The Work Of The Joint Committee On The National Security Strategy In 2013-14 (HC 169, HL 1257) covers the work of the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy, which was established with a broad role; to consider the National Security Strategy. In practice, the Committee has considered not only the National Security Strategy (NSS) document 'A Strong Britain In An Age Of Uncertainty: The National Security Strategy' published by the Government in 2010 (see below), but also the wider strategy that underlies government decision making on matters affecting national security. The report gives an account of activities over the past year, highlighting in particular the evidence session with the Prime Minister in January 2014; draws attention to areas of continuing concern; and outlines objectives for the remainder of the Parliament.
"The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic marks the most significant, singular global disruption since World War II, with health, economic, political, and security implications that will ripple for years to come." -Global Trends 2040 (2021) Global Trends 2040-A More Contested World (2021), released by the US National Intelligence Council, is the latest report in its series of reports starting in 1997 about megatrends and the world's future. This report, strongly influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic, paints a bleak picture of the future and describes a contested, fragmented and turbulent world. It specifically discusses the four main trends that will shape tomorrow's world: - Demographics-by 2040, 1.4 billion people will be added mostly in Africa and South Asia. - Economics-increased government debt and concentrated economic power will escalate problems for the poor and middleclass. - Climate-a hotter world will increase water, food, and health insecurity. - Technology-the emergence of new technologies could both solve and cause problems for human life. Students of trends, policymakers, entrepreneurs, academics, journalists and anyone eager for a glimpse into the next decades, will find this report, with colored graphs, essential reading.
This reports finds that the Coalition Government has developed in public a more mature and measured relationship with the US, although there has been no fundamental change in the nature of the tie. The Committee declares the relationship to be in good health. In particular, the Committee said that it was not aware of any evidence that the House of Commons vote in August 2013 against potential military action in Syria had damaged the UK's relationship with the US. Rather, the Committee concluded that the episode illustrated general features of the UK-US relationship, namely that developments in the UK could influence US policy; and that the underlying tie was resilient. Today's publication follows up a report produced by the previous Foreign Affairs Committee at the end of the last Parliament, which recommended that the UK Government should adopt a more hard-headed and less deferential approach to the US. The Coalition Government seemed to have taken up this recommendation. The Committee criticises the UK Government's poor provision of information about the UK-US Joint Strategy Board, which was created during President Obama's State Visit to the UK in May 2011. Among strategic issues that it considered, the Committee agreed with the Government that the proposed EU-US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) could have significant positive strategic impact for the UK and the transatlantic relationship.
In this report the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy finds that the National Security Strategy should address more fundamental questions about the UK's role in the world and its relationship with the USA and other allies. The Strategy also needs to be subject to a much wider public debate. The Committee says that: there is no evidence that the NSS has influenced decisions made since the Strategic Defence and Security Review; there should be an "overarching strategy", a document designed to guide government decision-making and crisis management both at home and on the international stage; the Government's assertion that there will be no reduction in the UK's influence on the world stage is wholly unrealistic in the medium to long term and the UK needs to plan for a changing, and more partnership-dependent, role in the world. The Government's unwillingness to provide the Committee with all the information it has asked for about the National Security Risk Assessment means that it is unable to give Parliament any assurances about its adequacy. The report also notes concern that the National Security Council's oversight of security issues is not sufficiently broad and strategic, given that it was deeply involved in operations in Libya and failed to discuss the national security implications of the Eurozone crisis or the possibility of Scottish independence.
The Defence Committee says the Government must describe the circumstances in which the UK would intervene militarily in the future. A strategic and well-articulated vision of the UK's position in the world and the level of influence it is able to exert would lead to more rational decisions on whether or not to intervene as well as a better public understanding of the rationale for any such future decision. It would also assist in identifying the strategic objective of such operations, contributing to a more coherent UK foreign, defence and security policy. The Committee supports the Government's adoption of an "adaptable posture" in the 2010 Strategic Defence and Security Review. The threats to UK national security remain uncertain and unpredictable and it is important flexibility to deal with them is retained. The current main national security threat was from international terrorism, but the Committee calls on the Government to ensure that the next National Security Strategy gives due weight to the likelihood of a return to an increased threat of state versus state conflict. The Government needs to resolve the balance between Parliament's essential role as a strategic inquisitor on military deployments and the use of the Royal Prerogative in conflict decisions. The Government should commit to ensuring that a summary of the legal justification on military action is available to Parliament in advance of any debate. The Government should also set out how it intends to define and assess successful exit strategies and end states.
Employing several historical case studies between 1940-2003 and marshalling a host of primary sources, William D. James argues that British politicians and officials have thought in grand strategic terms under American hegemony - even if they do not realise or admit to this.
On cover and title page: House, committees of the whole House, general committees and select committees. On title page: Returns to orders of the House of Commons dated 14 May 2013 (the Chairman of Ways and Means)
Contents: (1) National Security (NS) and the Congressional Interest; 21st Century Challenges to NS; (2) The Role of the Economy in U.S. NS; Macroecon. and Microecon. Issues in NS; (3) Economic Growth and Broad Conceptions of NS: Human Capital; Research, Innovation, Energy, and Space; (4) Globalization, Trade, Finance, and the G-20; Instability in the Global Economy; Savings and Exports; Boosting Domestic Demand Abroad; Open Foreign Markets to U.S. Products and Services; Build Cooperation with International Partners; Deterring Threats to the International Financial System; (5) Democracy, Human Rights, and Development Aid; Sustainable Development. Charts and tables. This is a print on demand publication.
In this report the Defence Committee argues that the capabilities of HM Forces should be determined not by budgetary constraints but by a fully-developed strategy which defines the position in the world that the UK wants to adopt. The report urges the government to produce a comprehensive national security strategy in the first place and let that document, along with the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR), direct the next Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR). The allocation of resources will be based on national spending priorities set to meet the nation's security needs. There is a danger of defence becoming a matter of discretionary spending. Decisions about the expeditionary capability that the UK retains must be based on proper strategic decision making about the UK's place in the world and not simply flow from the "horse-trading" that surrounds the CSR process. The report points to a lack of understanding amongst the public of why we have Armed Forces. General sympathy and support for the Armed Forces must not obscure a hard-headed understanding of what they are for. The process of producing the next Defence and Security Review is the opportunity to engage the public in understanding the future of the Armed Forces. The Committee has very real concerns about the focus that will be given to the number of asymmetric security threats to the UK, such as from terrorism or cyber attack. The Government must think more strategically about the resilience of the country's critical infrastructure and recovery following an attack.
This volume outlines two decades of reforms at the Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO), British Council and BBC World Service – the so-called Public Diplomacy Partners. Between 1995 and 2015, the FCO and its partner organisations in promoting British influence abroad have introduced major changes to how, where and with whom diplomacy is conducted. This unique study links major organisational reforms to the changing political, technological and intellectual contexts of the day. Through detailed case studies over a 20-year period, this study demonstrates how and why British diplomacy evolved from a secretive institution to one understanding its purpose as a global thought leader through concepts such as public diplomacy, digital diplomacy and soft power. It is rich with unpublished documents and case studies, and is the most detailed study of the FCO and British Council in the contemporary period. From Cool Britannia to the recent GREAT campaign via the 2012 Olympics and diplomats on Twitter, this book charts the theory and practice behind a 21st century revolution in British diplomacy. This work will be of much interest to policymakers and advisors, students and researchers, and foreign policy and communication specialists. “From the heady past of Cool Britannia to the present days of the Great Campaign by way of the Royal Wedding, London Olympics and multiple other gambits in Britain's evolving attempt to connect to foreign publics, this book is the essential account of the inner workings of a vital aspect of contemporary British foreign policy: public diplomacy. James Pamment is an astute, succinct and engaging Dante, bringing his readers on journey through the policy processes behind the scenes. We see the public diplomacy equivalents of paradise, purgatory and the inferno, though Pamment leaves us to decide which is which.” Nicholas J. Cull, author of ‘The Decline and Fall of the United States Information Agency: American Public Diplomacy, 1989-2001’. “A gift to practitioners who want to do the job better: required reading for anyone going into a senior job at the British Council, the UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office and enlightened thinkers at 10 Downing Street, HM Treasury and Ministries of Foreign Affairs worldwide. Authoritative, scholarly and accurate, Pamment strikes a great balance between the salient details and the overarching picture. He also does a major service to those of us who lived it; our toils make more sense for what he has done - placing them in a historical and conceptual context.” John Worne, Director of Strategy & External Relations, British Council, 2007-2015
