Andere Kunden interessierten sich auch für
![Who Cares about the Global War on Terror? a Study of Compulsory Service and America's Attitude Toward the War]( "Who Cares about the Global War on Terror? a Study of Compulsory Service and America's Attitude Toward the War")
Who Cares about the Global War on Terror? a Study of Compulsory Service and America's Attitude Toward the War60,99 €![The Interagency Process and America's Second Front in The Global War on Terrorism]( "The Interagency Process and America's Second Front in The Global War on Terrorism")
The Interagency Process and America's Second Front in The Global War on Terrorism60,99 €![Pakistan's Tribal Lands: Central Front in the War against the Global Islamist Insurgency]( "Pakistan's Tribal Lands: Central Front in the War against the Global Islamist Insurgency")
Pakistan's Tribal Lands: Central Front in the War against the Global Islamist Insurgency60,99 €![Terrorism and Counterterrorism in Western Europe: Implications for U.S. Strategy in the Global War on Terror]( "Terrorism and Counterterrorism in Western Europe: Implications for U.S. Strategy in the Global War on Terror")
Terrorism and Counterterrorism in Western Europe: Implications for U.S. Strategy in the Global War on Terror60,99 €![NATO-Russia Relations: A Critical Partnership in Us National Security Strategy in the Global War on Terror]( "NATO-Russia Relations: A Critical Partnership in Us National Security Strategy in the Global War on Terror")
NATO-Russia Relations: A Critical Partnership in Us National Security Strategy in the Global War on Terror60,99 €![Oddity of Waging War on a Tactic: Reframing the Global War on Terror as a Global Counterinsurgency]( "Oddity of Waging War on a Tactic: Reframing the Global War on Terror as a Global Counterinsurgency")
Oddity of Waging War on a Tactic: Reframing the Global War on Terror as a Global Counterinsurgency60,99 €![Resurrecting NSC-68 for the Global War on Terror]( "Resurrecting NSC-68 for the Global War on Terror")
Resurrecting NSC-68 for the Global War on Terror60,99 €
This paper, which was prepared using a historical research methodology, argues that the U.S. is losing the "war of ideas," and it provides recommendations that can support a comeback. The importance of the U.S. Department of State in the global war on terror is briefly introduced; as the lead agency for strategic communications in the war of ideas, it is distinguished from the U.S. Department of Defense, which leads the physical struggle. To develop a sense of urgency in resolving the State Department's subsequently outlined problems, the argument is made that the ideological struggle is strategic in nature, as it can target the underlying source of terrorism. Key statements made by U.S. spokespeople are reviewed to identify the State Department's communications strategy. Polling data is then reviewed to demonstrate the Department's performance. The lackluster track record in the war of ideas is linked to three problem areas: resources, organization, and strategy. Each problem area has contributed to a precariously weak wartime posture. Recommendations that can help resolve these issues include: a study to better determine the enemy's propaganda expenditures; an approximate three-fold increase in resources (funding and personnel) for State's public diplomacy activities; an organizational architecture that provides unity of command, centralized control, decentralized execution, interagency coordination, and implicit communications across the chain of command; and the development of a new communications strategy that aims more directly at the underlying source or cause of terrorism.