Also this week we focus on main global crises, devoting a specific attention to the NATO Summit in Wales.
Steven Saideman highlights an alternative view regarding NATO and the “burden sharing problem”. Despite NATO countries do not spend equally on defense, the military operation in Afghanistan reveals the significant contribution provided by Canadians and Europeans (and yes, ISAF doesn’t’ stand for “I Saw Americans Fight”). In addition, the post is “a reaction to the ideas that the allies are completely flaky and that the US is engaged in Europe due to its charitable nature”.
On NATO summit we also suggest the analysis by Professor Michael Clark, who illustrates future challenges and tasks. The emergence of a “new NATO” is the main issue at the stake. Forthcoming events in Ukraine will represent the first hard test for assessing the effective development of a “new” structure. In the meanwhile, here you can find a fact sheet of the Wales Summit.
ISIS (or IS or ISIL) has been seriously harmed by the US airstrikes. However, global media have probably underestimated the role played by the Syrian Kurds (YPG) as well as by the PKK forces in the fight against ISIS. Here you find a recent account.
The National Interest reviews the controversial debate over the F35. Several key arguments (pro et contra the acquisition) are reported. Among them, the impact of the China’s investment in anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) capabilities on a short range tactical fighter like the JSF is something that deserves attention.
Finally, James Johnson illustrates a very important and complex issue: the economics of reclining the airplane seat (a major source of problems and even clashes for travellers). Transaction costs, property rights and externalization can help but they don’t solve the problem. Therefore, further analyses are required…