The Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986 is the most important legislation affecting U.S. national defense in the last 50 years. This act resulted from frustration in Congress and among certain military officers concerning what they believed to be the poor quality of...

The Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986 is the most important legislation affecting U.S. national defense in the last 50 years. This act resulted from frustration in Congress and among certain military officers concerning what they believed to be the poor quality of military advice available to civilian decision-makers. It also derived from the U.S. military's perceived inability to conduct successful "joint" or multi-service operations. The Act, passed after four years of legislative debate, designated the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as the principal military advisor to the President and sought to foster greater cooperation among the military services. Goldwater-Nichols marks the latest attempt to balance competing tendencies within the Department of Defense, namely centralization versus decentralization and geographic versus functional distributions of power.

Zegart (policy studies, School of Public Policy and Social Research at UCLA) challenges the belief that national security agencies are well designed to serve the national interest. Using a new institutionalist approach, she asks what forces shaped the design of the CIA, the Joint Chiefs of Staff...

Zegart (policy studies, School of Public Policy and Social Research at UCLA) challenges the belief that national security agencies are well designed to serve the national interest. Using a new institutionalist approach, she asks what forces shaped the design of the CIA, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the National Security Council. She finds that blame can be ascribed to features of American democracy which limit presidential power and give Congress little incentive to create an effective foreign policy system.

Will current strategic planning give the United States the sort of military capabilities needed to counter threats likely in the future? Using first-hand experience at the Pentagon and an Army background, Lieutenant Colonel Peters outlines serious problems, offers fresh insights into the defense...

Will current strategic planning give the United States the sort of military capabilities needed to counter threats likely in the future? Using first-hand experience at the Pentagon and an Army background, Lieutenant Colonel Peters outlines serious problems, offers fresh insights into the defense planning process, surveys the global security environment in this post-Cold War era, and makes suggestions for developing an optimal force structure for the year 2000. This risk and consequences assessment, alongside case studies of the Gulf War and other situations, shows the inner workings of the Defense Department and departs from recent literature on military reform.