Rediscovering geography in NATO defence planning

References

• Andréani, G., 2006. De la dérive au divorce: les relations transatlantiques après la guerre d’Irak. Commentaire, 113, 55–66. doi:10.3917/comm.113.0055.
   Google Scholar
• Ångström, J., 2018. The US perspective on future war: why the US relies upon Ares rather than Athena. Defence studies, 18 (3), 318–338.
   Google Scholar
• Arnold, J.-M., 2016. NATO’s readiness action plan: strategic benefits and outstanding challenges. Strategic studies quarterly, 10 (1), 74–105.
   Google Scholar
• Barry, C. and Binnendijk, H., 2012. Widening gaps in U.S. and European defense capabilities and cooperation. Washington DC: Institute for National Strategic Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Blount, C., 2013. Staying in step: the US “Pivot” and UK strategic choices. Strategic studies quarterly, 7 (2), 137–150.
   Google Scholar
• Childs, N., 2016. The measure of britain’s new maritime ambition. Survival, 58 (1), 131–150. doi:10.1080/00396338.2016.1142143.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clem, R.S., 2016. Geopolitics and planning for a high-end fight: NATO and the baltic region. Air & space power journal, 30 (1), 74–85.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, J.M., 1998. Military geography for professionals and the public. Washington DC: National Defense University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Daalder, I., 2003. The end of atlanticism. Survival, 45 (2), 147–166. doi:10.1080/00396330312331343536.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daalder, I. and Goldgeier, J., 2006. Global NATO. Foreign affairs, 85 (5), 105–113. doi:10.2307/20032073.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, P.K. and Finch, L., 1993. Defense planning for the post-cold war era: giving meaning to flexibility, adaptiveness, and robustness of capability. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• De Spiegeleire, S., 2011. Ten trends in capability planning for defence and security. RUSI journal, 156 (5), 20–28. doi:10.1080/03071847.2011.626270.
   Google Scholar
• Deni, J.R., 2014. NATO’s new trajectories after the wales summit. Parameters, 44 (3), 57–65.
   Google Scholar
• Deni, J.R., 2017. NATO and article 5: the transatlantic alliance and the twenty-first-century challenges of collective defense. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Doerfel, J.S., 1982. The operational art of the AirLand battle. Military review, LXII (5), 3–10.
   Google Scholar
• Fitzsimmons, M., 2006. The problem of uncertainty in strategic planning. Survival, 48 (4), 131–146. doi:10.1080/00396330601062808.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frühling, S. and Lasconjarias, G., 2016. NATO, A2/AD and the Kaliningrad challenge. Survival, 58 (2), 95–116. doi:10.1080/00396338.2016.1161906.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glatz, R.L. and Zapfe, M., 2016. NATO defence planning between Wales and Warsaw: politico-military challenges of a credible assurance against Russia. Berlin: Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik.
   Google Scholar
• Gray, C.S., 1991. Geography and grand strategy. Comparative strategy, 10 (4), 311–329. doi:10.1080/01495939108402853.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunzinger, M., 2013. Shaping america’s future military: toward a new force planning construct. Washington DC: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffenaar, J. and Krüger, D., eds., 2012. Blueprints for battle: planning for war in central Europe, 1948-1968. Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, F.G., 2017. Making NATO Less ‘Obsolete’. Philadelphia, PA: Foreign Policy Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Kamp, K.-H., 1999. A global role for NATO? The washington quarterly, 22 (1), 7–11. doi:10.1080/01636609909550362.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khalilzad, Z. and Ochmanek, D., 1997. Rethinking US defence planning. Survival, 39 (1), 43–64. doi:10.1080/00396339708442896.
   Google Scholar
• Kramer, F.D. and Craddock, B.J., 2016. Effective defense of the Baltics. Washington DC: Atlantic Council.
   Google Scholar
• Leonhard, R.R., 1994. Fighting by minutes: time and the art of war. Westport, CT: Prager.
   Google Scholar
• Lock-Pullan, R., 2005. How to rethink war: conceptual innovation and AirLand battle doctrine. Journal of strategic studies, 28 (4), 679–702. doi:10.1080/01402390500301087.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mackinder, H.J., 1943. The round world and the winning of the peace. Foreign affairs, 21 (4), 595–605. doi:10.2307/20029780.
   Google Scholar
• Marrone, A., De France, O., and Fattibene, D., eds., 2016. Defence budgets and cooperation in Europe: developments, trends and drivers. Rome: Istituto Affari Internazionali.
   Google Scholar
• Mattelaer, A., 2011. How Afghanistan has Strengthened NATO. Survival, 53 (6), 127–140. doi:10.1080/00396338.2011.636517.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattelaer, A., 2014. Preparing NATO for the next defence-planning cycle. RUSI journal, 159 (3), 30–35. doi:10.1080/03071847.2014.927995.
   Google Scholar
• Mattelaer, A., 2016. Revisiting the principles of NATO burden-sharing. Parameters, 46 (1), 25–33.
   Google Scholar
• Mearsheimer, J.J., 1982. Maneuver, mobile defense, and the NATO central front. International security, 6 (3), 104–122. doi:10.2307/2538609.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell, A.W., 2018. Anchoring the western alliance. Speech delivered at the heritage foundation. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of State, 5 June.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 1949. Strategic concept for the defence of the North Atlantic area. NATO, DC 6/1, 1 December 1949.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 1950. Strategic guidance for North Atlantic regional planning. NATO, MC 14, 28 March 1950.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 1952. NATO strategic guidance. NATO, MC 14/1, 9 December 1952.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 1957. Overall strategic concept for the defense of the North Atlantic treaty organization area. NATO, MC 14/2, 21 February 1957.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 1967. Decisions of defence planning committee in ministerial session. NATO, DPC/D (67) 23, 11 May 1967.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 1968. Overall strategic concept for the defense of the North Atlantic treaty area. NATO, MC 14/3, 16 January 1968.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 1991. The alliance’s new strategic concept. NATO, 8 November 1991. Available from: https://www.nato.int/cps/ua/natohq/official_texts_23847.htm
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2003. Final communique: ministerial meeting of the defence planning committee and the nuclear planning group. NATO, 12 June 2003. Available from: https://www.nato.int/docu/pr/2003/p03-064e.htm
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2010. Active engagement, modern defence: strategic concept for the defence and security of the members of the North Atlantic treaty organisation. NATO, 19 November 2010. Available from: https://www.nato.int/cps/ua/natohq/official_texts_68580.htm
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2014. Wales summit declaration. NATO, 5 September 2014. Available from: https://www.nato.int/cps/ic/natohq/official_texts_112964.htm
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2016. Warsaw summit communiqué. NATO, 9 July 2016. Available from: https://www.nato.int/cps/ic/natohq/official_texts_133169.htm
   Google Scholar
• Pedlow, G.W., 1997. NATO strategy documents 1949-1969. Brussels: NATO.
   Google Scholar
• Pedlow, G.W., 2009. The evolution of NATO’s command structure, 1951-2009. Mons: Allied Command Operations.
   Google Scholar
• Peltier, L.C. and Pearcy, G.E., 1966. Military geography. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
   Google Scholar
• Pfeiffer, H., 2008. Defence and force planning in historical perspective: NATO as a case study. Baltic security & defence review, 10, 103–120.
   Google Scholar
• Reuters, 2017. After summits with trump, merkel says Europe must take fate into own hands. Reuters, 28 May. Available from:  https://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-politics-merkel-idUSKBN18O0JK
   Google Scholar
• Rivero, H., 1972. The defence of NATO’s Southern Flank. RUSI journal, 117 (666), 3–10. doi:10.1080/03071847209429768.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, J. and Romanovs, U., 2015a. Baltic military preparations after Ukraine: a sufficiently ‘prickly’ deterrent? RUSI newsbrief, 35 (2), 8–10.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, J. and Romanovs, U., 2015b. NATO’s Eastern Flank: rebuilding deterrence? RUSI newsbrief, 35 (3), 14–16.
   Google Scholar
• Rühle, M. and Williams, M., 1997. Why NATO will survive. Comparative strategy, 16 (1), 109–115. doi:10.1080/01495939708403093.
   Google Scholar
• Ruiz Palmer, D.A., 1990. Paradigms lost: A retrospective assessment of the NATO Warsaw pact military competition in the Alliance’s Southern Region. Comparative strategy, 9 (3), 265–286. doi:10.1080/01495939008402814.
   Google Scholar
• Rupp, R., 2000. NATO 1949 and NATO 2000: from collective defense toward collective security. Journal of strategic studies, 23 (3), 154–176. doi:10.1080/01402390008437804.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rynning, S., 2013. Germany is more than Europe can handle: or, why NATO remains a pacifier. Rome: NATO Defense College (Research Paper No. 96).
   Google Scholar
• Shlapak, D.A. and Johnson, M., 2016. Reinforcing deterrence on NATO’s Eastern Flank: wargaming the defense of the Baltics. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, L., 2014. Assessing NATO’s Eastern European “Flank”. Parameters, 44 (3), 67–79.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, L., 2015. Understanding US retrenchment in Europe. Survival, 52 (2), 157–172. doi:10.1080/00396338.2015.1026093.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, L., 2018. The spectre of a Westphalian Europe. London: Royal United Services Institute (Whitehall Paper 90).
   Google Scholar
• Vallance, A., 2003. A radically new command structure for NATO. NATO review, Autumn issue. Available from: https://www.nato.int/docu/review/2003/NATO-Strategic-Partners/Radically-new-Command-Structure-NATO/EN/index.htm
   Google Scholar
• Webber, M., Sperling, J., and Smith, M.A., 2012. NATO’s post-cold war trajectory: decline or regeneration? Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Wouters, P., 2011. Technical background briefing on NATO command structure. Brussels: NATO, 9 June 2011. Available from:  https://www.nato.int/cps/ic/natohq/opinions_75353.htm
   Google Scholar
• Yost, D.S., 2000. The NATO capabilities gap and the European Union. Survival, 42 (4), 97–128. doi:10.1080/713869441.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar