International Acquistion

TASK:

Read the attached and below references and answer the following questions:

How should the U.S. use security assistance tools in response to the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, either in terms of near-term goals to assist Ukraine and other states affected by the conflict or in terms of longer-term national security objectives? Reponse should:

o Recommend policy options by articulating clear objective(s) and the ways and means with respect to security assistance tools to advance those objectives.

o Evaluate the constraints potentially limiting U.S. action and evaluate the risks associated with any recommendations.

o Support your recommendations.

INSTRUCTIONS:

Write a 1-2 page single-spaced position paper addressing the task above. Use the attached Department of the Air Force, Air Force Handbook 33-337, The Tongue and Quill page 228 position paper format and follow the paper outline below. Use the assessment rubric below as an assessment. Ensure there is no detection of AI. An example of the paper format is attached.

To limit the level of effort needed for this paper, no additional research required outside of the references, but may do so if it is necessary to support recommendation(s). The paper must, at a minimum, address the following:

A careful explanation of the objective(s) sought in the export of arms (or the limitation of arms exports) to Ukraine in support of their ongoing conflict with Russia (or to other countries in response to this conflict). Include a clear recommendation(s) for the ways and means you suggest using to achieve the objective(s) with respect to the security assistant tools and a clear articulation of the logic underpinning your assertion that the ways and means will advance the objective(s). Note: The assignment does not ask you to describe current U.S. policy objectives in Ukraine, nor does the assignment ask you to address the full spectrum of the instruments of power; the intent is for you to develop objective(s) with potential strategic value to the U.S. and to articulate how they could be advanced through the use of the security assistance tools discussed in this course (e.g., Foreign Military Sales, Foreign Military Financing, International Cooperation Programs, etc.).

An evaluation of the constraints possibly limiting U.S. action and risks associated with the recommendation, along with measures to mitigate and manage that risk, and an assessment of the relative likelihood of various positive and negative outcomes (i.e., rewards/costs, success/failure, containment/escalation, etc.).

Support the position using examples or quotes from the required reading, as well as own interpretation and analysis of the material. Cite supporting information using endnotes in the format prescribed by the Chicago Manual of Style.

Successfully demonstrate an ability to develop policy options for the role of international acquisition and security assistance to achieve national security objectives in an authentic, current and real-world situation.

PAPER OUTLINE:

I. Heading:

MEMORANDUM FOR [Decision Authority/Audience]

FROM: [Organization/Office Symbol]

SUBJECT: Position Paper [Clear, Specific Issue Statement]

II. Purpose: Provide a clear, one-sentence statement of what the paper does. Example: This paper recommends [specific action] regarding [issue] in order to [desire outcome].

III. Background (1 short paragraph): Brief, revelant context necessary to understand the issue. Keep this section factual and concise. Include what the issue is, why it matters, previous decisions or guidance, key constraints (policy, legal, fiscal, operational).

IV. Discussion: This is the analytical core of the paper. Problem statement – clearly define the issue, identify impacts if not addressed and identify stakeholders. Analysis organize logically with possible structures of OPTION 1: COA 1 description with pros/cons and COA 2 description with pros/cons or OPTION 2: Thematic analysis operational impacts, strategic impacts, resource implications, risks, legal/policy considerations. Keep analysis balanced and objective.

IV. Recommendation (Position): Clearly state the recommended course of action. Include the preferred COA, why it is superior, risk mitigation steps, and required approvals or resources. Example: Recommend approving COA2 to implement [action], as it provides the best balance of operational effectiveness and cost efficiency while minimizing risk.

ASSESSMENT RUBRIC:

LEARNING OUTCOMES: Policy Options.

Made clear, creative and exceptional well supported policy recommendation(s) to improve how the U.S. can use security assistance tools in response to the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, and improve political and economic interactions and joint processes to evaluate and manage DoD resources to achieve national security objectives.

LEARNING OUTCOMES: Constraints/Risk.

Exceptional evaluation of potential constraints and risks of recommended U.S. use of security assistance tools in support of Ukraine.

LEARNING OUTCOMES: Support Material.

Exceptional use of provided materials and/or other sources to support objectives and recommendations

CRITICAL AND CREATIVE THINKING

Issue/problem being considered critically is stated clearly and described comprehensively.

Information is taken from source(s) w/ interpretation/evaluation to develop comprehensive analysis/synthesis.

Specific position is imaginative, taking into account the complexities of the issue. Limits of position are acknowledged. Others points of view are synthesized within position.

Appropriate and convincing application of prior learning or existing knowledge to a new context.

SHORT WRITING: Content.

Compelling argument with abundant critical, creative thought & analysis/insight.

Uses appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to illustrate thorough knowledge/mastery of course material.

WRITING: Organization & Structure.

Use of headings significantly enhances the clarity and organization of the paper.

Ideas are artfully & logically organized in a compelling way, reflecting a sophisticated analysis / argumentation.

Paragraphs & transitions are creative & persuasive, substantially enhance main points.

WRITING: Sources & Evidence.

Skillful use of high-quality, credible, relevant sources to develop compelling and contextually appropriate ideas and support argument(s).

Citations and references are formatted correctly.

WRITING: Language, Syntax & Mechanics.

Clear & concise language skillfully communicates meaning to readers.

Main points are clearly identified.

All sentences are well-written with varied sentence structure; manipulates complex sentences for effect/impact.

Virtually free of errors in grammar, punctuation & spelling.

Visual aids (i.e., figures / tables) are used (as needed) to greatly enhance assignment (no spelling errors, concise, readable).

PRESUBMISSION CHECKLIST:

1-2 pages maximum

Clear, concise, active voice

Bottom line up front (BLUF approach)

Decision-focused

Minimal fluff

Profressional tone

Single-spaced, TNR 12pt, 1-inch margins.

REFERENCES:

(a) President Trump and President Zelensky oval office meeting excerpt, 28 February 2025, (watch 7:05 minute video).

(b) Defense Talk with Secretary Austin and President Zelensky at NDU, December 2023, (review minutes: 05:00-09:30, and 11:00-25:30).

(c) Michael Gordon and Isabel Coles, U.S. to Restore Military Support to Ukraine After It Agrees to Cease-Fire, The Wall Street Journal, 11 March 2025 (5 pages).

(d) Congressional Research Service, U.S. Security Assistance to Ukraine, 22 May 2024, (2 pages).

(e) Isabel Coles, How Much Hs the U.S. Spent on the Ukraine in the War?,The Wall Street Journal, 26 February 2025, (4 pages).

(f) Dan Ward, HIMARS Hidden Superpower and Other Acquisition Lesson from Ukraine, Defense One, 5 August 2022, . (2 pages).

(g) Rob Arnett, Ethics and Arms Sales: Operationalizing the Just War Tradition, The Strategy Bridge, 20 October 2016, . (5 pages).

(h) Jonathan Helton, Military Aid: Financing Foreign Conflict? The Strategy Bridge, 19 August 2019, . (6 pages).