The U.S. National Security Strategy for the 21st Century

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael D. LINGENFELTER
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-32
Author(s):  
Evan Kerrane

AbstractInterpreting Russian actions in the Near Abroad relies on the perception of Russian intent, but all too often states fail to analyse how Moscow interprets Western objectives. While defensive realist theorists argue that states tend to seek only enough power to survive within the system, the U.S. 2017 National Security Strategy argues Moscow is a revisionist state, seeking a return to great power status. Increasing tensions among the actors in the region gives rise to potential misperception of intent. This article analyses state motivations under a defensive realist paradigm and addresses how Russian actions may emerge from a defensive perspective. Using a defensive realist framework, this article elevates Russian insecurities and fear of Western influence in the Near Abroad as the primary motivator of state action.


2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (34) ◽  
pp. 122-144
Author(s):  
Stanisław Zarobny

In the article the author presents the genesis and evolution of the research on strategic culture. He also conducts an analysis of the conditions and factors shaping the Polish strategic culture and the role of the Polish national security strategy in it. Attempts are also made to evaluate the Polish strategic culture, with an emphasis on the perception of the role of military forces in it. The main research problem is as follows: Is strategic culture really present in Poland and what were the conditions for its development? Specific questions to be answered are: What has characterized strategic culture in Poland? What factors have determined the shape of Polish strategic culture? What is its impact on foreign policy and Poland’s security? How are armed forces perceived in Polish strategic culture? The main conclusion is that Poland has its own strategic culture, which has been shaped by historical experience.


2020 ◽  
pp. 249-254
Author(s):  
Vanessa Walker

This concluding chapter explains that for Movement advocates, the human rights vision of the 1970s was intimately connected with a reckoning with the U.S. failures of Vietnam, Cold War national security strategy, and, of course, Chile. The Movement and the Carter administration shared a vision of human rights as a way to improve not only the world but also the U.S. government and its policies. This is not to say the Movement's views were universally shared, or that human rights faded away after the 1970s. Rather, human rights continued to serve as an instrument of its time, a powerful idea and language, flexible and indelible. The Carter administration's human rights policy was far from perfect or consistent. It was, however, a uniquely self-reflective policy that restrained U.S. intervention and addressed abuses taking place in areas where the United States was most directly complicit in empowering violators.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document