National security strategy

In June 2016, the European Union launched its new ‘Global Strategy for Foreign and Security Policy’. In less unusual times, it would have been received as merely the latest iteration of the main tenets and ambitions of EU external action, this time with an enhanced dose of pragmatism to respond to a more challenging international environment. However, with the contours of ‘Brexit’ becoming clearer and the start of the Trump Presidency in the United States, the EU’s Global Strategy has acquired a whole new level of significance. This paper argues that while meant to express a largely uncontroversial consensus, it now needs to be recontextualized as a distinctive vision in the face of trends of anti-globalism and Euroscepticism. This concerns in particular its emphasis on rules-based global governance. Challenged by both President Trump ‘America First’ policy and the British government’s course for a ‘hard Brexit’, the Global Strategy represents a blueprint and rallying point for a continued pursuit of a liberal world order based on the rule of law.

Hai-Nyzhnyk P., Chupriy L., Fihurnyi Y., Krasnodemska I., Chyrkov O. (2018). Aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine: ethnonational dimension and civilizational confrontation. Saarbrucken (Germany): LAP Lambert Academic Publishing. 229 p.

The expert-analytical study analyzes the preconditions, course and contemporary socio-political consequences of the aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine and the Ukrainian nation, which has signs of not only direct and covert, but also inter-state conflict and even civilizational confrontation.

The submitted article deals with the question whether the Security strategy, the Defense strategy and the Military strategy of the Slovak Republic are capable to influence the activities of the public authorities of the Slovak Republic, as well as the question whether the fact, that these documents are approved by the National Council of the Slovak Republic, af-fects their enforceability.

Rusya Federasyonu’nun güvenlik politikalarını açıklamak amacıyla yapılan bu çalışma; uluslararası ilişkilerin daha iyi anlaşılması adına, mevcut durumları belli bir teoriye dayandırma gerekliliğinden yola çıkarak, şu temel sorunsal üzerine: Uluslararası ilişkiler teorilerinden hangisi, Rusya Federasyonu’nun güvenlik politikalarını analiz edebilir (?) yoğunlaşmıştır. Sorunsal dâhilinde çalışma: “Rusya Federasyonu’nun güvenlik politikalarını neo-realist teori şekillendirmektedir ve bu politikaların nedensel argümanlarına İnşacı Kuram cevap vermektedir” hipotezi üzerinden sınanmıştır.
Bu hipotezin sınanması adına; öncelikle kavramsal-kuramsal çerçeve oluşturulmuş, daha sonra Rus kimliğinde güvenlik anlayışı incelenmiş ve son olarak Rusya Federasyonu’nun güvenlik belgeleri (Ulusal Güvenlik Konsepti ve Askeri Doktrin); daha önce incelenen, kavramsal-kuramsal çerçeveye uygun bir şekilde bir örüntü oluşturularak analiz edilmiştir.
Çalışmada, ulaşılan bulgular çerçevesinde şu sonuçlara ulaşılmıştır;
a) Rusya Federasyonu uluslararası sistemi anarşik-istikrarsız görmektedir.
b) Rusya Federasyonu’nun ulusal güvenliğine yönelik temel tehditler, uluslararası sistemin yapısından kaynaklanmaktadır.
c) Rusya Federasyonu’nun güvenlik politikaları, “nükleer caydırıcılık ve askeri kapasite” ve “ittifaklar yolu ile dengeleme” stratejileri çerçevesinde oluşturulmuştur.
d) Rusya Federasyonu’nun “ben” algısı olan büyük/güçlü devlet anlayışı varlığını sürdürmektedir.
e) Rusya Federasyonu’nun “öteki” algısı olan Batı; NATO, ABD ve AB üzerinden devamlılığını sürdürmektedir.
f) Rusya Federasyonu’nun “öteki” algısı, düşünsel-ideolojik unsurlardan değil, jeopolitik kaygılar neticesinde oluşmuştur.
g) Rus kimliğinin düşünsel-ideolojik temellerinden biri olan Avrasyacılık, Yeni (Neo)- Avrasyacılık haliyle varlığını sürdürmektedir.
Çalışmanın; ulaşılan bulgular dâhilinde genel sonucu şu şekilde özetlenebilir: “Rusya Federasyonu güvenlik politikalarını, geçmişinde olduğu gibi günümüzde de NATO, ABD ve AB’nin “çevreleme, cordon sanitaire, kuşatma” politikalarına karşı, “tampon bölgeler” oluşturmak üzerine kurmaktadır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Rusya Federasyonu, Güvenlik Politikaları, Ulusal Kimlik, Neo-Realizm, İnşacılık, Güvenlik Belgeleri.

The research will analyse, amongst others, the implications for the strategic dimension of Indonesia's NSS, the structures of national security institutions, the factor determining and the implementation of national security, and the agility/effectiveness of its national security interconnection between the Military, Law Enforcement and Society under civilian authority. This research aims to explore the NSS of Indonesia, through postmodernist perspective (that composes symbolism, interaction, functionalism, and conflict) and fill the gap by contributing to the development of knowledge in social science. Here are questions linked to the postmodern basis of this research, with initial broad question of:
“To what extent does postmodern development in institutional and social democracy, as well as domestic and international developments in crime and terrorism influenced Indonesia’s recent military and NSS?”
These can be divided into sub-questions looking at the influences of the following on the military and NSS:
1. How have the recent institutional democratic developments over the last 20 years (including politics, and inclusive social discourse in public policy) effected the making of NSS in Indonesia?
2. How has the evolution of Crime and terrorism effected the making of NSS in Indonesia over the last 20 years?

A country's National Security Strategy (NSS) contains principled guidelines and purposeful plan of action to promote national interests and protect these from threats in a vulnerable and uncertain world. It outlines the right mix of ways and means—i.e. internal political consolidation, economic capacity-building, diplomacy, and/or military—in order for the state to survive and succeed at both domestic and strategic levels. When published as an unclassified document, the NSS serves various, at times ambiguous, purposes for a state actor's performativity before diverse audiences at the two-level theater of national security. On the home front, the NSS draws the people to the national leader's strategic vision for the country in the midst of emerging and pressing security problems. It creates national consensus on a range of security issues and concerns that the leadership desires to address with utmost priority. It lays down strategic lines of action for the executive branch and informs congress of the budgetary requirements for a whole-of-government approach to national security. As a management tool, the NSS provides national level direction and coordination, institutional oversight, measures for effectiveness, and mechanisms for accountability in national security administration. Outside the homeland, the NSS communicates to the world the unity, resiliency, and firmity of the state and its people to counter threats against their safety and security, and carve a strategic position in the region. It projects power, pride, and even pretenses to influence others in the security community. It aims to deter aggression and defeat the enemy if needed. As a strategic communication, the NSS shows off the strengths and will of the nation-state under a strong leader, and shrouds any weakness and indecisiveness in challenging times.

This article attempts to shed some light on the relationship between three factors that influence the deployment of Slovenian troops in international operations. These are: the normative expectations of Slovenian policy makers (who wish to maintain a military presence in various crisis flashpoints around the world) as defined in the National Security Strategy; the reality of low public support for participation in far-away operations such as ISAF (and the relatively high support for regional participation, for example in KFOR); and the role of internal politics.

National security policy (NSP) is a framework for describing
how a country provides security for the state and its citizens,
and is often presented as an integrated document. For the
purposes of this Backgrounder, NSP will refer to such an
integrated document. This document can also be called a
plan, strategy, concept or doctrine. NSP has a present and future role, outlining the core
interests of the nation and setting guidelines for addressing
current and prospective threats and opportunities.

The aim of this article is to test the hypothesis that Halford Mackinder and Nicholas Spykman's geopolitical theories, which sustained the grand strategy of the United States with the implementation of 1946 Truman Doctrine, are still relevant today after their termination. The results indicate that the intellectual matrixes were found in documents of the grand strategy of the United States in two moments. First, in 1992, in the George Herbert Walker Bush's government's Defense Planning Guidance document, formulated by the Pentagon, in February 1992. Second, they were found replicated 10 years after in the first term of President George Walker Bush, inaugurated in 2001. In the latter, the theoretical formulations repercussions were depicted in the official documents Quadrennial Defense Review (2001) and the National Security Strategy (2002). The article concluded that the authors' ideas remain valid to explain and interpret the actions of the United States' grand strategy in the international scenario.

Almost a hundred years after JFC Fuller first outlined the modern conception of grand strategy, the term still perplexes. Some now insist that grand strategy is an illusion best ignored and replaced with a sole reliance on strategy – which, it must be said, others argue is an illusion as well! Jason Thomas’s commentary in the last edition of this journal is of the former view. It brings up several issues that are useful to discuss not just to gain a better understanding of grand strategy but also of strategy.

[Streszczenie] Głównym celem artykułu jest ocena zawartej w "Strategii Bezpieczeństwa Narodowego Republiki Serbii" analizy środowiska bezpieczeństwa tego państwa, która została dokonana przy wykorzystaniu dwóch metod badawczych: analizy instytucjonalno-prawnej oraz analizy systemowej. Aby zrealizować tego typu cel badawczy, w artykule autor przybliża treść omawianego dokumentu i cele jego powstania, a także analizuje jego treść według wymiarów wyróżnionych przez autorów tego dokumentu, mianowicie w perspektywie globalnej, regionalnej oraz państwowej. Autor wyjaśnia również istotę i przyczyny zawarcia w "Strategii Bezpieczeństwa Narodowego Republiki Serbii" wybranych zapisów. [Summary] The main objective of the article is to assess the analysis of the security environment of that country contained in "The National Security Strategy of The Republic of Serbia". The author analyzed the document using two research methods: institutional and legal analysis and system analysis. In the article, the author described the content of the discussed document and the goals of its creation, and analyzed the content of this document according to the dimensions highlighted by the authors of this document, namely in a global, regional and state perspective to achieve the research goal. The author also explained the essence and reasons for the conclusion of selected provisions in "The National Security Strategy of The Republic of Serbia".

This research aims to explore the NSS of Indonesia, through postmodernist perspective (that composes symbolism, interaction, functionalism, and conflict) and fill the gap by contributing to the development of knowledge in social science. Here are questions linked to the postmodern basis of this research, with initial broad question of:
“To what extent does postmodern development in institutional and social democracy, as well as domestic and international developments in crime and terrorism influenced Indonesia’s recent military and NSS?”

В статье рассматривается тенденция изменений внешних угроз национальной безопасности Армении за последние 10 лет. Анализ ситуации основывается на тех угрозах, которые приведены в Стратегии нацбезопасности страны, принятой в 2007г. Показывается, как изменилась внешняя среда нацбезопасности страны и какие вызовы стоят перед страной.