Catalogue Search | MBRL
هل أنت متأكد أنك تريد إزالة الكتاب من الرف؟
{{itemTitle}}
1,872
نتائج ل
"Gray, Colin S"
صنف حسب:
Strategic Studies and Public Policy
Strategic studies as a field of civilian scholarship has developed along distinctive lines in the United States since World War II. The rapid proliferation and increasing sophistication of weapons technology have required constant revision of strategic theory, while the shifting political climate, both internationally and in the United States, has had an equally powerful impact.
One of the field's leading theorists now examines the history and development of American strategic studies, the varied roles assumed by civilian strategists, and their relationship with those charged with developing and carrying out American military and diplomatic policy. This provocative book clearly demonstrates the importance of a sound strategic theory if America is to survive in an age of high arms technology and increased world tensions.
eBook
The Sheriff
Since the end of the Cold War, and especially since September 11, few issues have been more hotly debated than the United States' role in the world. In this hard-nosed but sophisticated examination, Colin S. Gray argues that America is the indispensable guardian of world order. Gray's constructive critique of recent trends in national security is holistic, rooting defense issues and prospective answers both in U.S. national security policy, broadly defined, and in the emerging international security environment. Colin S. Gray is professor of international politics and strategic studies at the University of Reading, England, and senior fellow at the National Institute for Public Policy in Fairfax, Virginia. He is the author of seventeen books, including Modern Strategy and Strategy for Chaos: Revolutions in Military Affairs and the Evidence of History.
eBook
Strategy for Chaos
In this volume, Professor Colin Gray develops and applies the theory and scholarship on the allegedly historical practice of the 'Revolution in Military Affairs' (RMA), in order to improve our comprehension of how and why strategy 'works'. The author explores the RMA hypothesis both theoretically and historically. The book argues that the conduct of an RMA has to be examined as a form of strategic behaviour, which means that, of necessity, it must \"work\" as strategy works. The great RMA debate of the 1990s is reviewed empathetically, though sceptically, by the author, with every major school of thought allowed its day in court. The author presents three historical RMAs as case studies for his argument: those arguably revealed in the wars of the French Revolution and Napoleon; in World War I; and in the nuclear age. The focus of his analysis is how these grand RMAs functioned strategically. The conclusions that he draws from these empirical exercises are then applied to help us understand what, indeed, is - and what is not - happening with the much vaunted information-technology-led RMA of today.
eBook
سياسة الردع والصراعات الإقليمية : المطامح والمغالطات والخيارات الثابتة /
يوضح الباحث في هذه الدراسة أن سياسة الردع تعتبر جذابة حين نقارنها ببدائل أخرى كالحرب أو الاستسلام السياسي، لكن هناك أسبابا تجعلها قابلة لعدم الاعتماد والثقة فيها ؛ مثل إساءة فهم النية السياسية، وأن تكون التهديدات أو الإنذارات غير مقنعة، وعدم كفاية القدرات العسكرية، ووجود شخصيات لا ترتدع عن تنفيذ أعمال عدوانية، إن سياسة الردع لا تتوقف على القدرات العسكرية، ولكنها مسألة تتعلق بالخيار السياسي الذي يتأثر بعدد من العوامل التي تدخل في النطاق الاستراتيجي، ولكي تطبق سياسة الردع فلابد من أن يختار الخصم المحتمل التعاون وأن يقبل أن يرتدع، ويعرض الباحث في هذه الدراسة أهم الأسس التي تشكك بقيمة الردع كفكرة وكاستراتيجية، خاصة في الصراعات الإقليمية ؛ وهي أن الردع النووي يفتقد المصداقية، فيما لا يمكن الاعتماد على الردع التقليدي، كما لا يمكن الاعتماد على القوى التي يتوقع أن توفر الردع عند الطلب.
Book
The strategic anthropologist
Ken Booth's Strategy and ethnocentrism, published in 1979, deserves to be promoted in scholars' esteem to the very small category of works regarded as classics about strategy. Three reasons serve to explain why, over the years, it never received the acclaim it merits: the relatively undistinguished publisher; ironically, the subsequent debate over more than a quarter of a century about culture as a factor necessary for the understanding of strategy; and the attractively accessible style in which Booth expressed himself. Strategy and ethnocentrism is witty and even occasionally amusing—characteristics apt to trigger a response of some disdain from over-serious scholars. We can now assess Booth's book in its proper context, which is the long if very thinly populated history of strategic ideas, largely free of unduly distorting 'presentist' concerns. The fact that Strategy and ethnocentrism was written in the context of the Cold War really does not matter for the quality of its argument. This work is a classic because it speaks to all periods and about all participants in strategic history. The originality of Booth's treatment of culture does not lie so much in the realm of his grasp of its relative strategic significance, but rather in his relentless unwrapping of the actual, or certainly potential, harm, including unanticipated self-harm, of ethnocentricity. Today, studies of culture and strategy are not in short supply, but works that compel readers to attempt to take due account of their own ethnocentric frailties are in desperately short supply.
Journal Article
Strategic culture as context: the first generation of theory strikes back
‘Strategic Culture as Context: The First Generation of Theory Strikes Back’ takes the scholarly argument about the study, and meaning, of strategic culture to a new stage. Specifically, this article is a direct reply to recent criticisms of so-called first-generation theorists of strategic culture. The author reconsiders both the subject of strategic culture, and what he first wrote about it fifteen and more years ago. He finds that although there is noteworthy room for improvement in what he wrote then, the recent theorising by Alastair Iain Johnston, in particular, rests upon a misunderstanding of the nature, character, and ‘working’ of strategic culture. Of particular note is the insistence by Johnston on a separation of ideas from behaviour, for the dominant purpose of developing falsifiable theory. ‘Strategic Culture as Context,’ therefore, revisits in some detail questions of definition, with particular reference to the ideas-behaviour nexus. The article proceeds both to register arguments that should advance understanding of how strategic culture ‘works,’ and to suggest a better set of discriminators, different perspectives, for better consideration of evidence of strategic culture. Overall, the article suggests that strategic culture provides context for understanding, rather than explanatory causality for behaviour.
Journal Article