The White House released its latest national strategy document today.
or as a PDF athttp://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/infosharing/NSIS_book.pdf
The Factsheet is available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/10/20071031-10.html
The White House released its latest national strategy document today.
or as a PDF athttp://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/infosharing/NSIS_book.pdf
The Factsheet is available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/10/20071031-10.html
The report on Mission Impact of Foreign Influence on DoD Software can be found at
http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/2007-09-Mission_Impact_of_Foreign_Influence_on_DoD_Software.pdf
According to the memorandum of endorsement by Dr. Schneider, this report
"was established to complement the 2005 DSB study on High Performance
Microchip Supply which focused on the implications of semiconductor
fabrication in foreign countries. The task force found that the DoD
faces similar consequences from the possible exploitation of software,
increasingly developed outside of the United States, it its systems."
The 2005 report can be found at
http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/2005-02-HPMS_Report_Final.pdf
These and other DSB reports can be found at http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports.htm
American Enterprise Institute (AEI)
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Center for Defense Information (CDI)
Centre for Military and Strategic Studies (CMSS) and the Institute of World Affairs (IWA)
Center for Security Policy
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Congress. House. Oversight Committee. National Security and Foreign Affairs Subcommittee.
Congressional Budget Office (CBO)
Foreign Policy Institute
Government Accountability Office (GAO)
Heritage Foundation
Human Rights Watch
Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS)
International Crisis Group
Iraqanalysis.org
Jamestown Foundation
Lexington Institute
Rand
Strategic Studies Institute
United Nations Assistance Mission to Afghanistan
United States Institute of Peace (USIP)
Washington Institute for Near East Policy
As reported in the news this morning, here's the link to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report on the estimated costs of the war so far. This is from the testimony of CBO Director Peter Orszag submitted to the House Committee on the Budget.
Testimony on Estimated Costs of
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdoc.cfm?index=8690&type=1
Items of Interest
American Enterprise Institute (AEI)
Amnesty International
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Center for Security Policy
Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA)
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Congressional Budget Office (CBO)
Government Accountability Office (GAO)
Heritage Foundation
Human Right Watch
International Crisis Group (ICG)
Jamestown Foundation
Office of the Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR)
Rand
Reform Institute
Strategic Studies Institute (Army War College)
US Navy
Washington Institute for Near East Policy
White House
It can be found at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/10/20071018-10.html
100 Day Plan Follow-up
http://dni.gov/100-day-plan/100_FOLLOW_UP_REPORT.pdf
Items of Interest
Amnesty International
BASIC (British American Security Information Council)
Brookings Institution
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Center for American Progress (CAP)
Center for Defense Information (CDI)
James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies (MIIS CNS)
Center for Security Policy
Combating Terrorism Center (USMA)
Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS)
Government Accounting Office (GAO)
Heritage Foundation
Hudson Institute
Human Rights Watch
Federation of International Red Cross & Red Crescent Societies’ Operational Update
International Crisis Group
Lexington Institute
Oxfam International & the International Action Network on Small Arms
Rand
Strategic Studies Institute (Army War College)
United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq
UN Development Programme
UN High Commissioner on Refugees
Veteran's Disability Benefits Commission
Washington Institute for Near East Policy
White House
The PDF of the full report is available at
http://www.vetscommission.org/pdf/eReport_prepub_9-27.pdf
The executive summary is available at http://www.vetscommission.org/pdf/ExecutiveSummary_eV_9-27.pdf
The related documents are avaialble at
https://www.1888932-2946.ws/vetscommission/e-documentmanager/displaycontent.asp?categoryid=5D
Excerpt from the Exec Summary:
The Veterans' Disability Benefits Commission was established by Public Law 108-136, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2004. Between May 2005 and October 2007, the Commission conducted an in-depth analysis of the benefits and services available to veterans, service members, their survivors, and their families to compensate and provide assistance for the effects of disabilities and deaths attributable to military service. The Department of Veterans Affairs expended $40.5 billion on the wide array of these benefits and services in fiscal year 2006. The Commission addressed the appropriateness and purpose of benefits, benefit levels and payment rates, and the processes and procedures used to determine eligibility. The Commission reviewed past studies on these subjects, the legislative history of the benefit
programs, and related issues that have been debated repeatedly over many decades.
The Commission identified eight principles for guiding the development and delivery of future benefits for veterans and their families.
1. Benefits should recognize the often enormous sacrifices of military service as a continuing cost of war, and commend military service as the highest obligation of citizenship.
2. The goal of disability benefits should be rehabilitation and reintegration into civilian life to the maximum extent possible and preservation of the veterans' dignity.
3. Benefits should be uniformly based on severity of service-connected disability without regard to the circumstances of the disability (wartime v. peacetime, combat v. training, or geographical
location.)
4. Benefits and services should be provided that collectively compensate for the consequence of service-connected disability on the average impairment of earnings capacity, the ability to engage in usual life activities, and quality of life.
5. Benefits and standards for determining benefits should be updated or adapted frequently based on changes in the economic and social impact of disability and impairment, advances in medical knowledge and technology, and the evolving nature of warfare and military service.
6. Benefits should include access to a full range of health care provided at no cost to service-disabled veterans. Priority for care must be based on service connection and degree of disability.
7. Funding and resources to adequately meet the needs of service-disabled veterans and their families must be fully provided while being aware of the burden on current and future generations.
8. Benefits to our nation's service-disabled veterans must be delivered in a consistent, fair, equitable, and timely manner.
Given the latest news and hearings, these might be of some interest. Several House Oversight Committee reports were released in the last couple of days.
“Blackwater
http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1509
“Additional Information about Blackwater
http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20071001121609.pdf
“Private Military Contractors in
http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20070927104643.pdf
“War Profiteering and Other Contractor Crimes Committed Overseas.” House. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. June 19, 2007
http://judiciary.house.gov/oversight.aspx?ID=338
“Iraqi Reconstruction: Reliance on Private Military Contractors “ House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Hearing – Feb 7, 2007 [includes links to the video of the hearing, witness statements, and more]
http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1165
Various letters to and from the Committee, the State Dept and Blackwater
http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1497
CPA Memorandum 17 – Registration Requirements for Private Security Companies (PSC) with Annexes including Annex A- Rules for the Use of Force by Contractors in
“Abuses in Private Security and Reconstruction Contracting in
http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/dpc-hearing.cfm?A=40
Selected other sources:
“The Private Military Firms: Historical Evolution and Industry Analysis.” NPS thesis. June 2007.
http://bosun.nps.edu/uhtbin/hyperion-image.exe/07Jun_Alabarda_MBA.pdf
“Analysis of Security Contractors in Deployed Environments.” NPS Thesis. December 2006
http://bosun.nps.edu/uhtbin/hyperion-image.exe/06Dec_Herron_MBA.pdf
“A Critical Analysis of the Coordination, Command and Control of Contractors in
http://bosun.nps.edu/uhtbin/hyperion-image.exe/06Dec_Butkus_MBA.pdf
“Outsourcing Small Wars: Expanding the Role of Private Military Companies in
http://bosun.nps.edu/uhtbin/hyperion-image.exe/05Sep_Jorgensen.pdf
“Rebuilding
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05737.pdf
“Private Security Contractors in
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32419.pdf
DCAF Backgrounder “Private Military Companies” April 2004
http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/files/portal/issueareas/security/security_pdf/2006_DCAF.pdf
“The Private Military Industry and
http://www.dcaf.ch/_docs/pp04_private-military.pdf
“Phasing Out Private Security Contractors in
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/ksil520.pdf
“Private Security Contractors on the Battlefield.” USAWC Strategy Research Project. March 2006
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/ksil320.pdf
“Operational Implications of Private Military Companies in the Global War on Terror. Army Command and
http://stinet.dtic.mil/dticrev/PDFs/ADA436294.pdf
“Public War, Private Fight? The United States and Private Military Companies” Global War on Terrorism Occasional Paper no. 12. Fort Leavenworth Combat Studies Institute. 2005
http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/download/csipubs/kidwell.pdf