State and Strategy : How Big States Do their Strategic Thinking

The ancient times do set forth in figure, both the incorporation, and inseparable conjunction, of counsel with kings, and the wise and politic use of counsel by kings: the one in that they say Jupiter did marry Metis, which signifieth counsel; whereby they intend that Sovereignty, is married to Counsel; the other in that which followeth, which was thus: They say, after Jupiter was married to Metis, she conceived by him and was with child, but Jupiter suffered her not to stay till she brought forth, but eat her up; whereby he became himself with child, and was delivered of Pallas armed, out of his head. Which monstrous fable containeth a secret of empire; how kings are to make use of their counsel of state.

How influential is Russian strategic thinking in and outside the country? Do India’s ambitions flow from an assessment of its strategic landscape, or are they driven by political and industrial considerations? How steadfast is the link between British defence and its wider research community? Is Brazil’s strategic setup commensurate with the country’s growing weight on the world stage? Exactly how are American defence and security priorities set? In which ways do political authorities in Germany outsource, sustain and foster outside defence research?

The following study has a look at these difficult questions. It ponders how political authorities interact with the strategic community at large – or, as Francis Bacon might put it, how sovereignty is married to counsel. The paper is grounded in comparative research undertaken over the course of one year in Germany, the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, India and Brazil. Its conclusions are the outcome of an extensive study undertaken for the Ministry of Defence of France…