Strategic Culture

Strategic Users of Culture: German Decisions for Military Action

by Olivier Schmitt

Contemporary Security Policy, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2012, pp. 59-81.

This article looks at cases in which political leaders have engaged in seemingly inconsistent behaviour and explores... more This article looks at cases in which political leaders have engaged in seemingly inconsistent behaviour and explores how they framed and justified their decisions. After showing that strategic culture is composed of different facets, I argue that when faced with conflicting pressures from the international environment and their own national constituencies, political leaders intentionally manipulate facets of their own strategic culture to legitimate a decision, made for contingent reasons, to participate (or not) in a military operation. I illustrate this argument by analysing in depth the decision-making process and public justifications of the German participation in the European and Security Defence Policy (ESDP) mission EUFOR Congo in 2006 and its refusal to militarily participate in a similar mission in Chad in 2007. This conception of strategic culture as both a constraint and a resource for policymakers reinforces our understanding of the boundaries of strategic culture’s explanatory power, and provides an explanation of seemingly inconsistent foreign policy behaviours.

Strategic Culture and Alliance Shifts: Exploring New Zealand and Australia’s Divergent Security Engagement with the United States, 1987­‐2011

by Matt Hill

Unpublished paper presented at the Australian and New Zealand Studies Association of North America annual conference, Toronto, ON (February 17 2012)

Australia and New Zealand’s security relationships with the United States have developed along divergent trajectories,... more Australia and New Zealand’s security relationships with the United States have developed along divergent trajectories, following Wellington’s ejection from the Australia, New Zealand, United States (ANZUS) security alliance in 1986. Explanations for the emergence and persistence of distinctive forms of strategic engagement between the respective Australasian states and Washington have tended to focus on various domestic New Zealand political dynamics, including the emergence of national consensus around popular anti-nuclear movements, pragmatic concessions to allow socio-economic reforms, and genuine political internalisation of ideological shifts. This paper advances an additional explanatory variable, namely the distinctive impact of national strategic culture on national security preferences. It is contended that despite decades of security cooperation, the manner in which strategic culture defines the geographic scope and content of New Zealand security preferences has remained independent of U.S. perspectives. In the context of the ANZUS crisis, these idiosyncratic policy preferences encouraged policy-makers in Wellington to the point where they were faced with the reality of making ad hoc trade-offs between New Zealand’s alliance relationships and internal domestic political objectives. Moreover, the persistence of New Zealand’s distinctive strategic cultural perspectives, particularly with regards to the scope of its national interests, holds implications for the extent of ongoing security rapprochement between Wellington and Washington.

Sovyet İşgali ve Sürekli Özgürlük; Afganistan'da Süper Güç Müdahalelerinin Uluslararası Sisteme Etkileri Üzerine Karşılaştırmalı Bir Jeopolitik Değerlendirme (The Soviet Invasion and Enduring Freedom: A Comparative Geopolitical Analysis of Superpower Interventions in Afghanistan and Their Impact on the International System)

by Ahmet Kasım Han

published "Ortadoğu Etütleri" in 2011

Analyses on Afghanistan often assume the importance of this country as given or prefer not to deal with the... more Analyses on Afghanistan often assume the importance of this country as given or prefer not to deal with the geopolitical, geostrategic aspect of the issue. This study aims at analyzing
this widely-accepted importance of Afghanistan within a geopolitical framework and by doing so understanding Afghanistan’s role and impact on the international system in the
past and today. It analyzes the two superpower interventions to the country, the Soviet invasion (1979) and September 11 and US and NATO intervention (2001) and examines
both of these interventions regarding the international context, the priorities of the actors, regional responses and the impact of the interventions on the international system. To understand
Afghanistan’s geopolitical location, this article takes into account factors such as the country’s geography, political culture and demography. However, this is neither a full historical account of these two interventions nor it aims to discuss all aspects
of Afghanistan’s political and cultural structure. This study takes the concept of geopolitics at its center and through a comparative geopolitical analysis it compares the motivations and the political impact of the interventions on the international system
within a political realist framework. In the paper firstly Soviet Union’s intervention to Afghanistan is discussed before a theoretical discussion on geopolitics is made. The
aim behind this is to give a background first where concepts could be understood much clearly when put into practice. Later the part on US intervention follows aiming again at presenting the conceptualization and framework of geopolitical analysis
through the case study.

Keywords: Afghanistan, USA, Soviet Union, NATO, ISAF, Operation Enduring Freedom

Masters of Change: Transformational Growth Strategies at General Electric from 1982 to 2006

by Tim Lowder

Learning New Roles and Changing Beliefs: Turkish Strategic Culture in Transition

by Kaan Renda

This paper is devoted to investigating change in Turkish strategic culture, i.e. the adoption of new narratives,... more This paper is devoted to investigating change in Turkish strategic culture, i.e. the adoption of new narratives, roles, and values. This paper constrains itself to understanding changing features of Turkish strategic culture rather than its influence on Turkey’s policies. Hence, the main purpose is to put forward a theoretical framework to account for the change in Turkish strategic culture. The main research question is that since the EU gave Turkey the candidacy status what kind of roles Turkish foreign policy elites have adopted and to what extent their beliefs and values about security and defence have changed at a time when Turkey’s neighbourhood is in a state of flux and its domestic politics is in a process of transformation.
I analyze the change in Turkish strategic culture by conducting a discourse analysis in three issue areas; these are i) new historical and geographical representations in strategic culture and the different uses of geopolitical arguments in debates about security and defence, ii) change in threat perceptions, iii) adoption of new roles and values. The main unit of analysis is the discourses of Turkish state elites which include top statesmen such as presidents, prime ministers, and foreign ministers as well as foreign policy bureaucracy and the military.

DESUNIDOS CONTRA O TERROR? O TERRORISMO JIHADISTA E OS ENTRAVES À COOPERAÇÃO NA ÁREA DE SEGURANÇA DA UNIÃO EUROPÉIA

by Dani Nedal

‘Strategic Culture and the Korean Peninsula Crisis: Conceptual Challenges and Policy Opportunities.’

by James Stratford

Published in Security Challenges, 1:1, (2005) 123-35. Can be viewed freely by going to http://www.securitychallenges.org.au/ArticlePDFs/vol1no1Stratford.pdf

The prospect of a nuclear capable North Korea has seen the strategic crisis on the Korean peninsula take on an... more The prospect of a nuclear capable North Korea has seen the strategic crisis on the Korean peninsula take on an additional layer of complexity and potentially catastrophic lethality. Recent analysis tends to focus only on the period since the Korean War and consequently pays little attention to historical and cultural factors, which inform the context in which the North Korean (and the South as well for that matter) elites operate. This paper is an attempt to demonstrate how an appreciation of traditional strategic culture and the broader history in which the crisis is situated can enhance our understanding of the motivations for, and functions of, this nuclear capability.

‘European Security: The Limits of Strategic Culture’ in Stivachtis, Yannis A. (ed), The New Europe: Politics, Economics and Foreign Relations (Athens: Athens Institute for Education and Research, 2010), pp.43-52.

by Andrew Liaropoulos

This essay questions whether a strategic culture is emerging in Europe. The objective is to identify the endogenous... more This essay questions whether a strategic culture is emerging in Europe. The objective is to identify the endogenous obstacles that hinder the formation of a common strategic culture. First, it reviews the concept of strategic culture and then applies it in the European security context. The persistence and heterogeneity of national strategic cultures, along with the scanty military budget, as well as the institutional stiffness and the lack of political will, highlight the inability of the European Union to construct a coherent strategic culture. Second, by identifying the need to focus on the non-military security dimensions, the essay also examines the utility of the security culture concept. Only by balancing the civilian and military dimensions, integrating the new member states and enhancing its operational capabilities will the EU move gradually towards a Common Foreign and Security Policy.