Join us this Sunday, 9 December at 5pm Eastern U.S. for Episode 153: NATO and the Challenge of Relevance :

From the conflicts that came following the break-up of Yugoslavia, a decade in Afghanistan, land and sea-based ballistic missile defense, Libya, and now Patriot missiles deployed to the Turkish-Syrian border, NATO continues to test what kind of alliance it is after the fall of the Soviet Union roughly a quarter-century ago.

Where does the alliance stand, and what direction is it going? Are the roles of the member states changing? Where is the alliance strongest, and where does it need the most improvement?

Our returning guest for the full hour to discuss this and more will be Dr. Daniel Goure, is Vice President with the Lexington Institute.

Dr Goure has held senior positions in both the private sector and the U.S. Government, as a member of the 2001 Department of Defense Transition Team, two years as the director of the Office of Strategic Competitiveness in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, as a senior analyst on national security and defense issues with the Center for Naval Analyses, SAIC, SRS Technologies, R&D Associates, and System Planning Corporation.

Prior to joining the Lexington Institute, Dr. Goure was the Deputy Director, International Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

He has consulted for the Departments of State, Defense and Energy. He has taught or lectured at the Johns Hopkins University, the Foreign Service Institute, the National War College, the Naval War College, the Air War College, and the Inter-American Defense College. Since 2001, Dr. Goure has been an adjunct professor in graduate programs at Georgetown University, and the National Defense University since 2002.

Dr. Goure holds Masters and Ph.D. degrees in international relations and Russian Studies from Johns Hopkins University and a B.A. in Government and History from Pomona College.

If you can’t make the show, listen later on iTunes or at BlogTalkRadio.

Posted by Mark Tempest in Podcasts

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

  • RightCowLeftCoast

    Another good program. It is unfortunate that NATO as a whole has become overeliant on American capabilities. Unfortunately, the defense spending minimums have been treated by many member nations as spending maximums. I have to wonder if NATO can field an independent and capable Army Corps if they needed to; but like that really matters, many member nations have shown a relunctance to actually use their forces for their intended purpose (to fight). For instance look at many member nations forces in Afghanistan, where the international force has unfortunatly been called “I Saw Americans Fighting”.
    Makes me wonder if NATO naval forces could field self-sustaining (including organic long range UNREP) Carrier Task Force.
    Perhaps SHAPE should begin long-term planning that will create a roadmap for NATO capability growth. Say at minimum each nation member nation needs to field an independent Brigade Combat Team for five million persons. That shouldn’t be to much to ask.