DOCSLIB.ORG

Thesis Master

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Thesis Master CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY DAREN BOWYER JUST WAR DOCTRINE: RELEVANCE AND CHALLENGES IN THE 21ST CENTURY DEFENCE COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY PhD THESIS CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY DEFENCE COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED SCIENCE, SECURITY AND RESILIENCE PhD THESIS Academic Year 2003-2008 Daren Bowyer Just War Doctrine: Relevance and Challenges in the 21st Century Supervisor: Professor E R Holmes CBE JP March 2008 Crown Copyright 2007. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without the written permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT For nearly two millennia just war doctrine has been central to Western understanding of justified resort to armed force, and of conduct in war. As the international system developed so the theory was first secularised and then all but rendered obsolete by a legal paradigm that sought first to establish states‘ rights and, later, to eliminate armed force as an instrument of international policy altogether. In the world order that has emerged after the Cold War, the legal paradigm has been found wanting. Just war doctrine is thus of renewed relevance as there remains a requirement for resort to force to be justified and for its conduct to be restrained. Contemporary security threats and a changed value-set have made Western governments more interventionist and concern over non-state actors, mass-destructive weaponry and the threats emerging from state failure have prompted some to argue a case for preventive war. Whilst a strictly legalist approach has proved unsatisfactory, just war doctrine offers a robust framework for debate in guiding our thinking about both intervention and pre-emptive self-defence. There are challenges to our traditional understanding of jus in bello presented both by Western technological dominance and by the preference for a different form of asymmetry on the part of the West‘s opponents. This is exacerbated by the appearance on the battlefield of a range of new actors. However, a thorough understanding of the moral principles underpinning our codes of conduct will offer a valuable – if not essential – tool not only to decision makers and commanders but to the individual fighting men and women who must make life and death decisions in the most demanding circumstances of the complex modern battlefield. i ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS A part-time PhD is not an undertaking that can be lightly made, nor can it be successful without the support of the student‘s family and colleagues. Certainly I should not have been able to complete this study without forbearance and sacrifice on the part of my family for which I am hugely grateful. My colleagues and those for whom I have worked during the time I have pursued this study are also to be thanked for their support and encouragement. In particular, it could not have happened without Brigadier Jim Campbell, then Director of Studies at the Royal Military College of Science, and Colonel (now Brigadier) David Allfrey, then Assistant Director and for whom I worked directly when this project was started. Not only did they acquiesce in this additional call on my time but also they were enthusiastic in their encouragement and support. No study of this length is conducted in isolation and I must here acknowledge the many colleagues, both military and academic, discussion with whom has helped shape the views here expressed. I am also indebted to the very professional and dedicated staff of the Cranfield University (Shrivenham Campus) library, especially Lynn Seddon and her team, and to the excellent if somewhat under-sung team at the Prince Consort‘s Library in Aldershot. The team there that runs the Military Studies Library Service list of journal and press articles provided an invaluable resource. My Supervisor, Richard Holmes, has been a wonderful source not only of advice and guidance but also of enthusiasm. His encyclopaedic knowledge has pointed me in the direction of important source material that I may otherwise have overlooked, his eye for detail has picked up my lapses in grammar and logic (though for any that remain, I alone am responsible), and his irrepressible enthusiasm for everything he undertakes has kept me focussed when my energy has flagged. Finally, I dedicate this work to all those who have given their lives fighting justly in causes they have believed just. iii iv CONTENTS Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………... i Acknowledgements …………………………………………………………………… iii Contents ………………………………………………………………………………... v List of Figures …………………………………………………………………………. vi List of Tables ………………………………………………………………………..... vii List of Video Clips ........................................................................................................ vii Glossary of Acronyms ……………………………………………………………….... ix INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 CHAPTER 1 : JUST WAR IN CONTEXT..................................................................... 5 1.1 Conceptual Framework........................................................................................... 5 1.1.1 Realism ............................................................................................................ 6 1.1.2 Liberalism. ..................................................................................................... 16 1.1.3 International Society ...................................................................................... 28 1.1.4 Other Perspectives ......................................................................................... 36 1.1.5 A Conceptual Place for Ethics ....................................................................... 40 1.2 Historical Context: The Origins and Development of Just War Doctrine ............ 47 1.2.1 The Early Church and the Conversion of Rome ............................................ 48 1.2.2 Aquinas and Development of the Theological Doctrine ............................... 50 1.2.3 Secularization and Early International Law .................................................. 53 1.2.4 Establishing the Legalist Paradigm: From The League of Nations and the Pact of Paris to the UN Charter Era ........................................................................ 58 1.3 Summary ............................................................................................................... 61 CHAPTER 2 : THE REQUIREMENT FOR ETHICAL JUSTIFICATION ................ 69 2.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 69 2.2 Why a Return to Ethics: The Legalist Paradigm Challenged ............................... 70 2.2.1 The Legalist Paradigm Examined ................................................................. 70 2.2.2 Structural Difficulties .................................................................................... 77 2.2.3 Practical Failings ........................................................................................... 85 2.2.3.1 Failure to Institute the Envisioned Mechanism for Enforcement .... 86 2.2.3.2 Widespread Disregard for Article 2(4) in Fact . ................................ 91 2.2.3.3 Lack of Faith in Institutions for Non-Forceful Settlement of Disputes ............................................................................................................................ 93 2.2.4 Reordering the Value Set: New World Order and Continued Failing of the Paradigm ................................................................................................................. 99 2.3 Why Justification? .............................................................................................. 104 2.3.1 Relevance at the International Level ........................................................... 106 2.3.2 Relevance at the National Level .................................................................. 123 2.3.3 Relevance at the Individual Level ............................................................... 138 2.4 Summary ............................................................................................................. 154 CHAPTER 3 : FUTURE CONFLICT AND ISSUES OF JUS AD BELLUM ............ 167 3.1 Introductory Comments ...................................................................................... 167 3.2 Future War .......................................................................................................... 167 3.3 Humanitarian Intervention .................................................................................. 180 3.3.1 The Legal Stay to Intervention .................................................................... 180 3.3.2 The Will to Intervene ................................................................................... 182 3.3.3 The Failure of Existing Mechanisms ........................................................... 186 v 3.3.4 The Dangers of Unfettered Interventionism and What Just War Might Offer .............................................................................................................................. 195 3.3.4.1 Just Cause in Humanitarian Intervention ........................................ 205 3.3.4.2 Right Intent and Reasonable Chance of Success in Humanitarian Intervention ....................................................................................................... 210 3.3.4.3 Proper Authority in Humanitarian Intervention .............................. 216
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lost in Translation? Afghan Interpreters and Other Locally Employed Civilians
    House of Commons Defence Committee Lost in Translation? Afghan Interpreters and Other Locally Employed Civilians Fifth Report of Session 2017–19 HC 572 House of Commons Defence Committee Lost in Translation? Afghan Interpreters and Other Locally Employed Civilians Fifth Report of Session 2017–19 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 22 May 2018 HC 572 Published on 26 May 2018 by authority of the House of Commons The Defence Committee The Defence Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Ministry of Defence and its associated public bodies. Current membership Rt Hon Dr Julian Lewis MP (Conservative, New Forest East) (Chair) Leo Docherty MP (Conservative, Aldershot) Martin Docherty-Hughes MP (Scottish National Party, West Dunbartonshire) Rt Hon Mr Mark Francois MP (Conservative, Rayleigh and Wickford) Graham P Jones MP (Labour, Hyndburn) Johnny Mercer MP (Conservative, Plymouth, Moor View) Mrs Madeleine Moon MP (Labour, Bridgend) Gavin Robinson MP (Democratic Unionist Party, Belfast East) Ruth Smeeth MP (Labour, Stoke-on-Trent North) Rt Hon John Spellar MP (Labour, Warley) Phil Wilson MP (Labour, Sedgefield) Powers The committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website at www.parliament.uk/defcom and in print by Order of the House. Evidence relating to this report is published on the inquiry page of the Committee’s website.
    [Show full text]
  • An Examination of the Correlation Between the Justification and Glorification of War in Charles Mee's Iphigenia
    An Examination of the Correlation Between the Justification and Glorification of War in Charles Mee’s Iphigenia 2.0: A Director’s Approach Caroline Donica Table of Contents Chapter One: Charles Mee and the History Behind Iphigenia 2.0 4 Introduction 4 The Life and Works of Charles Mee 4 Just War 8 Production History and Reception 11 Survey of Literature 13 Conclusion 15 Chapter Two: Play Analysis 16 Introduction 16 Synopsis 16 Given Circumstances 24 Previous Action 26 Dialogue and Imagery 27 Character Analysis 29 Idea and Theme 34 Conclusion 36 Chapter Three: The Design Process 37 Introduction 37 Production Style 37 Director’s Approach 38 Choice of Stage 38 Collaboration with Designers 40 Set Design 44 Costumes 46 Makeup and Hair 50 Properties 52 Lighting 53 Sound 55 Conclusion 56 Chapter Four: The Rehearsal Process 57 Introduction 57 Auditions and Casting 57 Rehearsals and Acting Strategies 60 Technical and Dress Rehearsals 64 Performances 65 Conclusion 67 Chapter Five: Reflection 68 Introduction 68 Design 68 Staging and Timing 72 Acting 73 Self-Analysis 77 Conclusion 80 Appendices 82 A – Photos Featuring the Set Design 83 B – Photos Featuring the Costume Design 86 C – Photos Featuring the Lighting Design 92 D – Photos Featuring the Concept Images 98 Works Consulted 102 Donica 4 Chapter One Charles Mee and the History Behind Iphigenia 2.0 Introduction Charles Mee’s Iphigenia 2.0 is a significant work in recent theatre history. The play was widely recognized and repeatedly produced for its unique take on contemporary issues, popular culture, and current events set within a framework of ancient myths and historical literature.
    [Show full text]
  • Jus Post Bellum
    The Unjustness of the Current Incantation of Jus Post Bellum by Dan G. Cox us post bellum was originally conceived as an extension of modern just war theory. Specifically, it was aimed at examining the justness and morality of actions during war, jus in bello, in relationship to negotiations for peace in the post-war setting. Under the initial conception of Jjus post bellum, considerations of distinction of enemies from civilians, for example, takes on a more pointed meaning, as one has to calculate how much collateral damage is appropriate given the longer-term end-goal of successful and beneficial peace negotiations. Unfortunately, jus post bellum has recently been expanded to mean that the victor in the war is now responsible for the long-term well-being of the people it has defeated. This has led to a concerted outcry for post-war nation-building, which neither leads necessarily to successful negotiations, nor ensures a better or lasting peace. In fact, current conceptions of jus post bellum remove national interest from the equation altogether, replacing all military endeavors with one monolithic national interest—liberal imperialism.1 Further, current incantations of jus post bellum obviate the possibility of a punitive strike or punitive expedition, even though this might be exactly what is needed in certain cases to create a better peace than existed prior to conflict. This article is an exploration of the current incantation of jus post bellum. The concept of an incantation was chosen purposively, as proponents of jus post bellum are engaging in a dogmatic approach to war termination oblivious to the complexities and realities of conflict and, in fact, in violation of just war theory itself.
    [Show full text]
  • House of Commons Official Report Parliamentary Debates
    Monday Volume 652 7 January 2019 No. 228 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Monday 7 January 2019 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2019 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT MEMBERS OF THE CABINET (FORMED BY THE RT HON. THERESA MAY, MP, JUNE 2017) PRIME MINISTER,FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY AND MINISTER FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE—The Rt Hon. Theresa May, MP CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER AND MINISTER FOR THE CABINET OFFICE—The Rt Hon. David Lidington, MP CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER—The Rt Hon. Philip Hammond, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT—The Rt Hon. Sajid Javid, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS—The Rt. Hon Jeremy Hunt, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION—The Rt Hon. Stephen Barclay, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEFENCE—The Rt Hon. Gavin Williamson, MP LORD CHANCELLOR AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR JUSTICE—The Rt Hon. David Gauke, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE—The Rt Hon. Matt Hancock, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR BUSINESS,ENERGY AND INDUSTRIAL STRATEGY—The Rt Hon. Greg Clark, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE—The Rt Hon. Liam Fox, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WORK AND PENSIONS—The Rt Hon. Amber Rudd, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EDUCATION—The Rt Hon. Damian Hinds, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR ENVIRONMENT,FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS—The Rt Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • From Just War to Just Intervention Susan J
    New England Journal of Public Policy Volume 19 | Issue 1 Article 5 9-21-2003 From Just War to Just Intervention Susan J. Atwood University of Minnesota - Twin Cities Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.umb.edu/nejpp Part of the International Relations Commons, Military, War and Peace Commons, and the Religion Commons Recommended Citation Atwood, Susan J. (2003) "From Just War to Just Intervention," New England Journal of Public Policy: Vol. 19: Iss. 1, Article 5. Available at: http://scholarworks.umb.edu/nejpp/vol19/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks at UMass Boston. It has been accepted for inclusion in New England Journal of Public Policy by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at UMass Boston. For more information, please contact [email protected]. From Just War to Just Intervention Susan J. Atwood What is Just War? What is Just Intervention? This paper examines the evolution of the criteria for Just War from its origins in the early Christian church to the twenty-first century. The end of the Cold War era has expanded the discussion to include grounds for intervention. Indeed, in the 1990s, a number of multilat- eral interventions took place on humanitarian grounds. But the debate is ongoing about whether the criteria applied in the Just War theory — proper authority, just cause, and right intent — remain valid in an era of Just Intervention. The author examines as case studies some multilateral interven- tions and the lessons learned from them as we seek to develop the framework of international law to address the evolving theory and current practice of Just Intervention.
    [Show full text]
  • Cox, Abstract, the Injustice of the Current Incantation of Jus Post Bellum
    The Injustice of the Current Incantation of Jus Post Bellum Dan G. Cox, Ph. D., School of Advanced Military Studies, US Army, [email protected] 9137583319 Abstract: Jus post bellum was originally conceived as an extension of modern just war theory. Specifically, it was aimed at examining the justness and morality of actions during war, jus in bello, in relationship to negotiations for peace in the post-war setting. Under the initial conception of jus post bellum, considerations of distinction of enemies from civilians, for example, takes on a more pointed meaning as one has to calculate how much collateral damage, even if allowed for in just in bello, is appropriate given the longer-term end-goal of successful and beneficial peace negotiations. Unfortunately, jus post bellum has been expanded to mean that the victor in the war is now responsible for the well-being of the people and/or nation it has defeated. This has led to a concerted cry for post-war nation-building which neither leads necessarily to successful negotiations nor ensures a better or lasting peace. In fact, current conceptions of jus post bellum remove national interest from the equation altogether replacing all military endeavors with one monolithic national interest; liberal imperialism1. Further, current incantations of jus post bellum obviate the possibility of a punitive strike or punitive expedition even though this might be exactly what is needed in certain cases to create a better peace than existed prior to conflict. This paper will explore the genesis and evolution of the jus post bellum concept.
    [Show full text]
  • Cicero and St. Augustine's Just War Theory: Classical Influences on a Christian Idea Berit Van Neste University of South Florida
    University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 4-12-2006 Cicero and St. Augustine's Just War Theory: Classical Influences on a Christian Idea Berit Van Neste University of South Florida Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd Part of the American Studies Commons, and the Religion Commons Scholar Commons Citation Neste, Berit Van, "Cicero and St. Augustine's Just War Theory: Classical Influences on a Christian Idea" (2006). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/3782 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Cicero and St. Augustine's Just War Theory: Classical Influences on a Christian Idea by Berit Van Neste A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of Religious Studies College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Major Professor: James F. Strange, Ph.D. Paul G. Schneider, Ph.D. Michael J. Decker, Ph.D. Date of Approval: April 12, 2006 Keywords: theology, philosophy, politics, patristic, medieval © Copyright 2006 , Berit Van Neste For Elizabeth and Calista Table of Contents Abstract ii Chapter 1 1 Introduction 1 Cicero’s Influence on Augustine 7 Chapter 2 13 Justice 13 Natural and Temporal Law 19 Commonwealth 34 Chapter 3 49 Just War 49 Chapter 4 60 Conclusion 60 References 64 i Cicero and St.
    [Show full text]
  • Military Operations in Libya
    Military Operations in Libya Standard Note: SN/IA/5909 Last updated: 24 October 2011 Author: Claire Taylor Section International Affairs and Defence Section On 17 March 2011 the UN Security Council adopted resolution 1973 (2011), under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, which authorised the use of force, including enforcement of a no-fly zone, enforcement of a UN arms embargo against Libya and to protect civilians and civilian areas targeted by the Qaddafi regime and its supporters. The weekend of 19/20 March saw French, British and US military action begin under Operation Odyssey Dawn. By the end of March command of that operation had been gradually transitioned to NATO. On 23 March NATO assumed command of operations to enforce the UN arms embargo. The transfer of command responsibility for the no-fly zone was agreed on 24 March; while the decision to transfer command and control for all military operations in Libya was taken on 27 March. NATO formally assumed command under Operation Unified Protector at 0600 hours on 31 March 2011. Military operations have been ongoing for seven months. During that time there have been criticisms of stalemate in the military campaign, allegations over burden sharing among NATO Member States, and questions over the existence of a viable exit strategy. Following the fall of Sirte and the death of Colonel Gadaffi, Libya’s transitional government declared liberation on 23 October 2011. The NATO Secretary General also confirmed in a statement that a preliminary decision had been taken to end Operation Unified Protector on 31 October 2011. However, he also went on to state that NATO would monitor the situation and retain the capacity to respond to threats to civilians if necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • Airpilotdec 2017 ISSUE 24
    AIR PILOT DEC 2017:AIR PILOT MASTER 29/11/17 09:25 Page 1 AirPilot DEC 2017 ISSUE 24 AIR PILOT DEC 2017:AIR PILOT MASTER 29/11/17 09:25 Page 2 Diary DECEMBER 2017 7th General Purposes & Finance Committee Cobham House AIR PILOT 14th Carol Service St. Michaels, Cornhill THE HONOURABLE COMPANY OF JANUARY 2018 AIR PILOTS 10th AST/APT meeting Dowgate Hill House incorporating 16th Air Pilots Benevolent Fund AGM RAF Club Air Navigators 18th General Purposes & Finance Committee Dowgate Hill House 18th Court & Election Dinner Cutlers’ Hall PATRON: His Royal Highness FEBRUARY 2018 The Prince Philip 7th Pilot Aptitude Testing RAF Cranwell Duke of Edinburgh KG KT 8th General Purposes & Finance Committee Dowgate Hill House 20th Luncheon Club RAF Club GRAND MASTER: His Royal Highness The Prince Andrew Duke of York KG GCVO MASTER: VISITS PROGRAMME Captain C J Spurrier Please see the flyers accompanying this issue of Air Pilot or contact Liveryman David Curgenven at [email protected]. CLERK: These flyers can also be downloaded from the Company's website. Paul J Tacon BA FCIS Please check on the Company website for visits that are to be confirmed. Incorporated by Royal Charter. A Livery Company of the City of London. PUBLISHED BY: GOLF CLUB EVENTS The Honourable Company of Air Pilots, Please check on Company website for latest information Cobham House, 9 Warwick Court, Gray’s Inn, London WC1R 5DJ. EDITOR: Paul Smiddy BA (Eco n), FCA EMAIL: [email protected] FUNCTION PHOTOGRAPHY: Gerald Sharp Photography View images and order prints on-line. TELEPHONE: 020 8599 5070 EMAIL: [email protected] WEBSITE: www.sharpphoto.co.uk PRINTED BY: Printed Solutions Ltd 01494 478870 Except where specifically stated, none of the material in this issue is to be taken as expressing the opinion of the Court of the Company.
    [Show full text]
  • Peace and War
    Peace and War Christian Reflection A SERIES IN FAITH AND ETHICS BAYLOR UNIVERSITY GENERAL EDITOR Robert B. Kruschwitz ART EDITOR Heidi J. Hornik REVIEW EDITOR Norman Wirzba PRODUCTION ASSISTANT Julie Bolin DESIGNER Eric Yarbrough PUBLISHER The Center for Christian Ethics Baylor University One Bear Place #97361 Waco, TX 76798-7361 PHONE (254) 710-3774 TOLL-FREE (USA) (866) 298-2325 W E B S I T E www.ChristianEthics.ws E-MAIL [email protected] All Scripture is used by permission, all rights reserved, and unless otherwise indicated is from New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright 1989, Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. ISSN 1535-8585 Christian Reflection is the ideal resource for discipleship training in the church. Multiple copies are obtainable for group study at $2.50 per copy. Worship aids and lesson materials that enrich personal or group study are available free on the website. Christian Reflection is published quarterly by The Center for Christian Ethics at Baylor University. Contributors express their considered opinions in a responsible manner. The views expressed are not official views of The Center for Christian Ethics or of Baylor University. The Center expresses its thanks to individuals, churches, and organizations, including the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, who provided financial support for this publication. © 2004 The Center for Christian Ethics at Baylor University All rights reserved Contents Introduction 8 Robert B. Kruschwitz War in the Old Testament 11 John A. Wood The War of the Lamb 18 Harry O. Maier Terrorist Enemies and Just War 27 William T.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Thesis
    This electronic thesis or dissertation has been downloaded from the King’s Research Portal at https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/ Why does the UK have the Military that it has? Curtis, Andy Awarding institution: King's College London The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without proper acknowledgement. END USER LICENCE AGREEMENT Unless another licence is stated on the immediately following page this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the work Under the following conditions: Attribution: You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Non Commercial: You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No Derivative Works - You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. Any of these conditions can be waived if you receive permission from the author. Your fair dealings and other rights are in no way affected by the above. Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 02. Oct. 2021 Why does the UK Title Page have the Military that it has? An exploration of the factors relating to the translation of strategic direction into military capability PhD December 2019 Andrew R Curtis page 1 of 338 Abstract This thesis is an investigation of the factors relating to the translation of United Kingdom strategic direction into military capability.
    [Show full text]
  • THE 422 Mps WHO BACKED the MOTION Conservative 1. Bim
    THE 422 MPs WHO BACKED THE MOTION Conservative 1. Bim Afolami 2. Peter Aldous 3. Edward Argar 4. Victoria Atkins 5. Harriett Baldwin 6. Steve Barclay 7. Henry Bellingham 8. Guto Bebb 9. Richard Benyon 10. Paul Beresford 11. Peter Bottomley 12. Andrew Bowie 13. Karen Bradley 14. Steve Brine 15. James Brokenshire 16. Robert Buckland 17. Alex Burghart 18. Alistair Burt 19. Alun Cairns 20. James Cartlidge 21. Alex Chalk 22. Jo Churchill 23. Greg Clark 24. Colin Clark 25. Ken Clarke 26. James Cleverly 27. Thérèse Coffey 28. Alberto Costa 29. Glyn Davies 30. Jonathan Djanogly 31. Leo Docherty 32. Oliver Dowden 33. David Duguid 34. Alan Duncan 35. Philip Dunne 36. Michael Ellis 37. Tobias Ellwood 38. Mark Field 39. Vicky Ford 40. Kevin Foster 41. Lucy Frazer 42. George Freeman 43. Mike Freer 44. Mark Garnier 45. David Gauke 46. Nick Gibb 47. John Glen 48. Robert Goodwill 49. Michael Gove 50. Luke Graham 51. Richard Graham 52. Bill Grant 53. Helen Grant 54. Damian Green 55. Justine Greening 56. Dominic Grieve 57. Sam Gyimah 58. Kirstene Hair 59. Luke Hall 60. Philip Hammond 61. Stephen Hammond 62. Matt Hancock 63. Richard Harrington 64. Simon Hart 65. Oliver Heald 66. Peter Heaton-Jones 67. Damian Hinds 68. Simon Hoare 69. George Hollingbery 70. Kevin Hollinrake 71. Nigel Huddleston 72. Jeremy Hunt 73. Nick Hurd 74. Alister Jack (Teller) 75. Margot James 76. Sajid Javid 77. Robert Jenrick 78. Jo Johnson 79. Andrew Jones 80. Gillian Keegan 81. Seema Kennedy 82. Stephen Kerr 83. Mark Lancaster 84.
    [Show full text]