Improving the diversity and inclusion of a military can enhance cohesion & resiliency, thereby improving battlefield performance. @jaylyall_red5 wrote a whole book on the topic.
This seems like an area where the US could gain "soft power" advantage to complement & enhance the "hard power" provided by the US military. wilsoncenter.org/publication/so…
4) Understanding the Cold War's End.
Building on #3, during the Cold War, the US EVENTUALLY sided itself with movements seeking racial equality at home & abroad. @marydudziak's book shows how and why. amazon.com/dp/B006QNPIAC/…
Building up legitimacy (i.e. soft power) was a key reason the US was able to "win" the Cold War without direct major military confrontation with the USSR.
In his 1968 "Beyond Vietnam" speech, Martin Luther King Jr explained how maintaining domestic support for the military's mission required improving race relations at home.
Understanding the reasons for the demographic makeup of the US military seems critical to improving recruitment, as discussed in this @CNASdc report cnas.org/publications/c…
7) Improve Mobilization.
The US highway system came about in large part over concerns about domestic transportation & evacuation. There is a reason it is now officially called the "Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and DEFENSE Highways"
But US highways are not always constructed in the manner optimal for achieving those aims. Too frequently, racially motivated policies led to the suboptimal design of the highways, especially in and around major cities. See @ClaytonNall's book.
During much of the 19th century, the US military was largely used for "imperial policing" against Native American nations. To see how racism both fed into this policy, see @richardmaass book.
Military "hard" power is a (the) key instrument of international politics. If you are in the military, you should have an understanding of international politics.
Well, guess what is a central feature of international politics? Race. An outstanding summation was offered last year in @ForeignPolicy by @kelly_zvobgo & @meredithloken
In sum, there are actual war fighting, national security, and good citizenship reasons that US military officers should learn about the role of race in the history and policies of the United States.
[END]
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
When you hear "Liberal International Order", just think "the G-7, for better and for worse"
[THREAD]
While some scholars and policy makers like to speak of the "Liberal International Order" as the collection of post-World War II international institutions.... cambridge.org/core/journals/…
...the phrase itself is much more recent in origins, largely a product of the mid-1990s.
As I wrote in my latest for @WPReview, shifting patterns in population growth will inevitably influence international politics. worldpoliticsreview.com/global-demogra…
This isn't a new idea. It's one found in classic works on change in world politics.
I pointed out the difficulties in answering that question, namely that we don't actually know when deterrence works (i.e. selection bias)... tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.108…
R2P is "the responsibility to protect its populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity". This means nations can't hide behind the barrier of "sovereignty" to stop interventions.