دانلود کتاب قدرت و مشارکت، استراتژی و اخلاق در همکاری‌های دفاعی

The Trump Administration’s “America First” approach to national security has been roundly criticized for isolating the United States from what strategists have long recognized as one of its most significant sources of strength: its robust global network of allies and partners. Trump has reneged on enduring international commitments, denuded budgets for foreign assistance and cooperation across the US government, and torn down institutional infrastructure aimed at effective aid delivery. Yet, for all the talk about Trump’s go-it-alone approach, his Administration has been characterized more by consistency than disruption in one key area of assistance: cooperation with foreign defense establishments. Budgets for military assistance have remained robust; in fact, the Trump Administration has even proposed increases in military assistance in several major programs. The 2026 U.S. National Defense Strategy—even while criticizing allies and partners for their dependence on the U.S. security umbrella—recognizes that these nations must play vital roles in defending U.S. interests around the world. And the Administration has sought to improve and expedite bureaucratic machinery underpinning arms trade with foreign militaries. This sustained support for military assistance highlights the enduring faith of politicians, military commanders, and defense leaders in the ability of defense cooperation to deliver strategic results. Unfortunately, the track record of military assistance carried out by the U.S. and many other nations suggests that this faith may be misplaced. Too often, the expensive, risky, ambitious military assistance initiatives undertaken by a wide array of leading militaries—in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Niger, Mali, Syria and Somalia—have landed somewhere between indeterminate mire and spectacular failure. Less ambitious efforts may avoid such risks but often fail to achieve transformative outcomes. Demonstrable success is rare and often difficult to explain. Decisions to go to war, to build new weapons systems, or carry out high-risk operations often grab the headlines, but for most high-end militaries those activities are uncommon in comparison to the day-today engagement with allies and partners around the world on a wide variety of military assistance activities. Like it or not, these cooperative activities have become the most visible and persistent way in which the U.S. military engages with the world. These activities can set the stage for victory in military operations, helping to enable coalition interoperability, refine operational concepts and tactics, and establish new warfighting capabilities. Too often, however, they have failed to deliver and, more troublingly, we have seen that they can exacerbate regional tensions, undermine civilian governance, and degrade civilian security. The primary argument of this book is that this track record comes largely because assistance initiatives are too rarely guided by good strategies. It offers new strategic and ethical frameworks to guide policymakers, planners, and academicians as they seek to navigate defense cooperation and improve outcomes. Here’s why this matters: more countries are engaged in a more diverse range of military cooperation than ever before. As militaries in places like India, Japan, Korea, Turkey, and many Arabian Gulf states mature, they increasingly turn to defense cooperation to shape their spheres of interest. Even less developed defense establishments are seeking to grow domestic defense industries, and defense cooperation has become a way to both support fledgling manufacturers and expand overseas markets. And the rise of proxy warfare as a dominant foreign policy strategy in the twenty-first century has spurred dozens of nations toward indirect intervention to shape conflict outcomes or counterbalance rival influences. Indeed, external military assistance has played an important role in every global conflict of the twenty-first Century so far, and there is no doubt it will continue to do so. As an ever-growing group of nations looks to defense cooperation to deliver stability, security, and competitive advantage, there are opportunities for successful assistance programs to help solve problems in new ways, without violence. But the opposite is also true: if greater attention is not paid to the strategies, concepts, and tools necessary to generate successful outcomes, frustration in failure can lead to misguided and lawless alternatives. In a dynamic, multi-polar twenty-_irst century security environment, getting defense cooperation right is both imperative and urgent