The bipartisan commission, facilitated by USIP from 2008-2009, was tasked by Congress to "examine and make recommendations with respect to the long-term strategic posture of the United States."  The Commission issued its final report to Congress on May 6, 2009.

 

Quick Facts About the Commission 

  • The Commission consisted of twelve members nominated by Congress - 3 Democrats and 3 Republicans were selected by the House Armed Services Committee; 3 Democrats and 3 Republicans were selected by the Senate Armed Services Committee.
  • USIP contracted with the Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA), which provided substantive expertise and support for classified discussions and materials.
  • Fifty policy experts served in five Expert Working Groups that advised the Commission.  Working Groups examined: (1) national security strategy and policies; (2) deterrent force posture; (3) countering proliferation; (4) nuclear infrastructure; and (5) external conditions and threats.
  • There were 12 plenary meetings of the Commission from May 2008 to April 2009.
  • The Commission met with 75 people in and out of government as it prepared its report, including representatives of foreign governments.
  • The Commission and its supporting Expert Working Groups traveled to several key sites of the U.S. nuclear complex, including Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and the Y-12 National Security Complex.

 

Related Publications

The Current Situation in China

The Current Situation in China

Friday, November 13, 2020

By:

Over the last two decades, China has expanded its presence internationally, including in conflict zones and fragile states of strategic interest to the United States. From civil wars in neighboring countries, such as Afghanistan and Myanmar, to more distant conflicts in Africa, China’s growing influence has a substantial impact on local, regional, and international conflict dynamics.

Type: Fact Sheet

Is China Getting Serious About Crime on the ‘Belt and Road’?

Is China Getting Serious About Crime on the ‘Belt and Road’?

Wednesday, October 28, 2020

By: Jason Tower; Jennifer Staats

As China’s leading foreign policy project, its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) should be easy to understand. Yet since its inception in 2013, the BRI has remained remarkably opaque. The government publishes no criteria for approving BRI projects or comprehensive lists of authorized ones. Consequently, a range of Chinese investors—including some linked to organized crime—claim an association with the signature program of China’s leader, Xi Jinping. In host countries, this free-riding identification can threaten governance and stability, while further damaging the international community’s ability to check the spread of related criminal activity.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Economics & Environment; Conflict Analysis & Prevention

China-Venezuela Relations in the Twenty-First Century: From Overconfidence to Uncertainty

China-Venezuela Relations in the Twenty-First Century: From Overconfidence to Uncertainty

Tuesday, September 29, 2020

By: Matt Ferchen

The outsized ambitions and scale of the China-Venezuela political and financial relationship in the twenty-first century have meant that its failures and disappointments have been correspondingly large. This report explores how the nations came to be involved, how each side has responded to Venezuela’s extended economic and political crisis, and the implications for the future of the bilateral relationship and for China’s aspirations to be a leader and agent of international development.

Type: Special Report

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

Prospects for Crisis Management on the China-India Border

Prospects for Crisis Management on the China-India Border

Wednesday, September 16, 2020

By: Patricia M. Kim; Vikram J. Singh

After a deadly skirmish in June and shots fired in September, Sino-Indian tensions have escalated to a level not seen in decades. Both countries’ foreign ministers recently agreed to a five-point framework to manage the situation, showing both sides want tensions to plateau rather than deteriorate further. But the Line of Actual Control (LAC) will not easily go back to a well-managed bilateral irritant—right now, it’s a dangerous flashpoint and likely to stay that way. USIP’s Vikram Singh and Patricia Kim look at the recent discussions, what’s driving the escalation, how the conflict affects the region, and what history can tell us about how it might be resolved.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

View All Publications