Security in the 21st Century: US and European Responses to Global Terrorism

Передняя обложка
GRIN Verlag, 2007 - Всего страниц: 60
Master's Thesis from the year 2004 in the subject Politics - International Politics - Topic: Peace and Conflict Studies, Security, grade: 2 (B), University of Kent (Brussels School of International Studies), 64 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: Although the world stood united behind America when the dust of the collapsed twin towers of the World Trade Centre settled, differences between the United States and Europe soon became apparent. Europe might have supported the US in Afghanistan, both politically and militarily, but diverging interests already became apparent when the US sidelined NATO and preferred to lead 'Operation Enduring Freedom' itself. The dispute escalated over the US plans to continue the war on terror in Iraq. Here, it emerged that the US and Europe do not share the same world view. While the US seem to perceive the world in Hobbesian terms, and believe that military strength is the only means to achieve security, Europe appears to understand security in the Kantian sense and believes that 'perpetual peace' can be achieved. The question that divided Europe and the US over Iraq then is more than a simple difference of opinion but reflects a deep philosophical division: Can global security be achieved by force or through sustained dedication to a set of normative principles implemented by the world community? Consequently, the counterterrorism strategies formulated in Europe and the US are of a fundamentally different nature, which cannot be explained merely by the discrepancy in military capabilities. If that would be the case, Europe would have begun to build up its military potential by now. Acknowledging that "terrorism has become one of the most pressing political problems," (David Whittaker) the aim of this paper is to compare the US and the European approach to global terrorism, establish reasons for the differences and evaluate which approach might be more effective. As September 11, has changed our perception of secur

Результаты поиска по книге

Содержание

Contents _________________________________________________________________
1
The US Response An Outward Oriented Approach? ___________________
14
The European Response An Inward Oriented Approach? ______________
25
War Fighting or Crime Fighting or Another Way?_______________________
33
Conclusion _____________________________________________________________
43
Авторские права

Другие издания - Просмотреть все

Часто встречающиеся слова и выражения

Популярные отрывки

Стр. 17 - Given the goals of rogue states and terrorists, the United States can no longer solely rely on a reactive posture as we have in the past. The inability to deter a potential attacker, the immediacy of today's threats, and the magnitude of potential harm that could be caused by our adversaries' choice of weapons, do not permit that option.
Стр. 19 - While the United States will constantly strive to enlist the support of the international community, we will not hesitate to act alone, if necessary, to exercise our right of self-defense by acting preemptively against such terrorists, to prevent them from doing harm against our people and our country; and denying further sponsorship, support, and sanctuary to terrorists by convincing or compelling states to accept their sovereign responsibilities.
Стр. 21 - Our challenge in this new century is a difficult one: to defend our nation against the unknown, the uncertain, the unseen and the unexpected.
Стр. 29 - The genius of the founding fathers," European Commission President Romano Prodi commented in a speech at the Institut d'Etudes Politiques in Paris (May 29, 2001), "lay in translating extremely high political ambitions . . . into a series of more specific, almost technical decisions. This indirect approach made further action possible. Rapprochement took place gradually. From confrontation we moved to willingness to cooperate in the economic sphere and then on to integration.
Стр. 34 - Thomas G. Weiss, Margaret E. Crahan, and John Goering, eds, Wars on Terrorism and Iraq: Human Rights, Unilateralism, and US Foreign Policy (London: Routledge, 2004).
Стр. 20 - The United States is committed to lasting institutions like the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, the Organization of American States, and NATO as well as other longstanding alliances.
Стр. 15 - Develop Agendas for Cooperative Action with the Other Main Centers of Global Power We have our best chance since the rise of the nation-state in the 1 7th century to build a world where the great powers compete in peace instead of prepare for war.
Стр. 31 - A country may obtain the outcomes it wants in world politics because other countries want to follow it, admiring its values, emulating its example, aspiring to its level of prosperity and openness.

Библиографические данные