Strategic Facts as a Comprehensive Model for Defence Analysis

References

• Ackoff, Russell L. 1971. “Towards a System of Systems Concepts.” Management Science 17 (11): 661–671. doi:10.1287/mnsc.17.11.661.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ADP. 2019. Mission Command: Command and Control of Army Forces, . Headquarters, Department of the Army, Washington DC. Army Doctrine Publication No. 6-0.
   Google Scholar
• ADP 3-0. 2019. Operations, Army Doctrine Publication No. 3-0. Washington DC: Headquarters, Department of the Army.
   Google Scholar
• AJP-01(E). 2017. Allied Joint Doctrine. Approved by STANAG 2437. E ed. Brussels, Belgium: NATO Standardization Office (NSO).
   Google Scholar
• Andersson, Kent 2020. “Notes on Military Capability Concepts and Their Relevance for Analysis of System Characteristics.” October 5, 2020. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:fhs:diva-9463
   Google Scholar
• Balasevicius, Tony. 2016. The Mackenzie Institute2016 “Is It Time To Bring Back Threat-Based Planning?.” Security Matters 2016 (Spring): 4–10. https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/55434082/security-matters
   Google Scholar
• Barthes, Roland. 1972. Mythologies, Edited by Lavers, Annette. New York: Noonday Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ben-Ari, Eyal. 2014. “Theory Building in Research on the Military.” In Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in Military Studies, edited by Soeters, Joseph, Patricia M. Shields, and Sebastiaan Rietjens, 301–311. London and New York: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203093801.
   Google Scholar
• Berkebile, Richard E. 2018. “Military Strategy Revisited: A Critique of the Lykke Formulation.” Military Review Online. Exclusive: https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/Army-Press-Online-Journal/documents/Berkebile-v2.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Breitenbauch, Henrik, and André Ken Jakobsson. 2018. “Defence Planning as Strategic Fact: Introduction.” Defence Studies 18 (3): 253–261. doi:10.1080/14702436.2018.1497443.
   Google Scholar
• Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. 2022. “Structural Functionalism.“ Encyclopedia Britannica, February 7, 2022. Edited by, Duignan, Brian. Chicago, Illinois, USA: The Britannica Group. https://www.britannica.com/topic/structural-functionalism
   Google Scholar
• Buzan, Barry, Ole Waever, and Jaap De Wilde. 1998. Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Boulder, London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Cambridge University Press. n.d. “Analysis.” In Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary & Thesaurus. Accessed 26 January, 2022. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/analysis
   Google Scholar
• Cambridge University Press. n.d. “Governance.“ in Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary & Thesaurus. Accessed 9 August, 2021. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/governance
   Google Scholar
• Checkland, Peter. 1999. “Systems Thinking.” In Rethinking Management Information Systems, edited by Currie, Wendy and Robert Galliers, 45–56, New York: Oxford University Press Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Chinn, David, and John Dowdy. 2014. “Five Principles to Manage Change in the Military.” McKinsey on Government 2014/15 (Winter): 40–44. Special Issue on Defense.
   Google Scholar
• Christiansson, Magnus. 2018. “Defense Planning beyond Rationalism: The Third Offset Strategy as a Case of Metagovernance.” Defence Studies 18 (3): 262–278. doi:10.1080/14702436.2017.1335581.
   Google Scholar
• Cordesman, Anthony H. 2019. “NATO’s ‘Brain Death’ Burdensharing Blunders: Focusing on the Right Investment, Force Strength, and Readiness Needs.” Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). November 21, 2019. https://www.csis.org/analysis/natos-brain-death-burdensharing-blunders-focusing-right-investment-force-strength-and
   Google Scholar
• Correia, João. 2019. “Military Capabilities and the Strategic Planning Conundrum.” Security and Defence Quarterly 24 (2): 21–50. doi:10.35467/sdq/108667.
   Google Scholar
• Dönges, Hannah E., and Stephanie C. Hofmann. 2018. “Defence As Security.“ In Edited by Galbreath, David J., Deni, John R. Routledge Handbook Of Defence Studies, 2018, 29–39. Abingdon, Oxon: New York, NY: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315650463-4.
   Google Scholar
• Dupuy, Trevor Nevitt. 1993. International Military and Defense Encyclopedia. Vol. 5 Washington, New York Charles Scribners Sons
   Google Scholar
• Durkheim, Émile.1982.The Rules of Sociological Method. New York: The Free Press. First published in French 1895.
   Google Scholar
• EDA. 2020. “Fact Sheet: Results of First Coordinated Annual Review on Defence.” https://eda.europa.eu/docs/default-source/eda-factsheets/2020-11-20-card
   Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. 1999. “Strategy as Strategic Decision Making.” Sloan Management Review 40 (3): 65–72. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/strategy-as-strategic-decision-making/
   Google Scholar
• Eisenhower, Dwight D. 1958. “Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1957.“ Edited by The National Archives of the United States. In Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States, Containing the Public Messages, Speeches, and Statements of the President, January 1 to December 31, 1957, Containing the Public Messages, Speeches, and Statements of the President, January 1 to December 31, 1957, Washington D.C: U.S. Government printing office: 986, http://hdl.handle.net/2027/miua.4728417.1957.001
   Google Scholar
• Fayol, Henri. 1949. General and Industrial Management, Edited by. Constance, Storrs and Irvine Gray. 1916 London: SIR ISAAC PITMAN & SONS, LTD,
   Google Scholar
• Feaver, P D. 1996. “The Civil-Military Problematique: Huntington, Janowitz, and the Question of Civilian Control.” Armed forces and society 23 (2): 149–178. doi:10.1177/0095327X9602300203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher, John R. 2010. “Systems Theory and Structural Functionalism.” In 21st Century Political Science: A Reference Handbook, edited by Ishiyama, John T. and Marijke Breuning, 71–80. Los Angles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC: SAGE Publications Inc. doi:10.4135/9781412979351.N9.
   Google Scholar
• FM. 2014. “Commander and Staff Organization and Operations.” In Army Field Manual No. 6-0. 2016th. Washington DC: Headquarters, Department of the Army.
   Google Scholar
• FM 3-24. 2006. Counterinsurgency. Washington DC: Headquarters, Department of the Army.
   Google Scholar
• Gerras, Stephen J., and Leonard Wong. 2013. Changing Minds In The Army: Why It Is So Difficult and What to Do About It. Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College. https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep11266
   Google Scholar
• Hartley, Dean S. 2015. “DIME/PMESII Models.“ In Edited by Fellman, Philip Vos, Bar-Yam, Yaneer, Minai, Ali A. Conflict and Complexity, 111–136. New York, NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-1705-1_5.
   Google Scholar
• Henderson, B D. 1989. “The origin of strategy. What business owes Darwin and other reflections on competitive dynamics.” Harvard Business Review 67 (6): 139–143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hicks, Kathleen 2017. “Bad Idea: Arguing Over Capabilities- vs. Threat-Based Planning.” Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). December 4, 2017. https://defense360.csis.org/bad-idea-arguing-capabilities-vs-threat-based-planning/
   Google Scholar
• Hillson, R. 2009. “The DIME/PMESII Model Suite Requirements Project.” NRL Review 235–239. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA525056.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, F.G. 2014. “Grand Strategy: The Fundamental Considerations.” Orbis 58 (4): 472–485. doi:10.1016/J.ORBIS.2014.08.002.
   Google Scholar
• Howard, Michael. 2002. The Invention of Peace and the Reinvention of War. 2nd ed. London: Profile Books.
   Google Scholar
• Huntington, Samuel P. 1957. The Soldier and the State: The Theory and Politics of Civil-Military Relations. Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England: Harvard University Press. doi:10.2307/j.ctvjf9wx3.
   Google Scholar
• Janowitz, Morris. 1960. The Professional Soldier: A Social and Political Portrait. New York: Free Press. https://archive.org/details/professionalsold00janorich
   Google Scholar
• JDP 0-01. . 2014, “UK Defence Doctrine.” Joint Doctrine Publication 0-01. Swindon: The Ministry of Defence (MOD). Development Concepts and Doctrine Centre (DCDC) 5th
   Google Scholar
• Kegley, Charles W. 1993. “The Neoidealist Moment in International Studies? Realist Myths and the New International Realities.” International Studies Quarterly 37 (2): 131–146. doi:10.2307/2600765.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kegley, Charles W. 1995. “The Neoliberal Challenge to Realist Theories of World Politics: An Introduction.” In Controversies in International Relations Theory: Realism and the Neoliberal Challenge, edited by Kegley, Charles W., 1–24. New York: St Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Keman, Hans. 2016. “Systems theory: the search for a general theory of politics.“ In Edited by Keman, Hans, Woldendorp, Jaap. Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Political Science (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited). doi:10.4337/9781784710828.00013.
   Google Scholar
• Lowndes, Vivien. 2018. “Institutionalism.” In Theories and Methods in Political Science. 4th ed., edited by Lowndes, Vivien, David Marsh, and Gerry Stoker, 54–74. London: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Lukes, Steven. 1982. “Introduction.“ In Edited by Lukes, Steven. Translated by Halls, W.D. The Rules of Sociological Method by Émile Durkheim, 1–27. New York: The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lykke, Arthur F. 1989. “Defining Military Strategy.” Military Review 69 (5): 2–8.
   Google Scholar
• Lykke, Arthur F. 2001. “Toward an Understanding of Military Strategy”. In U.S. Army War College Guide to Strategy, edited by Cerami, Joseph R. and James F. Holcomb, 179–185. Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep11998.15
   Google Scholar
• Macionis, John J. 2018. Sociology. Global Edition. 16th ed. Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Mahnken, Thomas G. 2018. “Strategy.“ In Edited by Galbreath, David J., Deni, John R. Routledge Handbook Of Defence Studies, 2018, 136–146. Abingdon, Oxon: New York, NY: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315650463-12.
   Google Scholar
• Mattelaer, Alexander. 2018. “Rediscovering Geography in NATO Defence Planning.” Defence Studies 18 (3): 339–356. doi:10.1080/14702436.2018.1497446.
   Google Scholar
• Meiser, Jeffrey W. 2016. “Are Our Strategic Models Flawed?.” Parameters 46 (4): 81–92. https://publications.armywarcollege.edu/pubs/3298.pdf
   Google Scholar
• MOD, UK. 2017. Defence Wargaming Handbook. Swindon: The Ministry of Defence (MOD). Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centre (DCDC).
   Google Scholar
• MOD, UK. 2020. How Defence Works. 6th. London: The Ministry of Defence (MOD). The Directorate of Sponsorship and Organisational Policy (DSOP).
   Google Scholar
• NATO. 2014. “Wales Summit Declaration.” NATO Press Release. Issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Wales. Wales, UK. September 5, 2014. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_112964.htm
   Google Scholar
• North, Douglass C. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Paret, Peter. 1989. “Military Power.” The Journal of Military History 53 (3): 239. doi:10.2307/1985872.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pietrucha, Michael W. 2015. “Essay: Capability-Based Planning and the Death of Military Strategy.” USNI News, August 5, 2015. https://news.usni.org/2015/08/05/essay-capability-based-planning-and-the-death-of-military-strategy
   Google Scholar
• Popescu, Ionut C. 2018. “Grand Strategy vs. Emergent Strategy in the Conduct of Foreign Policy.” Journal of Strategic Studies 41 (3): 438–460. doi:10.1080/01402390.2017.1288109.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam, Robert D. 1988. “Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games.” International Organization 42 (3): 427–460. www.jstor.org/stable/2706785
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reiter, Dan. 2015. “Should We Leave Behind the Subfield of International Relations?.” Annual Review of Political Science 18 (1): 481–499. doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-053013-041156.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenberg, Justin. 2016. “International Relations in the Prison of Political Science.” International Relations 30 (2): 127–153. doi:10.1177/0047117816644662.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galbreath, David J, and John R. Deni, eds.2018. Routledge Handbook of Defence Studies, 1st. London: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315650463.
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, Olivier. 2018. “Defence As War.“ In Edited by Galbreath, David J., Deni, John R.Routledge Handbook Of Defence Studies, 2018, 18–28. Abingdon, Oxon: New York, NY: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315650463-3.
   Google Scholar
• Sciulli, David, and Dean Gerstein. 1985. “Social Theory and Talcott Parsons in the 1980s.” Annual Review of Sociology 11: 369–387. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2083299
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephan De, Spiegeleire. 2011. “Ten Trends in Capability Planning for Defence and Security.” The RUSI Journal 156 (5): 20–28. doi:10.1080/03071847.2011.626270.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, Trevor. 2018. “Defence As Policy.“ In Edited by Galbreath, David J., Deni, John R.Routledge Handbook Of Defence Studies, 2018, 5–17. Abingdon, Oxon: New York, NY: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315650463-2.
   Google Scholar
• Lowndes, Vivien, David Marsh, and Gerry Stoker, eds. 2018. Theories and Methods in Political Science. 4th ed. London: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Marsh, David, and Gerry Stoker, eds. 2010. Theory and Methods in Political Science. Third Edition. 3rd ed. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Cerami, Joseph R, and James F Holcomb, eds. 2001. U.S. Army War College Guide to Strategy. Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College. https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep11998
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff. 2012. “Capstone Concept for Joint Operations - Joint Force 2020.” https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=723511
   Google Scholar
• Vanderstraeten, Raf. 2012. “Talcott Parsons and the Enigma of Secularization.” European Journal of Social Theory 16 (1): 69–84. doi:10.1177/1368431012449236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vincent, Joan. 2015. “Functionalism in Anthropology.” In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences 2nd ed., edited by Wright, James D., 532–535. Amsterdam: Elsevier. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.12077-X.
   Google Scholar
• Waltz, Kenneth Neal.2001.Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis.New York: Columbia University Press. First printed in 1954.
   Google Scholar
• Weber, Cynthia. 2021. International Relations Theory: A Critical Introduction. 5th ed. London and New York: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781003008644.
   Google Scholar
• Zweibelson, Ben. 2015. “An Awkward Tango: Pairing Traditional Military Planning to Design and Why It Currently Fails to Work.” Journal of Military and Strategic Studies 16 (1): 11–41. https://jmss.org/article/view/58153
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar