527 Olivier Urrutia The role of Think Tanks in the definition and application of defence policies and strategies as the worsening of counterinsurgency acts; all of these elements lead to a questioning of the traditional strategies of military intervention. We see, on the one hand, the situation in the United States and Spain where austerity policies lead to passionate debates on defence spending, rocking the boat in the arena of the drastic cuts that imply a redefinition of the concept of defence. In France, on the other hand, where the defence budget is maintained or increased, there is a serious debate centred on a strategic reform to decide which option to choose (NATO, EU or alone). Let us analyse in broad terms the current situation in the United States in order to stress the relationship between think tanks and defence policy. Within the context of the intense debate between Republicans and Democrats on the annual federal budget, we can see that there has been a threat of cuts to the defence budget since 2011. The focus seems to be on the argument of welfare versus warfare. The main think tanks in the United States (Brookings, Heritage, AEI, CFR) defend an ambitious defence policy upon which economic and security policies depend.46 There is broad consensus among think tanks regarding the need to maintain or increase the defence budget. The risks related to cuts are considered to be: sending out a sign of weakness to hostile regimes, running the risk of losing the military technological advantage, authorising attacks on US strategic interests, and losing leadership at a global level. For soft power and soft law to be effective, most experts are of the opinion that there must also be an existent hard power. For conservative and liberal think tanks alike, the roots of the Pax Americana are to be found in it being a military hyperpower. The recent creation of the Institute for the Study of War47 is the most direct example of the strategic potential of an advocacy tank in this case. The initiative was taken in response to the 2007 stagnation in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. A group of companies from the military sector make up the core founders and donors of the ISW, which deploys an aggressive strategy reminiscent of the defunct PNAC: • Direct links with political leaders thanks to the make-up of the board • Storytelling practices, producing, for example, the Surge: the untold story, a feature documentary on the importance of increasing the dispatch of troops to Iraq • Use of all possible communication techniques: rhetoric, slogans • Conferences and events attended by high-ranking politicians and military leaders 46 URRUTIA, Olivier, Les think tanks américains face à la crise: Dette, Leadership et Défense, L’Observatoire des think tanks, 7/10/2011 47 The Institute for the Study of War is a clone of the PNAC. For access to information on its foun-ders & donors, details of its activities, and the budget of the think tank, see the Institute for Policy Studies’ blog under: http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/institute_for_the_study_of_war
REVISTA IEEE 2
To see the actual publication please follow the link above