Suchergebnisse

Emanuel Adler & Michael Barnett's recently edited volume, Security Communities (1998), purports to explore & explain the development of relationships in which peaceful resolution of conflicts is the norm. An examination of this effort finds it wanting. The editors' approach neglects one of the most crucial of questions: "Whose security is guaranteed by such communities?" An examination of the editors' assumptions reveals that security communities are created to maintain the economic & political power of elites, often at the expense of the populations over which they rule. Moreover, their state-centric approach ignores the importance & influence of transnational phenomena. Finally, the assumption that increased interaction naturally leads to reduced conflict is simplistic at best. The case of West Africa, in particular, the creation of the Economic Community Cease-Fire Monitoring Group, illustrates the shortcomings of Adler & Barnett's arguments. 16 References. K. A. Larsen

Several problems with ascertaining the conditions for achieving security are highlighted. Although individual security has traditionally been determined by evaluating a person's physical & environmental safety, economic well-being, social security, domestic order, & identity & values, it is asserted that additional measures must be incorporated into individual security assessments, eg, the need to calculate risks & identify potential threats. Although it is deemed easier to evaluate national security than individual security, it is noted that national security is contradictory since personal insecurity is frequently necessary to secure the nation. It is subsequently asserted that efforts to preserve global/planetary security conflict with measures designed to protect individual security. Even though international security is perceived as the product of global cooperation, it is maintained that threats to international safety emanate from the domestic deficiencies of particular members of the international community. Consequently, it is stressed that many people have advocated community-based security measures to compensate for inadequate national & international security programs. Multiple recommendations for enhancing Australia's national security, promoting Australia's involvement in international security design, & addressing the growth of community-based security in Australia are also offered. 1 Figure. J. W. Parker

Outlines Lithuania's initiatives to increase regional cooperation and enhance linkages with Euro-Atlantic institutions; views of the Lithuanian foreign minister. Lithuania's chairmanship of the Council of Baltic Sea States, leadership in coordinating assistance for Russia's Kaliningrad region, and prospects for joining the EU and NATO.

The role of historical change in international relations has been an important issue, especially regarding the `ahistoricism' of mainstream theories. In this context, security studies has suffered from a lack of analysis of the state and its relation to historical change. When this attitude is challenged, it can be seen that the particular `state' of security studies fits into a particular historical logic that structured states which is susceptible to change. A historical sociological analysis of the development of the state-society complexes surrounding security can provide a historical analysis of the state, in order to better articulate its continuing relevance to political life and security, its relationship with individuals and society, and the complexities of contemporary citizenship. The 20th century saw the development of the `security state', where the western state became the centre of security provision, the protector against external threat and provider of domestic well-being.