Suchergebnisse

This master thesis "Environmental protection on D. Trump's security agenda" present analysis of security policy changes during first years of D. Trump presidency. The main approach to analyse the changes in USA environmental protection policy could be desecuritization in D. Trump's security agenda the aspects of environment, climate change becomes issue of last importance. Environmental security was widely analysed in academic researches during last few decades. Many authors agree that environment could be listed as part of security agenda and could be considered one of the most important security threats. In 2010 and 2015 National security strategies climate change was one the main security threats, but in 2017 National security strategy it disappeared. The climate change not only disappeared from National security strategy, but also from many other policy documents. This research also aims to answer how D. Trump is using the process of desecuritization in the environmental security field. The analysis is divided into four main fields, the first is about desecuritization and environmental security as object of desecuritization process. The second is about how the securitization process of environmental security (climate change) was going during B. Obama presidency. The third part analyses the D. Trump's rhetoric, "tweets", formal actions and his administration actions, which show how widely D. Trump is seeking his goal – to make USA forget about climate change and environmental security as national security threat. The fourth part analyses D. Trump's 2017 National security strategy and other national security policy documents, the main instrument of government to make a question as national security threat, or vice versa during the process of desecuritization make a question not to be national security threat. An important step in the desecuritization process is the language act. At the time of the speech, D. Trump stressed that climate change was not a threat, but his position wasn't unanimously supported by other major US institutions – Congress, Defense Department, and so on. Efforts are being made to form public opinion through a variety of communication channels, but most often, Trump's communication (denying climate change and the importance of environmental protection) has been criticized as unfounded by either scientific research or objective data. Although D. Trump has taken various steps to eliminate environmental security and climate change from the US political and security agenda, these issues are still of great concern to other policy actors – states and institutions, as well as the US society itself. More importantly, Trump's actions have not altered the basic approach to climate change in US society and therefore cannot prevent states, cities and businesses from continuing the environmental initiatives initiated by Obama because of his and his administration's inability. Indeed, more and more Americans believe that climate change is a threat to security, and many US states and cities have taken the lead in implementing their commitments under the Obama administration, in partnership with business leaders.

This master thesis "Environmental protection on D. Trump's security agenda" present analysis of security policy changes during first years of D. Trump presidency. The main approach to analyse the changes in USA environmental protection policy could be desecuritization in D. Trump's security agenda the aspects of environment, climate change becomes issue of last importance. Environmental security was widely analysed in academic researches during last few decades. Many authors agree that environment could be listed as part of security agenda and could be considered one of the most important security threats. In 2010 and 2015 National security strategies climate change was one the main security threats, but in 2017 National security strategy it disappeared. The climate change not only disappeared from National security strategy, but also from many other policy documents. This research also aims to answer how D. Trump is using the process of desecuritization in the environmental security field. The analysis is divided into four main fields, the first is about desecuritization and environmental security as object of desecuritization process. The second is about how the securitization process of environmental security (climate change) was going during B. Obama presidency. The third part analyses the D. Trump's rhetoric, "tweets", formal actions and his administration actions, which show how widely D. Trump is seeking his goal – to make USA forget about climate change and environmental security as national security threat. The fourth part analyses D. Trump's 2017 National security strategy and other national security policy documents, the main instrument of government to make a question as national security threat, or vice versa during the process of desecuritization make a question not to be national security threat. An important step in the desecuritization process is the language act. At the time of the speech, D. Trump stressed that climate change was not a threat, but his position wasn't unanimously supported by other major US institutions – Congress, Defense Department, and so on. Efforts are being made to form public opinion through a variety of communication channels, but most often, Trump's communication (denying climate change and the importance of environmental protection) has been criticized as unfounded by either scientific research or objective data. Although D. Trump has taken various steps to eliminate environmental security and climate change from the US political and security agenda, these issues are still of great concern to other policy actors – states and institutions, as well as the US society itself. More importantly, Trump's actions have not altered the basic approach to climate change in US society and therefore cannot prevent states, cities and businesses from continuing the environmental initiatives initiated by Obama because of his and his administration's inability. Indeed, more and more Americans believe that climate change is a threat to security, and many US states and cities have taken the lead in implementing their commitments under the Obama administration, in partnership with business leaders.

This master thesis "Environmental protection on D. Trump's security agenda" present analysis of security policy changes during first years of D. Trump presidency. The main approach to analyse the changes in USA environmental protection policy could be desecuritization in D. Trump's security agenda the aspects of environment, climate change becomes issue of last importance. Environmental security was widely analysed in academic researches during last few decades. Many authors agree that environment could be listed as part of security agenda and could be considered one of the most important security threats. In 2010 and 2015 National security strategies climate change was one the main security threats, but in 2017 National security strategy it disappeared. The climate change not only disappeared from National security strategy, but also from many other policy documents. This research also aims to answer how D. Trump is using the process of desecuritization in the environmental security field. The analysis is divided into four main fields, the first is about desecuritization and environmental security as object of desecuritization process. The second is about how the securitization process of environmental security (climate change) was going during B. Obama presidency. The third part analyses the D. Trump's rhetoric, "tweets", formal actions and his administration actions, which show how widely D. Trump is seeking his goal – to make USA forget about climate change and environmental security as national security threat. The fourth part analyses D. Trump's 2017 National security strategy and other national security policy documents, the main instrument of government to make a question as national security threat, or vice versa during the process of desecuritization make a question not to be national security threat. An important step in the desecuritization process is the language act. At the time of the speech, D. Trump stressed that climate change was not a threat, but his position wasn't unanimously supported by other major US institutions – Congress, Defense Department, and so on. Efforts are being made to form public opinion through a variety of communication channels, but most often, Trump's communication (denying climate change and the importance of environmental protection) has been criticized as unfounded by either scientific research or objective data. Although D. Trump has taken various steps to eliminate environmental security and climate change from the US political and security agenda, these issues are still of great concern to other policy actors – states and institutions, as well as the US society itself. More importantly, Trump's actions have not altered the basic approach to climate change in US society and therefore cannot prevent states, cities and businesses from continuing the environmental initiatives initiated by Obama because of his and his administration's inability. Indeed, more and more Americans believe that climate change is a threat to security, and many US states and cities have taken the lead in implementing their commitments under the Obama administration, in partnership with business leaders.

This master thesis "Environmental protection on D. Trump's security agenda" present analysis of security policy changes during first years of D. Trump presidency. The main approach to analyse the changes in USA environmental protection policy could be desecuritization in D. Trump's security agenda the aspects of environment, climate change becomes issue of last importance. Environmental security was widely analysed in academic researches during last few decades. Many authors agree that environment could be listed as part of security agenda and could be considered one of the most important security threats. In 2010 and 2015 National security strategies climate change was one the main security threats, but in 2017 National security strategy it disappeared. The climate change not only disappeared from National security strategy, but also from many other policy documents. This research also aims to answer how D. Trump is using the process of desecuritization in the environmental security field. The analysis is divided into four main fields, the first is about desecuritization and environmental security as object of desecuritization process. The second is about how the securitization process of environmental security (climate change) was going during B. Obama presidency. The third part analyses the D. Trump's rhetoric, "tweets", formal actions and his administration actions, which show how widely D. Trump is seeking his goal – to make USA forget about climate change and environmental security as national security threat. The fourth part analyses D. Trump's 2017 National security strategy and other national security policy documents, the main instrument of government to make a question as national security threat, or vice versa during the process of desecuritization make a question not to be national security threat. An important step in the desecuritization process is the language act. At the time of the speech, D. Trump stressed that climate change was not a threat, but his position wasn't unanimously supported by other major US institutions – Congress, Defense Department, and so on. Efforts are being made to form public opinion through a variety of communication channels, but most often, Trump's communication (denying climate change and the importance of environmental protection) has been criticized as unfounded by either scientific research or objective data. Although D. Trump has taken various steps to eliminate environmental security and climate change from the US political and security agenda, these issues are still of great concern to other policy actors – states and institutions, as well as the US society itself. More importantly, Trump's actions have not altered the basic approach to climate change in US society and therefore cannot prevent states, cities and businesses from continuing the environmental initiatives initiated by Obama because of his and his administration's inability. Indeed, more and more Americans believe that climate change is a threat to security, and many US states and cities have taken the lead in implementing their commitments under the Obama administration, in partnership with business leaders.

Publicist, editor of periodicals, translator of Polish poetry, literary critic Dorofey Bokhan is an outstanding member of the Russian literary life of Minsk and Wilno. The purpose of the study is to reconstruct the activities of Bokhan in Wilno in the first years after fleeing from the Bolshevik Minsk. The material for this study are newspapers in Russian, as well as documents of the Office of Government Commissar for the City of Wilno, Starostwo of Wilno and other institutions stored in the Lithuanian Central State Archives. In 1921, Bokhan became one of the leaders of the Wilno Russian society and headed the Literary and artistic section of the society. The literary and artistic section held numerous literary evenings. The authorities were suspicious of the patriotic character of the evenings. Reports on Russian culture were presented as a manifestation of disloyalty to the Polish state. The authorities saw Bokhan as "the most prominent and at the same time harmful" leader of the Russian press and the Wilno Russian society. Thus, in the early years of Bokhan in Wilno, he occupied an important place in the local Russian press and began to play a key role in Russian literary life. But due to conflicts in the Wilno Russian society in 1923, he withdrew from the society's board and withdrew from participation in the Literary and artistic section.

Publicist, editor of periodicals, translator of Polish poetry, literary critic Dorofey Bokhan is an outstanding member of the Russian literary life of Minsk and Wilno. The purpose of the study is to reconstruct the activities of Bokhan in Wilno in the first years after fleeing from the Bolshevik Minsk. The material for this study are newspapers in Russian, as well as documents of the Office of Government Commissar for the City of Wilno, Starostwo of Wilno and other institutions stored in the Lithuanian Central State Archives. In 1921, Bokhan became one of the leaders of the Wilno Russian society and headed the Literary and artistic section of the society. The literary and artistic section held numerous literary evenings. The authorities were suspicious of the patriotic character of the evenings. Reports on Russian culture were presented as a manifestation of disloyalty to the Polish state. The authorities saw Bokhan as "the most prominent and at the same time harmful" leader of the Russian press and the Wilno Russian society. Thus, in the early years of Bokhan in Wilno, he occupied an important place in the local Russian press and began to play a key role in Russian literary life. But due to conflicts in the Wilno Russian society in 1923, he withdrew from the society's board and withdrew from participation in the Literary and artistic section.

Publicist, editor of periodicals, translator of Polish poetry, literary critic Dorofey Bokhan is an outstanding member of the Russian literary life of Minsk and Wilno. The purpose of the study is to reconstruct the activities of Bokhan in Wilno in the first years after fleeing from the Bolshevik Minsk. The material for this study are newspapers in Russian, as well as documents of the Office of Government Commissar for the City of Wilno, Starostwo of Wilno and other institutions stored in the Lithuanian Central State Archives. In 1921, Bokhan became one of the leaders of the Wilno Russian society and headed the Literary and artistic section of the society. The literary and artistic section held numerous literary evenings. The authorities were suspicious of the patriotic character of the evenings. Reports on Russian culture were presented as a manifestation of disloyalty to the Polish state. The authorities saw Bokhan as "the most prominent and at the same time harmful" leader of the Russian press and the Wilno Russian society. Thus, in the early years of Bokhan in Wilno, he occupied an important place in the local Russian press and began to play a key role in Russian literary life. But due to conflicts in the Wilno Russian society in 1923, he withdrew from the society's board and withdrew from participation in the Literary and artistic section.

Publicist, editor of periodicals, translator of Polish poetry, literary critic Dorofey Bokhan is an outstanding member of the Russian literary life of Minsk and Wilno. The purpose of the study is to reconstruct the activities of Bokhan in Wilno in the first years after fleeing from the Bolshevik Minsk. The material for this study are newspapers in Russian, as well as documents of the Office of Government Commissar for the City of Wilno, Starostwo of Wilno and other institutions stored in the Lithuanian Central State Archives. In 1921, Bokhan became one of the leaders of the Wilno Russian society and headed the Literary and artistic section of the society. The literary and artistic section held numerous literary evenings. The authorities were suspicious of the patriotic character of the evenings. Reports on Russian culture were presented as a manifestation of disloyalty to the Polish state. The authorities saw Bokhan as "the most prominent and at the same time harmful" leader of the Russian press and the Wilno Russian society. Thus, in the early years of Bokhan in Wilno, he occupied an important place in the local Russian press and began to play a key role in Russian literary life. But due to conflicts in the Wilno Russian society in 1923, he withdrew from the society's board and withdrew from participation in the Literary and artistic section.

The Master's thesis "D-6 oil fields exploitation in the background of the international maritime law" analyzes sources of the international law governing construction and exploitation of offshore platforms as well as responsibility for the damages to other countries caused by such platforms. The thesis also analyzes which international treaties and other legislation are mandatory to the Russian Federation and must be followed in exploiting oil fields continental shelf in the Baltic Sea in the area of the Russian jurisdiction. Besides, the thesis provides for the cases where Russia violated mandatory legislation in planning, erecting and exploiting oil platform D-6. Furthermore, the thesis analyzes whether the Russian Federation would be liable against the Republic of Lithuania for the damages which may arise from exploitation of D-6 oil platform. To that end, the thesis analyzes two principles of liability: liability for violations of the international legislation and liability for the damages to the interests of the other country resulting from the actions not prohibited by the international law. For assessment of the principle of application of "strict" liability, the work done by the UN International Law Commission is analyzed. Attempts are made to find out whether there is an international custom providing for the country's liability for the caused damages. The thesis is finalized by the findings. Taking into consideration the research results it is stated that planning and erection of D-6 platform violated the regulations of the international law but current exploitation of the platform shows that Russia does not violate any international legislation. It is possible to make a conclusion that the Russian Federation would be liable against the Republic of Lithuania for the damages caused through exploitation of D-6 platform. Nevertheless, in some cases such liability could be based on violations of the international laws but in the other cases - on the international custom.

The Master's thesis "D-6 oil fields exploitation in the background of the international maritime law" analyzes sources of the international law governing construction and exploitation of offshore platforms as well as responsibility for the damages to other countries caused by such platforms. The thesis also analyzes which international treaties and other legislation are mandatory to the Russian Federation and must be followed in exploiting oil fields continental shelf in the Baltic Sea in the area of the Russian jurisdiction. Besides, the thesis provides for the cases where Russia violated mandatory legislation in planning, erecting and exploiting oil platform D-6. Furthermore, the thesis analyzes whether the Russian Federation would be liable against the Republic of Lithuania for the damages which may arise from exploitation of D-6 oil platform. To that end, the thesis analyzes two principles of liability: liability for violations of the international legislation and liability for the damages to the interests of the other country resulting from the actions not prohibited by the international law. For assessment of the principle of application of "strict" liability, the work done by the UN International Law Commission is analyzed. Attempts are made to find out whether there is an international custom providing for the country's liability for the caused damages. The thesis is finalized by the findings. Taking into consideration the research results it is stated that planning and erection of D-6 platform violated the regulations of the international law but current exploitation of the platform shows that Russia does not violate any international legislation. It is possible to make a conclusion that the Russian Federation would be liable against the Republic of Lithuania for the damages caused through exploitation of D-6 platform. Nevertheless, in some cases such liability could be based on violations of the international laws but in the other cases - on the international custom.

This Master's Thesis aims to determine what kind of roles Lithuania has perfomed during the second term of D. Grybauskaitė (2014-2019). It also seeks to answer the question, what development trends of identified roles could be noticed? To achieve the main purpose the following tasks were formulated: 1. To discuss role theory and reveal the position of political leader; 2. To formule the narrowed set of possible Lithuania's roles, taking into account the frames of Lithuanian identity; 3. To analize the declared foreign policy goals and choices of D. Grybauskaitė in order to identify what roles Lithuania has tried to perform in the international system in 2014-2019; 4. To investigate how does the expactations from other actors in the international system match with national role performance; 5. To determine the interaction between theoretically declared and practically constructed role. Role theory is used as a theoretical approach in this Master's thesis. In this case, the term of role has three elements – role conception, role expectation and role performance. In order to identify what roles Lithuania has performed during the second term of Grybauskaitė, the method of qualitative content analysis was chosen. Official speeches, interviews and statements were analyzed in order to determine role conception of D. Grybauskaitė. To determine the interaction between role conception and role performance, official documents, decisions and actions were important and also was taken into consideration. Finally, the speeches and interviews of leaders and their representatives from US, EU and the Eastern partners Ukraine and George revealed the expectations towards Lithuania. It provided the opportunity to examine whether the role conception of Lithuania matches with expectations from other actors in the international system. It was discovered that during the second term of D. Grybauskaitė, Lithuania played six main roles in the international arena: "anti-imperialist agent", "faithfull ally-atlanticist", "territorial defender", "pro-European multilateralist", "promoter of regional cooperation" and "bridge". The set of roles confirmed rather stable than unexpected guidelines for Lithuanian foreign policy: US prioritization, the pro-European direction, harsh stance towards Russia, active support for the Eastern Partnership. However, it is important to indicate that compared to the first term of D. Grybauskaitė, her position during the second term returned to the tracks drawn by V. Adamkus. The main factor which has led to these changes was aggresive Russian behavior. The President of Lithuania took a consistent and extremely rigorous stance against it, constantly reminding Western leaders of the Russian expansion possibility. Russian actions also highlighted the importance of US and NATO. The factor of Russian aggression can also be seen as an impetus for taking measures to strengthen the country's defense and thus consolidating the role of the " territorial defender". Such role changes because of the circumstances in the international arena, proves that structural factors are much more influencial than leader's preferences. It is important to mention that all three elements of role coincided with one another.

This Master's Thesis aims to determine what kind of roles Lithuania has perfomed during the second term of D. Grybauskaitė (2014-2019). It also seeks to answer the question, what development trends of identified roles could be noticed? To achieve the main purpose the following tasks were formulated: 1. To discuss role theory and reveal the position of political leader; 2. To formule the narrowed set of possible Lithuania's roles, taking into account the frames of Lithuanian identity; 3. To analize the declared foreign policy goals and choices of D. Grybauskaitė in order to identify what roles Lithuania has tried to perform in the international system in 2014-2019; 4. To investigate how does the expactations from other actors in the international system match with national role performance; 5. To determine the interaction between theoretically declared and practically constructed role. Role theory is used as a theoretical approach in this Master's thesis. In this case, the term of role has three elements – role conception, role expectation and role performance. In order to identify what roles Lithuania has performed during the second term of Grybauskaitė, the method of qualitative content analysis was chosen. Official speeches, interviews and statements were analyzed in order to determine role conception of D. Grybauskaitė. To determine the interaction between role conception and role performance, official documents, decisions and actions were important and also was taken into consideration. Finally, the speeches and interviews of leaders and their representatives from US, EU and the Eastern partners Ukraine and George revealed the expectations towards Lithuania. It provided the opportunity to examine whether the role conception of Lithuania matches with expectations from other actors in the international system. It was discovered that during the second term of D. Grybauskaitė, Lithuania played six main roles in the international arena: "anti-imperialist agent", "faithfull ally-atlanticist", "territorial defender", "pro-European multilateralist", "promoter of regional cooperation" and "bridge". The set of roles confirmed rather stable than unexpected guidelines for Lithuanian foreign policy: US prioritization, the pro-European direction, harsh stance towards Russia, active support for the Eastern Partnership. However, it is important to indicate that compared to the first term of D. Grybauskaitė, her position during the second term returned to the tracks drawn by V. Adamkus. The main factor which has led to these changes was aggresive Russian behavior. The President of Lithuania took a consistent and extremely rigorous stance against it, constantly reminding Western leaders of the Russian expansion possibility. Russian actions also highlighted the importance of US and NATO. The factor of Russian aggression can also be seen as an impetus for taking measures to strengthen the country's defense and thus consolidating the role of the " territorial defender". Such role changes because of the circumstances in the international arena, proves that structural factors are much more influencial than leader's preferences. It is important to mention that all three elements of role coincided with one another.

This Master's Thesis aims to determine what kind of roles Lithuania has perfomed during the second term of D. Grybauskaitė (2014-2019). It also seeks to answer the question, what development trends of identified roles could be noticed? To achieve the main purpose the following tasks were formulated: 1. To discuss role theory and reveal the position of political leader; 2. To formule the narrowed set of possible Lithuania's roles, taking into account the frames of Lithuanian identity; 3. To analize the declared foreign policy goals and choices of D. Grybauskaitė in order to identify what roles Lithuania has tried to perform in the international system in 2014-2019; 4. To investigate how does the expactations from other actors in the international system match with national role performance; 5. To determine the interaction between theoretically declared and practically constructed role. Role theory is used as a theoretical approach in this Master's thesis. In this case, the term of role has three elements – role conception, role expectation and role performance. In order to identify what roles Lithuania has performed during the second term of Grybauskaitė, the method of qualitative content analysis was chosen. Official speeches, interviews and statements were analyzed in order to determine role conception of D. Grybauskaitė. To determine the interaction between role conception and role performance, official documents, decisions and actions were important and also was taken into consideration. Finally, the speeches and interviews of leaders and their representatives from US, EU and the Eastern partners Ukraine and George revealed the expectations towards Lithuania. It provided the opportunity to examine whether the role conception of Lithuania matches with expectations from other actors in the international system. It was discovered that during the second term of D. Grybauskaitė, Lithuania played six main roles in the international arena: "anti-imperialist agent", "faithfull ally-atlanticist", "territorial defender", "pro-European multilateralist", "promoter of regional cooperation" and "bridge". The set of roles confirmed rather stable than unexpected guidelines for Lithuanian foreign policy: US prioritization, the pro-European direction, harsh stance towards Russia, active support for the Eastern Partnership. However, it is important to indicate that compared to the first term of D. Grybauskaitė, her position during the second term returned to the tracks drawn by V. Adamkus. The main factor which has led to these changes was aggresive Russian behavior. The President of Lithuania took a consistent and extremely rigorous stance against it, constantly reminding Western leaders of the Russian expansion possibility. Russian actions also highlighted the importance of US and NATO. The factor of Russian aggression can also be seen as an impetus for taking measures to strengthen the country's defense and thus consolidating the role of the " territorial defender". Such role changes because of the circumstances in the international arena, proves that structural factors are much more influencial than leader's preferences. It is important to mention that all three elements of role coincided with one another.

This Master's Thesis aims to determine what kind of roles Lithuania has perfomed during the second term of D. Grybauskaitė (2014-2019). It also seeks to answer the question, what development trends of identified roles could be noticed? To achieve the main purpose the following tasks were formulated: 1. To discuss role theory and reveal the position of political leader; 2. To formule the narrowed set of possible Lithuania's roles, taking into account the frames of Lithuanian identity; 3. To analize the declared foreign policy goals and choices of D. Grybauskaitė in order to identify what roles Lithuania has tried to perform in the international system in 2014-2019; 4. To investigate how does the expactations from other actors in the international system match with national role performance; 5. To determine the interaction between theoretically declared and practically constructed role. Role theory is used as a theoretical approach in this Master's thesis. In this case, the term of role has three elements – role conception, role expectation and role performance. In order to identify what roles Lithuania has performed during the second term of Grybauskaitė, the method of qualitative content analysis was chosen. Official speeches, interviews and statements were analyzed in order to determine role conception of D. Grybauskaitė. To determine the interaction between role conception and role performance, official documents, decisions and actions were important and also was taken into consideration. Finally, the speeches and interviews of leaders and their representatives from US, EU and the Eastern partners Ukraine and George revealed the expectations towards Lithuania. It provided the opportunity to examine whether the role conception of Lithuania matches with expectations from other actors in the international system. It was discovered that during the second term of D. Grybauskaitė, Lithuania played six main roles in the international arena: "anti-imperialist agent", "faithfull ally-atlanticist", "territorial defender", "pro-European multilateralist", "promoter of regional cooperation" and "bridge". The set of roles confirmed rather stable than unexpected guidelines for Lithuanian foreign policy: US prioritization, the pro-European direction, harsh stance towards Russia, active support for the Eastern Partnership. However, it is important to indicate that compared to the first term of D. Grybauskaitė, her position during the second term returned to the tracks drawn by V. Adamkus. The main factor which has led to these changes was aggresive Russian behavior. The President of Lithuania took a consistent and extremely rigorous stance against it, constantly reminding Western leaders of the Russian expansion possibility. Russian actions also highlighted the importance of US and NATO. The factor of Russian aggression can also be seen as an impetus for taking measures to strengthen the country's defense and thus consolidating the role of the " territorial defender". Such role changes because of the circumstances in the international arena, proves that structural factors are much more influencial than leader's preferences. It is important to mention that all three elements of role coincided with one another.

The aim of this study – "Security Agenda of Donald J. Trump: Analysis of Security Rhetoric of the US President" – is to analyze post-inaugurational rhetoric of the U.S. President Donald J. Trump attempting to reveal the aspects of U.S. foreign policy that are securitized by the current U.S. President and how the securitization of those aspects translates to the National Security Strategy of the United States of America. The main question is what aspects of U.S. foreign policy are securitized by President Donald J. Trump and how it is reflected in the National Security Strategy of the United States of America? Goals of this study are (1) to examine the existing academic literature that analyses the rhetoric of Donald J. Trump, his foreign policy goals and implemented foreign policy; (2) using Securitization theory by B. Buzan and O.Weaver understand what aspects of U.S. foreign policy are securitized in Donald J. Trump's rhetoric and (3) upon the identification of Trump's securitized U.S. foreign policy aspects examine the National Security Strategy of the United States of America, seeking to reveal which of Trump's securitized aspects are reflected in the strategy and which of those transgress the limits of securitizing move (i.e. a certain aspect of the U.S. foreign policy is not only named as a threat but also emergency measures are offered to solve that threat). In order to achieve these goals a method of qualitative content analysis was used to select the relevant material (speeches, remarks and press conferences of Donald J. Trump on national security and foreign policy) and build coding frame which allowed to identify the main threats that are securitized in Donald J. Trump's rhetoric. The identified threats fall under three main categories: existential threats (terrorism and rogue regimes i.e. Iran, North Korea, Syria); threats to the U.S. interests (bad deals and states that are not fulfilling financial obligations to international organizations) and threats that are securitized in two ways – as existential threats as well as threats to the U.S. interests (immigration). The research in this study has shown that almost all these threats (except for states that are not fulfilling financial obligations to international organizations) are included into the National Security Strategy of the United States of America. This study also reveals that the threats that were included into the National Security Strategy are securitized there in a very similar fashion to the way they are securitized in Presidential rhetoric. Finally, it is determined that emergency measures were offered to solve those threats that were securitized (at least in part) as existential threats – terrorism, rogue regimes, immigration – in the rhetoric of U.S. President Donald J. Trump while those threats that did not have an element of existential threat in their securitization remained in the realm of securitizing move, that is the measures that were offered to solve them do not constitute as emergency measures. The study ends with several suggestions for future research that would be useful and interesting. It is proposed to execute a more in-depth analysis of threats to the U.S. interests seeking to find out whether there are some threats that are securitized as threats to the U.S. interests that surpasses the limits of securitizing move or to examine which of the securitized threats reach the third step of securitization and are accepted by the public.