The burdensharing debate
Subtitle: a reassessment
By: Simon Duke.
Publisher: St. Martin's Press
Published: 1993
Place of publication: New York
Language: eng
Number of pages: 277
Subjects: North Atlantic Treaty Organization -- Armed Forces -- Finance.; United States -- Armed Forces -- Appropriations and expenditures.; Europe -- Armed Forces -- Appropriations and expenditures.; United States -- Military relations -- Europe.; Europe -- Military relations -- United States.
Description: Burdensharing is an attempt to reallocate defense expenditure within the framework of an alliance. This attempt has become known in NATO as the "burdensharing" debate. Much of the popularity of the burdensharing debate lies in its presentation of various statistics which, allegedly, proved that one partner (the United States) was assuming a disproportionate share of the common defense burden. This book does not aim to prove, or disprove, that one country carries an unfair burden but it does aim to examine critically the methodologies employed in the debate since the early 1950s. Important lessons for alliance management have been identified and these lessons are more often than not applicable to other geographical areas where the United States and her allies are involved. At a time of transition in Atlantic/European relations it is important that the lessons of the burdensharing debate are understood. Whatever revised, or new, security organization emerges as a result of the monumental changes in Europe and elsewhere, the question of who should pay, and how much, will return. The Burdensharing Debate: A Reassessment also provides an important contribution to the history of NATO and presents to the reader, in a clear and lucid fashion, the complexities of a highly divisive debate.
Notes: Includes bibliographical references (p. 262-270) and index.