base for certain kinds of Military operation. These operations were of immediate practical importance for the prosecution of the war, but they were also significant for post-war Military relations with Turkey. Because of Turkey's neutrality, these operations were sometimes clandestine. Nevertheless, they helped confirm in the minds of American Military planners the strategic importance of Turkey and represented a Military foothold in that country, a foothold that dramatically expanded in the 1950s. The initial focus of these operations was the secret 'Adana Station'. During World War II, Turkey took great care to avoid being drawn into the conflict by one side or the other. Unsympathetic to Fascism and leery of Italian ambitions, she had concluded a Military alliance with Britain and France on 19 October 1939. But for various reasons, above all the lack of Military assistance, the terms of the alliance could not be implemented, so Turkey did not join the Allies at the beginning of the war. In fact, on 18 June 1941, Ankara signed a treaty of friendship and non-aggression with Berlin as part of a strategy of 'defensive neutrality'. At the time, this action appeared to be prudent. A few months earlier, in April, Germany had occupied Greece and then some of the Aegean islands off the Turkish coast, while Italy held the others. As late as July 1941, Syria was controlled by Vichy France. And subsequently, in August 1942, the Wehrmacht, which