scholarly journals Military Security of Poland – From Theory to Practice

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Grzegorz Sobolewski ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
Strategic Alliance ◽  
International Security ◽  
Defense Mechanism ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Policy And Strategy ◽  
Military Security ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Military ◽  
The Eu

National and international security remains a fascinating area of scientific research. Studies of phenomena and processes in military security suggest that we are witnessing great and intense changes. In their analyses of the modern security environment, both NATO and the EU wish to accommodate the existing conditions. Poland also has been affected by that process. The security policy should be based on the main assumption that Poland is a sovereign security entity, able to define its national interests and strategic objectives autonomously. However, the foundations of our security are assured by membership in the EU and NATO, good relations in the region, a strategic alliance with the USA, and an internal defense mechanism. The needs of the state and the society for national security arise from a dynamic rate of changes in challenges and hazards. The Author intends to combine theory with practice that is implemented in favor of the military security of Poland. First of all, the essence of military security is presented from theoretical and utilitarian viewpoints. The subsequent parts of the paper present research results related to the identification of contemporary challenges and hazards to the military security of Poland. This approach provided an opportunity to outline assumptions of policy and strategy underlying military security in current international security conditions.

scholarly journals CHANGING OF PARADIGM IN MILITARY-POLITICAL THINKING IN THE DOCTRINES AND STRATEGIES OF MILITARY SECURITY OF UKRAINE OF THE 20th AND 21th CENTURIES

2021 ◽  
pp. 120-126
Author(s):  
Mykhailo Tsiurupa
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
Military Strategy ◽  
New Paradigm ◽  
Political Thinking ◽  
Main Thesis ◽  
Political Response ◽  
Military Security ◽  
The Creation ◽  
New Generation ◽  
The Military

The time limits of the life of one generation are about 25-30 years, so lived in the struggle for building its own state and its armed defence, this time for Ukraine goes down in the history of the first generation of creation and attempts to comply with four military doctrines (1993-2004-2012-2015), in which our own defence course was proclaimed. The theoretical basis of these official documents of significance were certain paradigms of military-political thinking, according to which Ukraine did not consider it a continuation of politics. The direction and principles of military policy (defence or security policy in European terminology) for modern Ukraine from the mid-20s of the XIX century, as well as 100 years ago, again came to the fore in connection with the implementation of previously abstract concepts " annexation "," occupation "," war ", which allegedly did not exist for our country in recent history. But today they have been embodied or, in the image of Franz Kafka, "reincarnated" into threatening forms of Russia's military practice against our state, the end of which is not yet visible in the near future. The military-theoretical and political response was the "Military Strategy of Ukraine" in 2021, which "opened" a new generation of paradigms of militarypolitical thinking. The main thesis is the belief that the protection of sovereignty and strengthening of military security is the military-theoretical and political response was the "Military Strategy of Ukraine" in 2021, which "opened" a new generation of paradigms of military-political thinking. The main thesis is the belief that the protection of sovereignty and strengthening of military security is the creation of a "comprehensive defence system" with the integration of all forces of the state and civil society, law enforcement agencies and volunteers, administrative regions and territorial communities. The military-theoretical and political response was the "Military Strategy of Ukraine" in 2021, which "opened" a new generation of paradigms of military-political thinking. We will prove that this is a philosophy of military security instead of the previously expressed doctrinal military-political ideas of entrusting a matter of national importance to the forces of the defence sector. The new generation of public life Ukraine will begin with a new paradigm of militarypolitical thinking, the central idea of which is the transition from hopes for the political levers of defence for international cooperation to the creation of a system of comprehensive national security with the synergistic potential of Ukrainianity.

scholarly journals Transregionalism in relations between Latin America and the European Union

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (Extra-B) ◽  
pp. 297-304
Author(s):  
Elizaveta Andreevna Vinogradova ◽  
Marina Vladimirovna Kuznetsova
Keyword(s):  
Latin America ◽  
Latin American ◽  
World Politics ◽  
The European Union ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Globalized World ◽  
Latin American Countries ◽  
The Eu

Nowadays the globalized world faces new challenges, for instance, trade and economic contradictions between the main actors of the world politics (the USA and China, the USA and the EU). Amid this situation, Latin America could play the card, add momentum to the cross-regional contacts and considerably benefit from it. Fostering relations with the EU serves the national interests of Latin American countries, since the EU investment and technologies can be the tools to modernize the economy. The EU is the leader in implementing harmonization between regions. The relations between the EU and Latin America can be considered as a model of hybrid interregionalism. While bilateral relations or the ties of the EU with subregional integration associations remain strong, the relations between the EU and the entire Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) region are still underdeveloped, and countries have been trying to rectify it recently.

scholarly journals Introduction

2020 ◽  
pp. 7-20
Author(s):  
Alexander Sidorov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Goal Setting ◽  
The Political ◽  
Strategic Culture ◽  
Political Actor ◽  
Objective Reduction ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Defence Cooperation ◽  
The Military ◽  
The Eu

The introduction examines the interaction of the EU countries and their approaches to the themes of defence and security in the changed geopolitical realities (Brexit, D. Trump's rise to power in the USA, the mood of the new leadership of the EU institutions, etc.). It highlights both the difficulties in creating an independent defence pole and the opportunities that open up in connection with Brexit and an objective reduction in the potential for blocking initiatives aimed at revitalizing and implementing specific defence projects. The difficulties of creating the EU military doctrine and the implementation of a common strategic culture are revealed in the context of different goal-setting of the main participants in European defence construction, related, inter alia, to the heterogeneous development of the integration in the context of its ongoing expansion, different perception and assessment of threats and the existence of de facto unequal security zones in Europe. The nature of the interaction between the CSDP EU and NATO is shown; the role of this interaction as a catalyst for the processes of greater EU independence in the military sphere is highlighted, taking into account the specifics of the EU global approach to resolving crises of low and medium intensity on the periphery of the EU. An assessment of the feasibility of cooperation plans in the field of defence and security, initiatives at the EU and interstate levels in connection with the pandemic is given. It notes the flexibility, sustainability and multi-formatting of defence cooperation in the EU, the political mood of its main participants to continue and improve cooperation within the framework of the CSDP in order to strengthen the EU’s position as an international political actor.

scholarly journals Geopolitical rivalry of global powers and its implications in Nepal

Unity Journal ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 57-65
Author(s):  
Geja Sharma Wagle
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
National Unity ◽  
National Interests ◽  
The Us ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
Military Security ◽  
Strategic Defense ◽  
Strategic Balance ◽  
Global Powers

National unity and independence, territorial integrity, people's sovereignty and national security are the supreme priority for any sovereign and independent country across the world. The essence of national unity and security is the most important and highly sensitive issue for Nepal in account of its geopolitical sensitivities and geostrategic balance as Nepal is located between two giant nuclear countries and rising global powers – India and China. Analyzing the national interests and national security policy of all three countries – India, China and the US, it is open secret that they have direct strategic, defense and security interests in Nepal. They, therefore, have strategic rivalry to extend their political, diplomatic, economic, strategic, defense and security and cultural influence in Nepal because of its geopolitical importance and geostrategic sensitivity. The emerging triangular strategic rivalry may undermine Nepal’s national interests and national security in the future as their rivalry gets intensified. It is a grave situation for Nepal which will have significant immediate as well as long-term implications. Nepal, therefore, should thoughtfully study to analyze the emerging global powers’ defense, military, security and foreign policies and strategies and should protect and preserve Nepal’s national interests and national security maintaining diplomatic and strategic balance among them.

scholarly journals Various approaches to building of «European Defence» in France

2020 ◽  
pp. 114-136
Author(s):  
Vladimir Chernega ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Eastern European Countries ◽  
The Military ◽  
The Eu

The article considers the views existing in France on the prospects of the European Union becoming a «political power» and the appearance in it of its own military instrument. It is noted that, in the opinion of most French politicians, experts and journalists, the EU is still far from being a full-pledged political subject. Although political and military structures are formed in it, as a kind of «embrio» of quasi statehood, and a «neo-imperial» tendency already exists in it, basically the EU is an economic and «civilian» power which must fight for influence on the international arena only with the help of «soft power». The main reason of its weakness is its internal friability, disagreements between Members States over its future. In addition, the United States, which are not interested in a new global rival, are hampering the achievement of the self-sufficiency, especially in the military-political share. NATO, controlled by the USA, can only allow the creation of a «European pillar» under its umbrella. Eastern European countries are against military integration of the EU, because they are oriented not by Brussels, but by Washington in the security field. However, the rise of China and the election of the nationalist Donald Trump as a President of the United States strengthened the trend in the EU advocating its political independence and the creation of its own «European defence». The article analyzes the initiatives and actions of French President Emmanuel Macron who personifies this trend. It is stated that, with the help of Germany, he managed to achieve certain progress both in terms of general integration and in the field of «European defence». This allowed him to speak about the formation of a «European army». But the question of whether he will be able to go further remains open. Besides the obstacles to political and military integration, which did not disappear, the coronavirus pandemic introduces its «corrections». The newly discovered split in the EU into «South» and «North» called into question its already fragile construction.

scholarly journals GEORGIA'S ECONOMY IN THE SPACE OF CONTRADICTIONS BETWEEN REGIONAL POWERS

2016 ◽  
pp. 219-233
Author(s):  
A. S. Degtev ◽  
A. Margoev ◽  
A. A. Tokarev
Keyword(s):  
Regional Analysis ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The European Union ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Financial Flows ◽  
Economic Point ◽  
Caucasus Region ◽  
Chinese Investment ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Eu

The article deals with the economic ties between Georgia and four countries neighbouring the Caucasus region: Russia, Turkey, Iran, and Kazakhstan. The authors focus their attention on regional analysis and, for comparison, give figures on Georgia's relations with three global players: the USA, the EU, and the PRC. The authors postulate at least three challenges to Russia’s interests in Georgia. First, both Georgian establishment and society regard integration with the EU and NATO as main goal of the state, which in case of NATO evidently contradicts Russian national interests. Second, from the economic point of view, the USA is no longer a financial driver of Georgian reforms. The EU, main trade partner of Georgia for the past 15 years, has replaced it. The CIS surpasses the EU in commodity turnover with Georgia, however it is in fact an amorphous organization that formally combines its member-states and lacks for common economic policy, unlike the European Union that acts as an integration association. Third, Chinese investment in Georgian infrastructure within the "New Silk Way" project serves as a ponderable alternative to Russian financial flow. For a comprehensive analysis of the situation the authors used some figures concerning commodity trade, FDI, cross-border financial flows, tourism, and transport development. Major pipeline branches, including the planned projects, are taken into account as well. The findings are based on the results of desk research, and on empirical data obtained through meetings with Georgian government officials.

scholarly journals The Role of the UN Peacemaking Operations in the Foreign Policy of Denmark in the 1990s: from an Exemplary Peacemaker to an Ardent Atlanticist

2021 ◽  
pp. 41-50
Author(s):  
N. Belukhin
Keyword(s):  
Status Seeking ◽  
The Usa ◽  
International Activism ◽  
Peace Enforcement ◽  
The One ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
The Military ◽  
International Status ◽  
The Eu

Under the Cold War Denmark successfully employed the UN peacemaking operations to increase its own international status and strengthen relations with the key Western allies. The Nordic model of peacemaking was later considered as an example to be followed by other European states in the 1990s. As the role of the UN gradually declined during the 1990s and the UN peacemaking operations led to major failures, most notably the Srebrenica massacre and the Rwandan genocide, NATO, as well as the EU, started expanding their own activities in the sphere of peacemaking and peace enforcement. As a consequence, Denmark stopped considering the UN peacemaking as the main framework for international activism and started getting increasingly engaged in coalition operations and NATO operations as a means to win the favor of the key ally — the USA. Another factor that significantly contributed to Denmark’s growing atlanticism was the so-called "defense clause" which prevented Denmark from participating in the military dimension of the emerging CFSP within the EU and later CSDP. The Danish international activism acquired therefore a tangible military element which on the one hand enabled Denmark to punch above its weight, but at the same time became contradictory to the very ideas and goals which made international activism attractive for the Danish public in the first place. The initial value- and identity-driven UN peacemaking eventually became reduced to a means of accomplishing limited goals of status-seeking and ensuring the country’s place as a non-permanent member of the Security Council. It is thus becoming increasingly difficult for Denmark to reconcile the adherence to humanitarian diplomacy and Nordic "Peace Brand" with aggressive military activism.

MIDDLE EAST POLICY COMPONENT OF THE USA, CHINA AND RUSSIAN FEDERATION: POLICY OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (12) ◽  
pp. 133-146
Author(s):  
D. V. GORDIENKO ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Important Place ◽  
The World ◽  
The Usa ◽  
East Component ◽  
The Military ◽  
The Impact

The Middle East component of the policy of the states of the "strategic triangle" Russia-China-USA occupies an important place in the implementation of the national interests of the USA, China and the Russian Federation in various regions of the world. The purpose of this article is to assess the impact of the Middle East component of the policies of these states on the implementation of their current economic and military policies and on ensuring their national security. An approach to comparing the influence of the Middle East component of the policy of the states of the "strategic triangle" Russia-China-USA, which allows identifying the priorities of Russia's policy in the Middle East and other regions of the world, is proposed. Comparison of the Middle East component of the policy of the states of the "strategic triangle" can be used to substantiate recommendations to the military-political leadership of our country. The article concludes that the Middle East component of the policy of the United States, China and Russia acquires significance in the implementation of the current economic and military policy of the countries of the Middle East region.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document