Complex security and strategic latency: the UK Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015

被引:10
|
作者
Cornish, Paul [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ,5 ,6 ,7 ]
Dorman, Andrew M. [8 ,9 ,10 ]
机构
[1] RAND Europe, Def Secur & Infrastruct, Cambridge, England
[2] Univ Exeter, Strateg Studies, Exeter EX4 4QJ, Devon, England
[3] Univ Bath, Int Secur, Bath BA2 7AY, Avon, England
[4] Chatham House, London, England
[5] British Army & Foreign & Commonwealth Off, London, England
[6] Univ Oxford, Global Cyber Secur Capac Bldg Ctr, Oxford OX1 2JD, England
[7] RUSI, London, England
[8] Kings Coll London, London WC2R 2LS, England
[9] Univ Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, W Midlands, England
[10] Royal Naval Coll, Greenwich, England
关键词
D O I
10.1111/1468-2346.12239
中图分类号
D81 [国际关系];
学科分类号
030207 ;
摘要
Whichever party or parties form the next UK government, a Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) is expected to begin soon after the general election in May. The review might be a light touch' exerciselittle more than a reaffirmation of the SDSR produced by the coalition government in 2010. It seems more likely, however, that the review will be a lengthier, more deliberate exercise and one which might even last into 2016. For those most closely engaged in the process the challenge is more complex than that confronted by their predecessors in 2010. The international security context is more confused and contradictory; the UK's financial predicament is still grave; security threats and challenges will emerge that cannot be ignored; the population's appetite for foreign military engagement appears nevertheless to be restricted; and prevailing conditions suggest that the risk-based approach to national strategy might be proving difficult to sustain. Two key questions should be asked of the review. First, in the light of recent military experiences, what is the purpose of the United Kingdom's armed forces? Second, will SDSR 2015-16 sustain the risk-based approach to national strategy set out in 2010, and if so how convincingly? Beginning with a review of the background against which SDSR 2015-16 will be prepared, this article examines both enduring and immediate challenges to the national strategic process in the United Kingdom and concludes by arguing for strategic latency as a conceptual device which can complement, if not reinvigorate, the risk-based approach to national strategy and defence.
引用
收藏
页码:351 / 370
页数:20
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Arbitrage and equilibrium in strategic security markets
    Koutsougeras, LC
    Papadopoulos, KG
    ECONOMIC THEORY, 2004, 23 (03) : 553 - 568
  • [42] NORWEGIAN SECURITY POLICY IN STRATEGIC PERSPECTIVE
    HOLST, JJ
    INTERNASJONAL POLITIKK, 1966, (05) : 463 - 490
  • [43] Strategic planning for information security and assurance
    Port, Daniel
    Kazman, Rick
    Takenaka, Ann
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE SECOND INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INFORMATION SECURITY AND ASSURANCE, 2008, : 466 - 471
  • [44] Efficient network security as a strategic game
    Schlake, Fari
    Mili, Lamine
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURES, 2013, 9 (03) : 243 - 273
  • [45] Norwegian security policy in strategic perspective
    Skogan, John Kristen
    INTERNASJONAL POLITIKK, 2009, 67 (04) : 784 - 786
  • [46] ENERGY SECURITY AND STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE
    STEINKAMP, CL
    JOURNAL OF ENERGY ENGINEERING-ASCE, 1984, 110 (02): : 124 - 132
  • [47] Funding social security: A strategic alternative
    Mulligan, CB
    JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE, 2000, 38 (03) : 659 - 660
  • [48] Model for ensuring strategic security of the state
    Arkhipov, Eduard
    Krokhicheva, Galina
    Mezentseva, Iulia
    Sidorina, Tatyana
    INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES IN SCIENCE AND EDUCATION (ITSE-2020), 2020, 210
  • [49] A Strategic Framework for Managing Internet Security
    Sitnikova, Elena
    Asgarkhani, Mehdi
    2014 11TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON FUZZY SYSTEMS AND KNOWLEDGE DISCOVERY (FSKD), 2014, : 947 - 955
  • [50] STRATEGIC BIAS AND SOUTHERN FLANK SECURITY
    SNYDER, JC
    WASHINGTON QUARTERLY, 1985, 8 (03): : 123 - 142