One of the most surprising aspects of the renaissance of scholarly interest in culture has been the emerging consensus in national security policy studies that culture effects significantly grand strategy and state behaviour. Therefore, the paper tries to advance rigorous procedures for testing for the existence and influence of security and strategic culture of different national states. It builds mainly on the definition of Alastair I. Johnston (1995) and Jeffrey S. Lantis (2002), who relate security and strategic culture with the definition of main goals/objectives of the state in security affairs and with ways of achieving them. As a case study, the paper will evaluate the approaches of the United States and France towards security threats in the early 21st century, especially towards the threat of global terrorism. It will assess whether and why when achieving security objectives, defined at the highest political level, persuasive or coercive strategy and military or non-military tools were preferred; whether negotiations, diplomacy and political pressure were favoured, or whether it was rather opted for deployment of armed forces and warfare. The text attempts to show how the differences in security and strategic culture, American and French particular identities, values, norms and perceptive lens might lead to different understandings of terrorism as global security threat and to distinct measures taken in the fight against it.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:nusl.cz/oai:invenio.nusl.cz:196935 |
| Date | January 2008 |
| Creators | Čmakalová, Kateřina |
| Contributors | Eichler, Jan, Veselý, Zdeněk, Novák, Jaromír, Adamec, Vilém |
| Publisher | Vysoká škola ekonomická v Praze |
| Source Sets | Czech ETDs |
| Language | Czech |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess |
Page generated in 0.0017 seconds