DOCSLIB.ORG

Uncorrected Transcript

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Uncorrected Transcript 1 PENTAGON-2013/08/06 THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION DISSECTING THE PENTAGON’S STRATEGIC CHOICES AND MANAGEMENT REVIEW Washington, D.C. Tuesday, August 6, 2013 PARTICIPANTS: Moderator: MARVIN KALB Nonresident Senior Fellow The Brookings Institution Panelists: MICHAEL O’HANLON Senior Fellow and Director or Research, Foreign Policy The Brookings Institution MACKENZIE EAGLEN Resident Fellow, Marilyn Ware Center for Security Studies American Enterprise Institute * * * * * ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100 Alexandria, VA 22314 Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190 2 PENTAGON-2013/08/06 P R O C E E D I N G S MR. KALB: Well, good morning, ladies and gentlemen, to another panel discussion here at the Brookings Institution. This one is called “Dissecting the Pentagon’s Strategic Choices and Management Review”. I’m Marvin Kalb, a Nonresident Senior Fellow here at Brookings and a senior advisor to the Pulitzer Center for Crisis Reporting, which is located just next door. Way back in August 2011, believe it or not, that’s only two years ago, Congress passed and the President signed into law a legislative monstrosity called the Budget Control Act. It was a way of doing something when nothing seemed worse, at least at that time. A Joint Select Committee was set up to control the spiraling deficit, but Congress warned that if the committee failed to come up with a solution, sequestration would automatically follow, meaning massive cuts in both Defense and all other programs. Those cuts have now begun. The Pentagon was already prepared to cut $150 billion over the next ten years. However, sequestration would require $500 billion in cuts over the next ten years. Last week, Defense Secretary Hagel soberly warned that cuts of that magnitude would not only affect entitlements such as salaries, housing, education, and the like, they would also affect Defense readiness and capability. If the U.S., for some time now, had been ready if necessary to fight two wars at the same time, now with these cuts that would no longer seem to be possible, meaning America’s Defense strategy would have to be radically altered. So, what to do in a macro and micro sense? We’ve asked two highly respect defense and budgetary experts to explain reality and options to us. They are Mackenzie Eaglen, a resident fellow at the ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100 Alexandria, VA 22314 Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190 3 PENTAGON-2013/08/06 American Enterprise Institute, and if I got this right, during the last presidential campaign, she helped Governor Romney, but the governor’s loss should in no way be ascribed to Mackenzie. Our other expert is Michael O’Hanlon, a senior fellow here at Brookings and though he has written many books, most recently author of “Healing the Wounded Giant”. Recently our panelists coauthored an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal urging Congress to reverse sequestration or watch the nation’s military readiness go into a decline. Mackenzie, why don’t we start with you? And then we’ll go onto Mike and then I’ll ask you both a couple of questions, then we’ll go to the audience, and we’re going to finish at 11:30. So, Mackenzie, please. MS. EAGLEN: Good morning. Thank you so much for moderating. It’s a pleasure to be up here with you and, of course, my good friend, Michael, who not only did we recently author the op-ed in The Wall Street Journal about some of these issues, but we were also together with Secretary Hagel and his team last week at a briefing about these choices and this budget outlook and we’ll certainly talk, I’m sure, about some of what was discussed at that conversation. I think you’ve set the ground very well. It’s important to remember, sequester is not the starting point and so much in Washington feels like we’re always starting at square one, but sequestration is the fourth year of Defense budget cuts. This draw down has been well under way. We peaked our Defense spending in 2010 and there were a series of capability, capacity, and real budget cuts ever since, and so there’s been almost roughly $1 trillion taken out of current or planned or future DOD spending in the last four years before sequestration. That’s why this is tough. That’s why you hear the chiefs constantly ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100 Alexandria, VA 22314 Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190 4 PENTAGON-2013/08/06 banging the drum, that’s why you hear the Secretary and the Deputy Secretaries talk endlessly about how damaging sequestration is. This is not the first dollar of Defense cuts, nor is it the first capability or capacity that’s being unwound as part of this process, and so a lot of the things that I think we’ll talk about this morning, unfortunately, are overdue. So many of the choices that the Pentagon has recently laid out, are things I think that should have been under consideration four years ago. It’s not to say that a lot of the Defense cuts that started under President Obama and then Secretary of Defense Robert Gates weren’t of value or utility in certain cases, this is not their first efficiency drill at DOD, and -- but there were a lot of things done rightly and wrongly as part of those previous years, but I’m not so sure the lessons learned have sunk in. And so what we have now is a Defense Department and a Congress -- a Washington, I guess you could say -- that continues to have to go back to the same pots of money and the same priorities for DOD every year as part of the Defense draw down because we’re doing it on an annual basis, we’re doing it piecemeal. It’s chipping away at the margins Defense cuts as opposed to big term, big picture strategic planning, thinking about this, if we really do have to live with this, how do we handle it for ten years and work backwards? Instead we see what we saw in 2013, which is half a year or so into the fiscal year we’re going to start to talk about serious change and serious planning, and I certainly don’t think that’s any yelp to the half trillion dollar tab that’s already on the table. MR. KALB: Mike, pick it up, please. MR. O’HANLON: Yeah, thanks, Marvin. And, by the way, I agree with you, Mackenzie can’t be blamed for Governor Romney’s loss, but she’s also been polite enough not to remind us all here in Washington that she’s from the great state of ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100 Alexandria, VA 22314 Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190 5 PENTAGON-2013/08/06 Georgia, and with the Atlanta Braves somewhere like 100 games ahead of the Washington Nationals at the moment, I admire her discretion and appreciate it very much. What I would say is -- and, again, it’s been very well framed -- some of the additional budget cuts that are now being considered I think are okay, and Mackenzie and I don’t have the exact same view. I don’t want to suggest that everything I say that she would endorse necessarily. We do think that there is room for efficiencies, and some of them are probably, if you can actually accomplish them, if you can get the Congress to authorize them, if you can actually implement them the way people think you can probably, let’s say, reform information technology systems at a massive organization like the Department of Defense, they’re worth doing. At the briefing that we heard last week from Secretary Hagel and his team, which developed some of the ideas that were also expressed by Deputy Secretary Carter in his Congressional testimony that everybody can read on the web, we saw an estimate that perhaps $40 billion could be saved over ten years from new efficiencies, and that’s on top of the other efficiencies that were already identified as part of previous budget cutting reviews, like additional base closures, although it’s worth pointing out that Congress has not yet authorized many of those previous efficiencies, so if anything we’re even deeper in the hole than we thought because even to get to previous levels of plan cuts, we’re now going to have to either persuade Congress to change its mind and go ahead and authorize things like base closures, or find other ways to save comparable amounts of money. But let’s say that base closures, for example, are authorized. Some of these efficiencies could save somewhere around $40 billion over ten years. And every time you ask the Pentagon to try harder and go look deeper, they’re probably going to ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100 Alexandria, VA 22314 Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190 6 PENTAGON-2013/08/06 find another $5 or 10 billion here or there and so I would say that, on balance, there’s never going to be the end of any and all possible cuts. So, $40 billion, let’s say we can do that. Then there’s another examination of possible savings, which Mackenzie and I wrote about in this Wall Street Journal op-ed ten days ago and they have to do with things like reductions in certain elements of military compensation, or at least reductions in the growth.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 113 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 113 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 159 WASHINGTON, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2013 No. 24 House of Representatives The House met at 10 a.m. and was Washington’s inability to take action whether it works—whether it helps families called to order by the Speaker pro tem- on today’s pressing problems. The fail- find jobs at a decent wage, care they can af- pore (Mr. COLLINS of New York). ure of uncertainty, with tax rates near ford, a retirement that is dignified. f chaos in the markets and a never-end- Unfortunately, all we have seen from ing stream of impractical regulations, this President is reckless spending and DESIGNATION OF SPEAKER PRO is a cloud of doubt that has been cast heavy-handed regulation. TEMPORE over the entire economy. For most At the time of the President’s first The SPEAKER pro tempore laid be- business owners, it is a daily struggle inauguration, the national unemploy- fore the House the following commu- just to keep the doors open in large ment rate was 7.8 percent. At the time nication from the Speaker: part because the government itself is a of his second inauguration, it was ex- WASHINGTON, DC, consistent obstacle. actly the same, and this month unem- February 14, 2013. The National Federation of Inde- ployment rose to 7.9 percent. While the I hereby appoint the Honorable CHRIS pendent Businesses recently released rate of unemployment has been mostly COLLINS to act as Speaker pro tempore figures from December indicating the stagnant, the national debt has not.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2018
    2018Annual Report Annual Report July 1, 2017–June 30, 2018 Council on Foreign Relations 58 East 68th Street, New York, NY 10065 tel 212.434.9400 1777 F Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006 tel 202.509.8400 www.cfr.org [email protected] OFFICERS DIRECTORS David M. Rubenstein Term Expiring 2019 Term Expiring 2022 Chairman David G. Bradley Sylvia Mathews Burwell Blair Effron Blair Effron Ash Carter Vice Chairman Susan Hockfield James P. Gorman Jami Miscik Donna J. Hrinak Laurene Powell Jobs Vice Chairman James G. Stavridis David M. Rubenstein Richard N. Haass Vin Weber Margaret G. Warner President Daniel H. Yergin Fareed Zakaria Keith Olson Term Expiring 2020 Term Expiring 2023 Executive Vice President, John P. Abizaid Kenneth I. Chenault Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer Mary McInnis Boies Laurence D. Fink James M. Lindsay Timothy F. Geithner Stephen C. Freidheim Senior Vice President, Director of Studies, Stephen J. Hadley Margaret (Peggy) Hamburg and Maurice R. Greenberg Chair James Manyika Charles Phillips Jami Miscik Cecilia Elena Rouse Nancy D. Bodurtha Richard L. Plepler Frances Fragos Townsend Vice President, Meetings and Membership Term Expiring 2021 Irina A. Faskianos Vice President, National Program Tony Coles Richard N. Haass, ex officio and Outreach David M. Cote Steven A. Denning Suzanne E. Helm William H. McRaven Vice President, Philanthropy and Janet A. Napolitano Corporate Relations Eduardo J. Padrón Jan Mowder Hughes John Paulson Vice President, Human Resources and Administration Caroline Netchvolodoff OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS, Vice President, Education EMERITUS & HONORARY Shannon K. O’Neil Madeleine K. Albright Maurice R. Greenberg Vice President and Deputy Director of Studies Director Emerita Honorary Vice Chairman Lisa Shields Martin S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Iran Nuclear Deal: What You Need to Know About the Jcpoa
    THE IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL: WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE JCPOA wh.gov/iran-deal What You Need to Know: JCPOA Packet The Details of the JCPOA • FAQs: All the Answers on JCPOA • JCPOA Exceeds WINEP Benchmarks • Timely Access to Iran’s Nuclear Program • JCPOA Meeting (and Exceeding) the Lausanne Framework • JCPOA Does Not Simply Delay an Iranian Nuclear Weapon • Tools to Counter Iranian Missile and Arms Activity • Sanctions That Remain In Place Under the JCPOA • Sanctions Relief — Countering Iran’s Regional Activities What They’re Saying About the JCPOA • National Security Experts and Former Officials • Regional Editorials: State by State • What the World is Saying About the JCPOA Letters and Statements of Support • Iran Project Letter • Letter from former Diplomats — including five former Ambassadors to Israel • Over 100 Ambassador letter to POTUS • US Conference of Catholic Bishops Letter • Atlantic Council Iran Task Force Statement Appendix • Statement by the President on Iran • SFRC Hearing Testimony, SEC Kerry July 14, 2015 July 23, 2015 • Key Excerpts of the JCPOA • SFRC Hearing Testimony, SEC Lew July 23, 2015 • Secretary Kerry Press Availability on Nuclear Deal with Iran • SFRC Hearing Testimony, SEC Moniz July 14, 2015 July 23, 2015 • Secretary Kerry and Secretary Moniz • SASC Hearing Testimony, SEC Carter Washington Post op-ed July 29, 2015 July 22, 2015 THE DETAILS OF THE JCPOA After 20 months of intensive negotiations, the U.S. and our international partners have reached an historic deal that will verifiably prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. The United States refused to take a bad deal, pressing for a deal that met every single one of our bottom lines.
    [Show full text]
  • No Exceptions: the Decision to Open All Military Positions to Women Table of Contents
    BELFER CENTER REPORT No Exceptions The Decision to Open All Military Positions to Women Ash Carter SPECIAL REPORT DECEMBER 2018 Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs Harvard Kennedy School 79 JFK Street Cambridge, MA 02138 www.belfercenter.org Statements and views expressed in this report are solely those of the author and do not imply endorsement by Harvard University, the Harvard Kennedy School, or the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. Layout by Andrew Facini Cover photo: KFOR Multinational Battle Group-East Soldiers fire the M9 pistol from the firing line during the weapons qualification event for the German Armed Forces Proficiency Badge at Camp Bondsteel, Kosovo, Dec. 12, 2017. (U.S. Army Photo / Staff Sgt. Nicholas Farina) Copyright 2018, President and Fellows of Harvard College Printed in the United States of America BELFER CENTER REPORT No Exceptions The Decision to Open All Military Positions to Women Ash Carter SPECIAL REPORT DECEMBER 2018 About the Author Ash Carter is a former United States Secretary of Defense and the current Director of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Har- vard Kennedy School, where he leads the Technology and Public Purpose project. He is also an Innovation Fellow and corporation member at MIT. For over 35 years, Secretary Carter has leveraged his experience in national security, technology, and innovation to defend the United States and make a better world. He has done so under presidents of both political parties as well as in the private sector. As Secretary of Defense from 2015 to 2017, he pushed the Pentagon to “think outside its five-sided box.” He changed the trajectory of the mili- tary campaign to deliver ISIS a lasting defeat, designed and executed the strategic pivot to the Asia-Pacific, established a new playbook for the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Boston Tech Hub Faculty Working Group Annual Report: 2019-2020
    BOSTON TECH HUB FACULTY WORKING GROUP Annual Report 2019–2020 Technology and Public Purpose Project Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs Harvard Kennedy School 79 JFK Street Cambridge, MA 02138 www.belfercenter.org/TAPP Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences 29 Oxford St., Cambridge, MA 02138 www.seas.harvard.edu Statements and views expressed in this report are solely those of the authors and do not imply endorsement by Harvard University, Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard Paulson School, or the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. Design and Layout by Andrew Facini Copyright 2020, President and Fellows of Harvard College Printed in the United States of America BOSTON TECH HUB FACULTY WORKING GROUP Annual Report 2019-2020 Table of Contents Foreword ........................................................................................................................1 FWG Members and Guests .........................................................................................5 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 13 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 14 FWG Session Briefs: Fall 2019 ................................................................................19 FWG Session Briefs: Spring 2020 ..........................................................................31 Carol Rose, Executive Director
    [Show full text]
  • Successes and Failures in the Enactment of Humanitarian Intervention During the Obama Administration
    “THE ROAD TO HELL AND BACK”: SUCCESSES AND FAILURES IN THE ENACTMENT OF HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION DURING THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION A Thesis submitted to the FaCulty of the Graduate SChool of Arts and SCiences of Georgetown University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in ConfliCt Resolution By Justine T. Robinson, B.A. Washington, DC DeCember 10, 2020 Copyright 2020 by Justine T. Robinson All Rights Reserved ii “THE ROAD TO HELL AND BACK”: SUCCESSES AND FAILURES IN THE ENACTMENT OF HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION DURING THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION Justine T. Robinson, M.A. Thesis Advisor: Andrew Bennett, Ph.D. ABSTRACT This thesis examines how United States presidential administrations change over time in their poliCies on humanitarian intervention. More speCifiCally, how and why do AmeriCan presidential administrations (and the offiCials in those administrations) fail in some cases and sucCeed in others in enaCting ConfliCt resolution and genocide preventative measures? This thesis will focus on why offiCials in the two Obama administration sometimes used ambitious means of humanitarian intervention to prevent or mitigate genocide and other mass atrocities, as in the Cases of Libya and the Yazidis in Iraq, and sometimes took only limited steps to aChieve humanitarian goals, as in the case of the Syrian Civil War and Syrian refugees. This thesis is partiCularly interested in cases where earlier Obama administration aCtions and outComes forced the president and his advisors to rethink their approaCh to potential humanitarian intervention cases. The central hypothesis of this thesis is that poliCy changes on humanitarian intervention over time within U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Jonathan Pollard's Release Means Little by David Makovsky
    MENU Policy Analysis / Articles & Op-Eds Why Jonathan Pollard's Release Means Little by David Makovsky Jul 28, 2015 Also available in Arabic ABOUT THE AUTHORS David Makovsky David Makovsky is the Ziegler distinguished fellow at The Washington Institute and director of the Koret Project on Arab-Israel Relations. Articles & Testimony Given the current state of the region, close U.S.-Israeli security and intelligence cooperation is more vital than ever, but repairing the rift between the two governments will require much more than symbolic gestures. lthough the Israelis have demanded his release for decades, the imminent parole of convicted Israeli spy A Jonathan Pollard after almost 30 years in prison is not likely to put even a dent in the iciness between President Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu surrounding the Iran nuclear deal. And that is evidence of just how far Washington and Jerusalem have to go before they can get to the place both countries desperately need to be: cooperating closely to deal with a volcanic Middle East. The U.S. and Israel simply do not have the luxury of continued rancor, no matter what happens to the Iran deal. Whether it is a question of monitoring Iran, holding it to account or managing Islamist chaos throughout the region, the two countries are compelled to cooperate in security and intelligence matters. As for Pollard, his parole should be seen as little more than a footnote. While the Department of Justice said the U.S. would favor Pollard's parole, the White House was very careful not to trumpet this move as a gesture to Israel.
    [Show full text]
  • January 2017 Sunday Morning Talk Show Data
    January 2017 Sunday Morning Talk Show Data January 1, 2017 28 men and 17 women NBC's Meet the Press with Chuck Todd: 7 men and 2 women Joe Lockhart (M) Nicolle Wallace (F) Ari Fleischer (M) David Folkenflik (M) Hal Boedeker (M) Claire Atkinson (F) Gabe Sherman (M) Gerard Baker (M) Dean Baquet (M) CBS's Face the Nation with John Dickerson: 4 men and 4 women Isabel Wilkerson (F) J.D. Vance (M) Diane Guerrero (F) Amani Al-Khatahthbeh (F) Michele Norris (F) Jeffrey Goldberg (M) Michael Gerson (M) David Frum (M) ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos: 5 men and 4 women *Hosted by Jonathan Karl Incoming White House Communications Director, Sean Spicer (M) Rep. Adam Schiff (M) Donna Brazile (F) Former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich (M) Sarah Haines (F) Steve Inskeep (M) Karine Jean-Pierre (F) Kevin Madden (M) Mary Bruce (F) CNN's State of the Union with Jake Tapper: 6 men and 5 women Rep. Charlie Crist (M) Rep. Marsha Blackburn (F) Rep. Darrell Issa (M) Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester (F) Jim Acosta (M) Salena Zito (F) Abby Phillip (F) Jeff Zeleny (M) Former Governor Brian Schwietzer (M) Karen Finney (F) Van Jones (M) Fox News' Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace: 6 men and 2 women *Hosted by Shannon Bream Sen. Tom Cotton (M) Leonard Leo (M) Austan Goolsbee (M) Steve Moore (M) Lisa Boothe (F) Julie Roginsky (F) Daniel Halper (M) Charles Hurt (M) January 8, 2017 19 men and 12 women NBC's Meet the Press with Chuck Todd: 5 men and 3 women Sen.
    [Show full text]
  • Autonomous Horizons: the Way Forward Is a Product of the Office Air University Press 600 Chennault Circle, Bldg 1405 of the US Air Force Chief Scientist (AF/ST)
    Autonomous Horizons The Way Forward A vision for Air Force senior leaders of the potential for autonomous systems, and a general framework for the science and technology community to advance the state of the art Dr. Greg L. Zacharias Chief Scientist of the United States Air Force 2015–2018 The second volume in a series introduced by: Autonomous Horizons: Autonomy in the Air Force – A Path to the Future, Volume 1: Human Autonomy Teaming (AF/ST TR 15-01) March 2019 Air University Press Curtis E. LeMay Center for Doctrine Development and Education Maxwell AFB, Alabama Chief of Staff, US Air Force Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Gen David L. Goldfein Names: Zacharias, Greg, author. | Air University (U.S.). Press, publisher. Commander, Air Education and Training | United States. Department of Defense. United States Air Force. Command Title: Autonomous horizons : the way forward / by Dr. Greg L. Zacha- Lt Gen Steven L. Kwast rias. Description: First edition. | Maxwell Air Force Base, AL : AU Press, 2019. “Chief Scientist for the United States Air Force.” | Commander and President, Air University Lt Gen Anthony J. Cotton “January 2019.” |Includes bibliographical references. Identifiers: LCCN 2018061682 | ISBN 9781585662876 Commander, Curtis E. LeMay Center for Subjects: LCSH: Aeronautics, Military—Research—United States. | Doctrine Development and Education United States. Air Force—Automation. | Artificial intelligence— Maj Gen Michael D. Rothstein Military applications—United States. | Intelligent control systems. | Autonomic
    [Show full text]
  • US Cyber Command's First Decade
    A HOOVER INSTITUTION ESSAY US Cyber Command’s First Decade MICHAEL WARNER Aegis Series Paper No. 2008 United States Cyber Command (USCYBERCOM) turned ten years old in 2020. It is a unique institution—a military command that operates globally in real time against determined and capable adversaries and yet never fires a shot or launches a missile. The Command comprises an amalgam of military, intelligence, and information technology capabilities that came together into its present shape more by design than by fortuitous chance. That design, however, was itself a work in progress. The Command’s first decade built upon the notion that states must operate in cyberspace at scale and in real time. “Operating” means that key national systems and data have to be “fought” like a weapons platform; in other words, they enable and execute critical sovereign functions and thus cannot be switched off or managed as discrete and individual devices.1 Indeed, each system and device affects the whole, and that whole is now immense. Only operational processes can harness the military’s and the Law and Technology, Security, National government’s limited talent and resources in ways that can accomplish such global tasks on behalf of the nation, and only military components have the training, expertise, equipment, and resources to fulfill key elements of that requirement full-time and without interruption. That vision dawned on military and civilian leaders years before the establishment of USCYBERCOM. The Command then refined the vision through actual operations. USCYBERCOM was by no means a passive medium upon which other government and industry actors imposed their visions.
    [Show full text]
  • A Lasting Defeat the Campaign to Destroy ISIS
    BELFER CENTER REPORT A Lasting Defeat The Campaign to Destroy ISIS Ash Carter SPECIAL REPORT OCTOBER 2017 Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs Harvard Kennedy School 79 JFK Street Cambridge, MA 02138 www.belfercenter.org Statements and views expressed in this report are solely those of the author and do not imply endorsement by Harvard University, the Harvard Kennedy School, or the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. Design & Layout by Andrew Facini Cover image and opposite page 1: Secretary of Defense Ash Carter speaks with Army Lt. Gen. Sean MacFarland, Commander Combined Joint Task Force- Operation Inherent Resolve as they fly to the Green Zone in Baghdad, Iraq in a UH-60 helicopter to meet with Iraqi leaders to discuss matters of usual importance Apr. 18, 2016. Copyright 2017, President and Fellows of Harvard College Printed in the United States of America BELFER CENTER REPORT A Lasting Defeat The Campaign to Destroy ISIS Ash Carter SPECIAL REPORT OCTOBER 2017 About the Author Ash Carter is the Director of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard Kennedy School. He is also an Innovation Fellow at MIT. For over 35 years, Carter has leveraged his experience in national security, technology, and innovation to defend the United States and make a better world. He has done so under presidents of both political parties as well as in the private sector. As Secretary of Defense from 2015 to 2017, Carter pushed the Pentagon to “think outside its five-sided box.” He changed the trajectory of the military campaign to deliver ISIS a lasting defeat, designed and executed the strategic pivot to the Asia-Pacific, established a new playbook for the US and NATO to confront Russia’s aggression, and launched a national cyber strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • A Nuclear Nonproliferation Strategy for the 21St Century
    BUILDING GLOBAL ALLIANCES FOR THE 21st CENTURY progressive solutions to urgent international challenges AA Nuclear Nuclear NonproliferationNonproliferation Strategy Strategy working paper #1 A Nuclear Nonproliferation Strategy for the 21st Century project chaired by: Madeleine K. Albright & Robin Cook BUILDING GLOBAL ALLIANCES FOR THE 21st CENTURY About “Building Global Alliances for the 21st Century” Initiated by leaders from the United States and Europe, “Building Global Alliances for the 21st Century” seeks to ensure security and prosperity for people around the world by developing and promoting progressive solutions to transnational challenges through global cooperation. The Alliance will draw on and include the experience and ideas of progressive leaders and thinkers from Europe, the United States, and around the world to shape policy by developing and communicating innovative proposals that address global economic, security and sustainable development concerns. In the longer term, the Alliance will address the institutional reforms required to manage our increasingly interdependent world. The Alliance benefi ts from the direction of a prominent Steering Committee comprised of: Madeleine Albright, Robin Cook, António Manuel de Oliveira Guterres, Morton H. Halperin, Lee H. Hamilton, John Monks, John Podesta, Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, Maria João Rodrigues and John Sweeney. Acknowledgments Global Alliances, and author Andrew J. Grotto, gratefully acknowledge the advice, comments and reviews that friends of Global Alliances have made on previous drafts. We wish to thank Matt Bunn, Ash Carter, Joe Cirincione, John Deutch, Ernie Moniz, and others for their comments and critiques. Global Alliances and the author are responsible for the content of this document and any errors it may contain.
    [Show full text]