[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page
Re: Security Policy in SEA
There should at least be a security policy resolution on the ballot of
resolution for a diversity. Eric brings up the issue of U.S. force
deployment. When was the last time a topic included forward deployment of
U.S. troops. The security assistance topic was limited to "observer and
monitoring forces" contextually. For example, the Golan Heights troop
brigade was only a peacekeeping operation, which is quite distinct from
U.S. military presence. Is it worth looking into forward deployment as a
part of a resolution?
On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Erik Cornellier wrote:
> There have been rumblings concerning whether security poicy would be a good
> area for topic limitation. Some have asserted that the US military posture
> in the region is not very important, and that the literature base would be
> sparse.
>
> In everything that I have read since the topic area has been released, the
> importance of the presence of the US military in the region has been
> stressed. I find it interesting that in the first four books that I have
> perused, each had something to say about this issue.
>
> I don't know if it is the best area for debate on this topic, but it
> certainly isn't unimportant in the region as some have claimed. I believe
> that US security policy in Southeast Asia could has vast potential as an
> action limitation. It should at least be considered in any resolution that
> allows multiple foreign policy choices (ie... one or more of the following:
> security policy, trade policy, human rights policy...you get my drift).
>
>
> erik
>
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Andrew Geppert
Wake Forest University
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
References:
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page