Strategika

Subscribe to receive Strategika. Subscribe »

Monday, June 25, 2018

Issue 51

Nuclear Proliferation
Background Essay
Background Essay

Should More Nations Have Nukes?

by Gordon G. Changvia Strategika
Monday, June 25, 2018

There is only one weapon that poses an existential threat to the United States, so why should America want other nations to possess it? The simple answer is that Washington’s nonproliferation policy, which once slowed the spread of nuclear weapons, now looks to be on the verge of collapse. 

Featured Commentary
Featured Commentary

A Bigger Arsenal for a Lasting Peace

by Thomas Donnellyvia Strategika
Monday, June 25, 2018

Where is Stanley Kubrick when you need him? With Donald Trump withdrawing from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (aka “the Iran deal”), playing summit footsie with Kim Jong Un and scoping out a vigorous modernization of the aging U.S. nuclear force, the abyssopelagic layer of the Deep State has taken on new life with warnings of the approaching apocalypse.

Featured Commentary

Beware Greeks Bearing Gifts: Strategic Competition And The North Korea Talks

by Thomas Karakovia Strategika
Monday, June 25, 2018

The United States has long been committed to stemming the further proliferation of nuclear weapons among both potential adversaries and friends alike. As the recent Nuclear Posture Review observes, “nuclear non-proliferation today faces acute challenges.” The current locus of this challenge is in northeast Asia.

E.g., 6 / 26 / 2018
E.g., 6 / 26 / 2018
Monday, November 10, 2014

Issue 19

What is the likely trajectory of Chinese-Japanese tensions and how will the United States be affected?

Background Essay

by Miles Maochun Yu Monday, November 10, 2014
article

Featured Commentary

by Angelo M. Codevilla Monday, November 10, 2014
article
by Mark Moyar Monday, November 10, 2014
article

Related Commentary

by Angelo M. Codevilla Monday, November 10, 2014
article
by Miles Maochun Yu Monday, November 10, 2014
article
Monday, September 1, 2014

Issue 18

Is there a military solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

Background Essay

by Andrew Roberts Monday, September 1, 2014
article

Featured Commentary

by Thomas H. Henriksen Monday, September 1, 2014
article
by Kori Schake Monday, September 1, 2014
article

Related Commentary

by Peter Berkowitz Tuesday, September 16, 2014
article
by Peter Berkowitz Wednesday, August 6, 2014
article
by Victor Davis Hanson Thursday, September 11, 2014
article
by Victor Davis Hanson Wednesday, August 20, 2014
article
by Victor Davis Hanson Tuesday, August 5, 2014
article
by Victor Davis Hanson Tuesday, July 29, 2014
article
by Edward N. Luttwak Sunday, July 20, 2014
article
by Bruce Thornton Monday, July 21, 2014
article
by Bruce Thornton Tuesday, April 8, 2014
article
Poster Collection, US 4642, Hoover Institution Archives.
Tuesday, July 1, 2014

Issue 16

What will be the immediate strategic repercussions, if any, of the scheduled radical pruning of the size of the American military?

Pages

Explore Research

Filter By:

Topic

Type

Author

Section

Enter comma-separated IDs of authors
Enter comma-separated IDs of contributors

Support the Hoover Institution

Join the Hoover Institution's community of supporters in advancing ideas defining a free society.

Support Hoover

Related Commentary

Snake Charmers and Snake Killers

by Andrew Robertsvia Strategika
Wednesday, September 21, 2016

The immediate result of an Israeli strike—assuming it were successful in destroying or at least very significantly degrading the Iranian nuclear program—would be a collective exhalation of breath across the Middle East and Europe. One of WikiLeaks’ most telling revelations came when the King of Saudi Arabia was heard urging the Americans “to cut off the head of the snake,” and if the Israelis undertook the identical action the Sunni Arab leadership would be cock-a-hoop with pleasure and relief (while of course publicly reserving the right to denounce Israel for aggression and war-mongering).

Background Essay

The US, Iran, And Israel

by Edward N. Luttwak via Strategika
Wednesday, September 21, 2016

The disagreement with Israel over Iran’s nuclear endeavors long pre-dated the “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action of July 14, 2015,” which the White House prefers to call “The Historic Deal that Will Prevent Iran from Acquiring a Nuclear Weapon”, but which should really be called Barjam, the Farsi acronym that is entering local parlance for any big deal.

Related Commentary

Israeli Jab, American Knockout

by Ralph Petersvia Strategika
Wednesday, September 21, 2016

The challenge for Israel in responding militarily to Iran’s nuclear weapons program is that Israel has the capacity to start a conflict, but not to conclude it (save through the use of its own nuclear arms—an unlikely scenario, for now). Israeli airpower and missile forces could frustrate Tehran’s ambitions for a period of a few and perhaps several years, but it would prove a Pyrrhic victory, given Iran’s inevitable response.

Related Commentary

Increasingly Isolated, Israel Must Rely On Nuclear Deterrence

by Josef Joffevia Strategika
Wednesday, September 21, 2016

Five years ago, Jeffrey Goldenberg published “The Point of No Return” in The Atlantic. In 10,000 words, he laid out the pressing rationale for an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. Like many such pieces, it prompted this author to formulate a law: “The U.S. can do it, but won’t; Israel wants to, but can’t.”

Related Commentary

The Ripple Effects of An Israeli Preemptive Strike

by Peter Berkowitzvia Strategika
Wednesday, September 21, 2016

An Israeli preemptive strike on Iranian nuclear facilities is fraught with immediate and long-term ramifications.

Strategika: "Terrorism, In Perspective,” With Williamson Murray

interview with Williamson Murrayvia Strategika
Wednesday, September 7, 2016
While America hasn’t seen another attack on the scale of 9/11, the possibility of a devastating terrorist strike remains.

Strategika: "The Legacy of 9/11," with Peter Mansoor

interview with Peter R. Mansoorvia Strategika
Wednesday, September 7, 2016

Fifteen years later, how have the September 11 attacks shaped the West's response to the threat of terrorism.

Strategika: “Underestimating Our Enemies,” With Ralph Peters

interview with Ralph Petersvia Strategika
Wednesday, September 7, 2016

How the foreign policy establishment systematically misunderstands the threat from jihadism.

Related Commentary

Terrorism From Within

by Angelo M. Codevillavia Strategika
Monday, August 15, 2016

On September 11, 2001, specifically the moment passengers on UA93 learned that three other hijacked liners had been crashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the U.S. forever ceased to be vulnerable to such hijackings. Never again would passengers follow the FAA’s regulation not to interfere with hijackers. Not ISIS or anyone else can change that.

Featured Commentary

Terrorism At Home And Abroad

by Williamson Murrayvia Strategika
Monday, August 15, 2016

Despite the enthusiasm of those media purveyors of horror stories about potential terrorist threats that could match the events of 9/11, it is unlikely, at least for the short term, that ISIS is capable of matching al-Qaeda’s bloody success. That said, there are innumerable ways in which its leaders will attempt to create mayhem, disorder, and paranoia in the developed world and the United States in particular. 

Pages


The Working Group on the Role of Military History in Contemporary Conflict strives to reaffirm the Hoover Institution's dedication to historical research in light of contemporary challenges, and in particular, reinvigorating the national study of military history as an asset to foster and enhance our national security. Read more.

Is there a military solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

Stay Up To Date!

Be notified when an new issue is available.

Subscriptions »

RSS Feed Subscription

subscribe and listen on iTunes

Strategika is an online journal that analyzes ongoing issues of national security in light of conflicts of the past—the efforts of the Military History Working Group of historians, analysts, and military personnel focusing on military history and contemporary conflict.

Our board of scholars shares no ideological consensus other than a general acknowledgment that human nature is largely unchanging. Consequently, the study of past wars can offer us tragic guidance about present conflicts—a preferable approach to the more popular therapeutic assumption that contemporary efforts to ensure the perfectibility of mankind eventually will lead to eternal peace. New technologies, methodologies, and protocols come and go; the larger tactical and strategic assumptions that guide them remain mostly the same—a fact discernable only through the study of history.

To stay up to date when new issues are released, sign up here to be notified when a new Strategika is available.

Subscriptions »

 

The opinions expressed in Strategika are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Hoover Institution or Stanford University.