Search

This paper assesses the global health implications of security-oriented regulation of laboratory research on pathogenic micro-organisms. The challenge with such regulation, implemented to address government concerns about biological weapons use, is to maximise security benefits while minimising interference with legitimate scientific research conducted for therapeutic ends. The biotechnology sector performs basic research on infectious diseases, produces vaccines and other drugs, and instructs health professionals on how to use them. Too much biosecurity regulation might cripple commercial and academic enterprise in the life sciences and thereby diminish the ability of public health systemsâ??particularly their diagnostic and patient care elementsâ??to respond to an infectious disease outbreak. It may also hinder valuable international collaborations on addressing local and transnational infectious disease threats. On the other hand, the potential application of gene technology for offensive purposes highlights the powerful position held by scientists with access to pathogens and knowledge of what makes them dangerous. The paper compares biosecurity regulatory schemes in the United States and Australia, and offers more general observations about health and security trade-offs in a global context. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses the intensification of anti-immigration measures in Minnesota, first, as effective performances of biopolitical statecraft, i.e., as speech-acts that produce local agents of "national security" whose role is to secure "American society" against the perceived threats posed by foreign bodies. Blurring the boundaries between war and law enforcement, these agents defend the body politic against the parasitic and insidious bodies of immigrants by mapping local spaces and communities (thereby rendering potentially hazardous bodies visible), by inoculating, weakening, or purging bodies deemed hazardous (e.g., through surveillance, incarceration, deportation, and killing, and by threatening all of these tactics), and by regulating the everyday lives of Minnesota residents. Secondly, the paper analyses these orders and orderings as effects of the nationalist or, more accurately, nation-statist backlash against the boundary-blurring movements and migrations animated by the post-nationalist economic logic of global capitalism. Drawing on Foucault's recently translated lectures, I argue that the resurgence of nationalist populism in Minnesota, and in the U.S. more broadly, restages a xenophobic, "neo-racist" fantasy. The new populist movement strives to domesticate the U.S. war machine in order to police and defend the borders, internal and external, of an imagined American nation. Finally, drawing on Derrida, Althusser, and Lacan, I demonstrate the ways in which anti-immigrant populism is fueled by failure, and particularly by the failure to realize the fantasy of ethno-national harmony through representational practices and physical violence. I argue that the "American nation" cannot be defended because, in the last analysis, it does not exist. It is anxiety stemming from its absence, I suggest, that fuels the productive activities of the police state. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the various impacts of contemporary globalization on national security, with special reference to the migration of the Taiwanese semiconductor industry to China and its security challenges to the United States, Taiwan and China. The paper adheres to a sectoral approach to the study of globalization-security interconnections and adopts a broadly based definition of security pertaining to the case study in question that encompasses economic, technological and defense security. The analysis of the subject matter is grounded in evidence collected in more than 140 interviews with chip industry, defense sector and government insiders in the US and Asia, as well as English-language and Chinese-language secondary data. On sectoral migration, the paper argues that the scope of the migration is extensive, the direction complicated, the cause multiple, and the outcome significant in boosting the development of the indigenous Chinese chip industry. It has been discovered that some Taiwanese non-state chip actors have violated government regulations in the process of spearheading the migration, and some have even forged business ties with their PRC counterparts associated with the PLA. As for the ensuing security ramifications, it is argued that there is no immediate security risk involved, although long-term strategic repercussions are paramount. The depth and scope of the continuous sectoral migration in years to come will determine the level of economic security risks faced by the US and Taiwan. Long-term technological and defense security repercussions need to take into account two important elements at play: technological change in the sector (increasing commercial-to-military spin-on and dual-use nature of the chip technology), and the PRC dual-track (economic and defense) grand strategy behind its resolve to upgrade its indigenous chip capability. Four pertinent aspects are analyzed: (a) concerns over the PRC chip industrial base, its contribution to the PLA modernization and the ensuing shift in the balance of power in Beijing's favour; (b) technology-related misgivings over the trustworthy supplies of chips for the US and Taiwanese military end uses, as well as the shrinking "chip gap"; (c) fear of denial of chip supply due to foreign dependency; (d) dubious implementation of export control policies at the unilateral and the multilateral level that exacerbate some of the above security repercussions. The concluding section elucidates how the case study helps to show the impact of globalization on security as far as the agency and scope of security, the autonomy and capacity of the state, as well as the balance of power are concerned. To sum up, the study offers a fresh look at the complex security repercussions of the globalization of a strategic industry that occurs in a politically sensitive region in world politics today. It not only helps us disentangle an important policy issue, but also advances our theoretical understanding of the globalization-security interconnections in international relations today. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the extent to which there has been a discursive shift in the debate over U.S. immigration policy from a right-based framework to a security-based framework. In addition to examining the discourse shaping the debate over U.S. immigration policy, the paper considers the extent to which norms that shape the debate over U.S. immigration policy have been effectively translated into legislation or implemented at the bureaucratic level. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will use the mass media theory of framing to assess three major Japanese newspapers-Yomiuri, Asahi and Mainichi -editorials (694) concerning Japan’s homeland security from 9/11/01-2/29/04. Based on the kinds of topics addressed by the editorials surveyed, I utilized five frames - national interest, cost/consequence, threat, responsibility and human interest. This period was selected because it includes 9/11, the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq, new Japanese legislation related to homeland security and anti-terrorism, PM Koizumi’s historic visit to North Korea, the killing of two Japanese diplomats in Iraq and finally the dispatch of more than 1000 ground, air, maritime SDF forces to Iraq for humanitarian and reconstruction assistance. The paper concludes by discussing the significance of this data for future Japanese homeland security. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Case studies on Clinton Administration national security policymaking are an important area for policy relevant research. During the 1990s, there were various attempts by the Clinton Administration to innovate in national security policymaking. Innovations were attempted in peace operations, the interagency process, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Were the 1990s Clinton policy leadership efforts in stopping the threats of WMD proliferation in North Korea, India, Pakistan, Iran and Iraq all policy failures that could have been prevented? Could more effective Clinton Administration policy leadership have made US counterproliferation efforts more successful? This paper focuses on the Clinton Administration?s Counterproliferation Policy Initiative in the 1994 North Korean Agreed Framework Case. The case uses coercive diplomacy theory to examine the existence of a theory-practice gap in assessing Clinton Administration top-down leadership in the 1994 North Korean crisis. This paper?s findings suggest a relatively effective linkage of theory and practice, however, the result is a short term rather than long term policy success. Additional case studies are necessary to further assess the effectiveness of Clinton era executive leadership patterns in Counterproliferation Initiative policymaking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the issues of agency merger and managerial flexibility in the Department of Homeland Security. The mission of DHS is to prevent terrorist attacks within the United States, reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism, and minimize the damage and recover from attacks that do occur (Bush 2002b, 8). The creation of DHS reflects the confluence of two strains of thought: the key issues and strategies of homeland security and the values of strategic management, especially strategic human resources management. The remainder of the paper identifies the critical questions in each area that impact the future success or failure of DHS, evaluates the passage and implementation of the new Department, and makes recommendations for future action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My study examines the conditions under which middle power states, such as Canada, the Netherlands, and Norway, may exercise effective leadership in the realm of human security. I hypothesize that a middle power-led human security initiative is more likely to be successful if the initiative does not threaten the fundamental principles of the superpower. My paper demonstrates that although it is possible for a human security initiative to overcome American opposition that is based on political or military interests, an initiative will be less likely to succeed if it challenges the core principles of the United States. I test the hypothesis by conducting a qualitative analysis of four cases of human security initiatives where the middle powers have played leadership roles. The cases include the endeavor to create a United Nations rapid deployment peacekeeping force, which led to the formation of the Standby High Readiness Brigade for United Nations Operations (SHIRBRIG) in 1996; the campaign to ban anti-personnel landmines, which resulted in the 1997 Ottawa Convention; the struggle to establish the International Criminal Court, which came into existence in 2002; and the unsuccessful attempt to regulate the legal trade in small arms and light weapons. The United States has taken different positions on these issues. The U.S. approved of the idea of a standby UN rapid response force, but did not participate in the establishment of SHIRBRIG. Washington objected to the Ottawa Convention on the basis of a conflict with U.S. military interests, and opposed the International Criminal Court due to the influence of certain groups in the American foreign policy establishment. Finally, the U.S. rejected the adoption of restrictions on the licit small arms trade due to a clash with an American principle protected by the U.S. Constitution: the right to bear arms. By illustrating that smaller states can assume leadership on global security, my paper counters the trend in international security studies of focusing almost exclusively on great power leadership, a tendency which has been reinforced by the decades-long predominance of the realist approach to international relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While almost a decade old, Ted Hopf's observation that the democratic peace is an observation in search of a theory still has some validity. In particular, the mechanisms behind the observed lack of war between democracies are poorly understood, making it difficult for scholars to provide a compelling explanation. While there has been some innovative work, particularly with respect to learning and the ability of an increasing number of democracies to cement democratic norms, Müller and Wolff note that normative and structural explanations are monadic explanations for a dyadic phenomenon. Underappreciated in the existing work is the role of identity and the importance this has for driving the democratic peace. With a focus on developing a dyadic democratic peace mechanism and using a case study approach, this paper utilizes the Copenhagen School's securitization framework to examine how identity plays out in the U.S. response to the Indian and Iranian nuclear programs. It finds that in fact identity does play a significant role in how security policy is constructed. The potential implications of this finding, particularly on policy, are significant. If the democratic peace does rely on identity to trigger the constraining norms that limit the escalation of conflict to violence, it is unlikely the democratic peace can be spread by force and it is possible that states nominally democratic can be excluded from the community of democracies if their behavior or significant other aspects of their perceived identity are at variance with the accepted democratic identity standard. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Paper examines changes in U.S. immigration and border policies post-9/11 ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I make two related claims in this paper. First, current debates about the nature of American primacy largely neglect how weak states can nonetheless frustrate American designs even under conditions of sharp material asymmetry. Second, these debates also sidestep the question of why states vary in their degree of sensitivity to American strategies. I argue that we need to view the security dilemma as a social process if we are to capture how actor identities and interests can become more conflictual over time. The content of a regime?s legitimating identity project, coupled with its prior rhetoric, determine (1) its sensitivity to American policies and (2) its probability of becoming entrapped on a path that leads to escalating challenges of American primacy. Russia?s response to the introduction and use of American forces in Central Asia after 11 September 2001 is used to test the proposition that security dilemmas can shift actor identities and create incentives to challenge, if quietly, American power. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bill Clinton in 1998 set up the first institutions and strategies of a U.S. cyber-security policy. The focus at that time was very much on cyberterrorism. Under George W. Bush, the discourse over cyber threats took three new turns. The first one came immediately after the election, when suddenly nation-states like China received much more attention in the cyber-threat debate. The second turn came after the attacks on 11 September 2001, and brought cyberterrorism back onto the security political radar. Now, with Iraq and Norht Korea on top of the security agenda, the debate seems to turn back towards states as possible cyber enemies again. How are these discourse serpentines linked to the real problem, if at all? This paper will provide some insight on the possible reasons for the change in perception of the cyber threat. It will show that the debate over the danger from cyberspace in the general public as well as in the political elites is decoupled from the real-world cyber-threat developments and in a postmodern way really is a virtual debate. In the end, we will see that "cyber-" has more to do with discursive trends and hidden agendas than with electronic terrorism or digital enemies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the hypothesis that the social reproduction of affluence tends to intensify national and human in/security, a contradiction that is projected on a universal scale by US strategies of world order. In the context of the hierarchy of social and political forces in a global order configured by disciplinary neo-liberalism, an exploration of the US political economy is crucial. This is partly because American lifestyles are increasingly energy-intensive, consumerist, individualist and premised on forms of social Darwinism that entail restructuring of social institutions and patterns of social risk. This, along with the shock associated with the mega-terrorist attacks of 9/11, as well as violence within US society, have led to generalized and growing perceptions of increasing insecurity. Here, one of the paradoxes of intensified globalization is that there appears to be an inverse correlation between the wealth held by individuals and their sense of personal security. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Debates in security studies in the U.S. and Europe have drifted almost completely apart. In Europe it is common to present the theoretical landscape in terms of, say, critical security studies, the Copenhagen School, traditionalism and feminism. In the U.S. it is more common to see the major debate within security studies as being the one between offensive realism and defensive realism! Previously, almost all theoretical inventions in IR were made in the U.S. Currently, distinct theories are widely associated with places like Aberystwyth (Critical Security Studies), Paris (Bigo’s Bourdieu-inspired work) and Copenhagen (securitization). The new European approaches differ not only from security studies in the US, they also stand apart from most work done in other parts of the world. Are these theories peculiarly ‘European’ and if so, why? The paper aims at explaining the emergence of these European security theories. The explanation draws partly on the political context in the different regions, and partly on features of the intellectual fields, International Relations and Security Studies. The theories are also assessed briefly as to their relevance and usefulness. To what extent are they bound to local, European problems or relevant to the issues that are addressed elsewhere and vice-versa for the theories that flourish in the U.S. and the periphery respectively? Can they travel to the other parts of the world in a helpful role? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined state-mandated training requirements for emergency first responders in the eleven states of the southeast United States, focusing on police officers, firefighters and emergency medical workers. The study posited that a clear understanding of first responder training requirements is necessary for the creation of effective state and federal emergency response plans. The study found that emergency medical workers are the most regulated and consistently trained of the three groups, with firefighter training being the most unregulated and inconsistent. The paper includes a discussion of the implications of the differences in training mandates and of the lack of mandated standards on state and national emergency response plans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that the institutionalization of the national security staff in the period 1949-2001 is largely driven by an increase in presidential bargaining uncertainty linked to changes in the presidential bargaining environment. As such, the growth of the NSC staff is driven by many of the same factors that explain the institutionalization of the White House staff more generally. After laying out a theory of staff growth derived from Neustadt’s model of presidential power, the theory is tested utilizing regression analysis and fractionally differenced variables designed to capture both short and long term influences on staff growth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

President Bush scored an important political victory with regard to the bureaucratic reorganization that led to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, but considerable leadership from the president is needed if the Department is to succeed at the mission the administration has defined for it. President Bush’s goals for the new Department include: centralizing the homeland security function, improving coordination and communication among agencies responsible for domestic security, developing new technologies capable of detecting nuclear, chemical and biological threats, and preparing state and local first responders to cope with any future terrorist attack. This paper addresses three significant challenges to the success of the Department of Homeland Security and the president’s management of it. The challenge of improving coordination and communication between agencies responsible for domestic security. The challenge of structuring a workforce capable of carrying out the domestic security function. And, the challenge of providing the necessary resources for an endeavor of such magnitude. The conclusion of the author is that while the administration excelled at articulating a vision for the new Department, its present choices regarding the operations of the Department are less convincing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Utilizing Baumgartner and Jones (1993) theory of punctuated equilibrium, we examine several terrorist attacks that occurred in the U.S. and Japan during the past decade: the World Trade Center Bombing of 1993; the Sarin nerve gas attack on the Tokyo subway in 1995; the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995; and the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The analysis demonstrates that earlier incidents failed to mobilize sufficient public interest to bring about major change. Only in the aftermath of September 11, was sufficient public attention focused on homeland security to bring about significant change. We also examine the institutional evolution of homeland defense in the U.S. and the creation and missions of the Office of Homeland Security and proposed Department of Homeland Security. The paper concludes with a critical assessment as to whether the new organizations have been given the necessary tools to adequately confront the threat posed by terrorism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current U.S. security strategy contains several relevant elements, and some of them are new. At the inter-American level, the most important issue is whether security will override indefinitely other important issues of U.S.-Latin American relations. The end of the Cold War radically changed the global panorama and gave rise to the emergence of new actors and issues on the international agenda that are currently challenging the scenario of the world order. Terrorism, drug trafficking, and the fight against organized crime are some of the big problems to be tackled. September 11 produced a rigorous review of U.S. security doctrine, giving rise to preemptive action and homeland security, which demonstrate how the United States concentrated on implementing unilateral policies by adopting a strategy towards guaranteeing security "vis-à-vis everyone and despite everyone." The future of Latin America in U.S. national security plans, at least in the short term, was relegated to a back burner, just as multilateralism became the mechanism par excellence for solving conflicts in the international arena. In the eight years of the George W. Bush presidency, the United States returned to a vertical unilateralism, with extraordinary implications for international security. The U.S. also relatively abandoned some of the regions allegedly of importance, such as Latin America. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1997, the United States government claimed ownership of the root file database and the domain name system (DNS) on which the functioning of the Internet depends. This U.S. decision constructed the Internet as a global marketplace rather than as a global public community even as the latter vision of Internet governance was equally compatible with efficient management of the system. Whereas the extant literature on Internet governance is predominantly normative, my study poses an analytical question: why did the U.S. government promote the Global Marketplace vision, which privileges corporate and intellectual property interests, over the alternative, Global Public Community vision of Internet governance? I will argue that U.S. identity, anchored in the trope of freedom and articulated through the discourses of democracy and free market enterprise precluded the Global Community vision from emerging as a viable Internet governance solution. The U.S. acted to incorporate and secure the Internet into market-oriented normative and legal frameworks in a way that reflected and reproduced America's self-image as a champion of freedom and a leader of the community of the world's capitalist-democratic nations. The relative success of the United States in shaping the Internet as a Global Marketplace means that the Internet is free in the predominant sense in which "freedom" is discursively constructed in contemporary U.S. culture; it is not "free" in the more radical sense implicitly associated with the term by champions of the Global Community vision of the Internet, which predominates the extant literature on the subject. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Is climate change a valid national security issue for the United States? Even taking a narrow definition of national security issues-threats to a state's core values for which it would be willing to go to war or use force, one can identify a number of ways in which climate change already constitutes a national security issue to which security specialists in the United States should pay attention. In part 1, I explore the definitional terrain of "environmental security" by offering an account of "national security" and "grand strategy" that accords with traditional conceptions of security. I also identify criteria by which climate change could constitute a threat to national security and the U.S. in particular. In parts 2-4, I assess whether the potential effects of climate change constitute national security threats for the United States. In part 2, I examine the directs effects of climate change on the territorial United States, including abrupt climate change and extreme weather events. In part 3, I discuss the effects of climate change on the extraterritorial interests of the U.S. including the links between extreme weather events and violent conflict, natural disasters and humanitarian intervention, and, finally, climate change and soft power. The final section explores the security externalities of energy and climate change, looking at the links between oil dependence, terrorism, and climate change as well as the proliferation problems associated nuclear power as a remedy for climate change. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the phenomenon of the national security mom or mother and the role she played in the 2004 U.S. presidential elections. U.S. President George W. Bush's better showing with women in 2004 were attributed to security moms. In 2000, Bush narrowed his deficit among female voters to five percentage points from 11, evidence that security moms doubted U.S. presidential candidate John Kerry's ability to fight terrorism.

The article examines how uniquely powerful hegemons behave in uniquely institutionalized environments. It proposes two additions to work on substitutability, suggesting that the sources of substitution derive from strategic interactions with other states, which may involve norm contestation. The author then applies this argument to developments in different sectors of maritime security since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the U.S.

Research on natural and technological disaster management policy often finds there are meaningful disincentives for state and local governments to be proactive in terms of preparedness effort. We investigate local government preparedness activities on homeland security issues in an effort to explain what factors might promote or inhibit local governments? level of policy commitment. Specifically, we assess the extent to which preparedness at the local level is consistent across differently-sized cities and across occupational positions of local officials. We then consider those differences along with internal local government characteristics, potential threat vulnerability, and state administrative context to explain local governments? preparedness activities and local officials? overall commitment to homeland security preparedness. We find that perceived vulnerability to threat and certain aspects of administrative capacity are linked to local government preparedness efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study will attempt to historicize America?s New Imperialism by locating its practices in an emerging post-Cold War security discourse. That is, in an ongoing discussion among American ?intellectuals of statecraft? concerning the official strategic or ?geopolitical? threats or problems that confront America in an era of complex globalization. In this poster, I look at the origins, practices, and ambitions of neoconservative statesmen and develop a genealogical framework for understanding why, despite the obvious constraints of soft power, they have opted to pursue a unilateral agenda. In closing, I look at the ‘counter-scripts’ confronting neoconservative discourse in the aftermath of the failure to capitalize on an initially successful invasion of Iraq. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the events of September 11, 2001, the protection of public and private infrastructures has become a major public policy issue in the United States and other countries. They are deemed critical, because they are essential to the functioning of modern societies, and because they are large technical systems that are particularly vulnerable to disruptions. The assessment of vulnerabilities of these complex and interrelated systems is the subject of a plethora of programs, activities, and agencies within the U.S. However, there could be interesting differences in dealing with critical infrastructure protection. In particular, countries like Germany that are similarly advanced and dependent on information infrastructures, but have a different tradition of public-private sector relations, might provide a useful comparison. It is argued here that the recognition of the criticality of infrastructures for national security, economic security, public health and safety, and public confidence is altering the relationship between the public and the private sector in the United States. The change is not only temporary, but structural, and seems to be indicative of a system of coordination that is more akin to the continental European model of corporatist structures than the North American free market system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the US focused on Homeland Security efforts, Mexico’s desire to advance immigration reform efforts will go unfulfilled for the foreseeable future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Globalization, far from being a monolithic economic phenomenon, involves a range of complex economic, social, and political trends that are unpacking the Westphalian inter state security system. These trends include, in particular, ! complex economic interdependence, ! ideological fragmentation, multiculturalism, postmodernity, etc., and ! the expansion of diverse, ad hoc processes of global governance. In this context, a growing range of actors, especially non state social and economic actors, find increasing incentives to defect from the state bound international security order. The result is a fragmentation of both threats and responses in a fluid Aneo medieval@ political environment. These new conditions of (un)governability create strong incentives for political entrepreneurs to experiment with untested projects for creating (or re creating) top down control, including attempts to impose unilateral American hegemony, among others. However, these projects themselves become sources of instability and conflict as they in turn reinforce incentives for defection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Much has been written in recent years about new, changing and emergent security issues around the globe. From terrorism to diseases and other chemical and biological threats to the recurrence of ethno-nationalism, security in the contemporary world is a different beast than even a decade ago. Moreover, this process of evolution will likely continue to change in the years to come. These changes have had distinct impacts on the ways individuals perceive threats to their security and how they act to make themselves feel more secure. But even though much attention has been paid to the ways security (and the ways we cope with challenges to security) is changing, little, if any, attention has been paid to the ways the next generation of citizens and decision-makers perceive current and future security challenges. Our research examines the ways middle school and high school students in the United States perceive security issues and the problems of global cooperation. Utilizing a quasi-experimental design that centers on an international studies simulation project embedded within the secondary school social studies curriculum, our analysis will inform discussion about how perceptions of security may change (or are changing) as the next generation comes of age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The consequences of violent conflict permeate countless aspects of a society and are not limited to the political and economic institutions of a state. I examine the effect of militarized conflict on the populations of states by evaluating the relationship between war and public health, taking into account relevant political and economic factors, including democracy and wealth. I argue that interstate and intrastate conflict negatively influence the health achievement of states and, therefore, the human security of their populations. I assess this relationship by analyzing data on summary measures of public health in all states between 1999 and 2001. My analysis suggests that the negative effect of war on health is closely linked to the levels of income, trade, and democracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Examines the endurance of the belief of U.S. citizens on civil liberties and personal security after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the country. Reasons behind the fear of terrorism; Factors that affected the trust of the people to the federal government; Background on willingness of the people to concede their civil liberties for safety and security.

This essay finds that rather than using executive orders to evade the wishes of Congress the president takes into account congressional support and the expected reactions of Congress when issuing executive orders. Congress maintains indirect influence over executive action because of the complexity of modern government and because of credible commitment. I illustrate indirect influence through an analysis of homeland security reorganization, which supports my hypothesis but also complicates it in a significant way by highlighting unexpected ways in which the president can influence the agenda. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are important public management implications associated with the September 11th terrorist attacks. Because of a new threat recognition, management trends toward greater decentralization and flexibility that have become pronounced in recent decades are likely to be altered. We discuss how the introduction of national security concerns into policy domains produces strong imperatives for more direct federal policy management and coordination, interrupting authority devolution to state and local governments. Because of the perceived legitimacy of the federal government on security matters, this position is politically justifiable. We illustrate these public management changes in three areas of transportation policy: airport and seaport security, and the transport of hazardous material. While the ?new public management? paradigm is not reversed, it now must compete with an unexpected logic of authority centralization in the service of national security objectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Cold War shows us that the only kind of policy which will protect our interests against terrorism is one that also protects our values. Security policies focusing too much on expressions of risk. and not enough on the underlying threat, make a bad situation worse. Instead, US anti-terrorism policy should keep the high ground, for only moral policies can truly be expedient, like the Marshall Plan. This paper shows that in the present situation, the moral and the expedient are one, and thus we need not accept the paradox of sacrificing our values in order to protect them. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

U.S. Global Security Policy, the UN, and the World: Historical Reflections John Allphin Moore, Jr. California State Polytechnic University Pomona, CA The end of the Cold War and the shocking events of 11 September 2001 have stirred debate in the United States about the country’s security and foreign policies. Commentators and policy-makers have engaged in a search for viable new policies in what are viewed as dangerously altered historical circumstances. Because the United States remains so powerful, both economically and militarily, this internal debate has large ramifications for the rest of the world, including for the United Nations. In the early twenty-first century the American government began to pursue a novel policy that appeared unilateral instead of cooperative, that announced the legitimacy of “preemptive” or “preventive” war, and that seemed more pugnacious than in former times. Even critics of the new posture, however, suggested that earlier American policies must be replaced by ones that more effectively address ominous and unanticipated contemporary challenges. This paper will suggest that – contrary to the proposition that former diplomatic practices are now outdated – three examples from the history of American foreign relations of enduring and rather successful policies may well be worth reconsidering, even in the new circumstances. These include specific injunctions proffered by George Washington in his Farewell Address of 1796, the “Containment” policy heralded by George F. Kennan’s famous “X” article in 1947, and the wide-ranging “internationalist” policy crafted by the Franklin Roosevelt administration in the closing days of World War II. These three approaches to security and diplomatic matters differ from America’s post-9/11 deportment, yet they may offer healthy and practical alternatives. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, some states are retooling and reconfiguring their border regulatory apparatus. These emerging border security practices offer a unique observational window to engage on-going debates on continuity and change in contemporary world politics. They also, we argue, attempt to reconcile the competing demands of economic globalization and national security. In this paper, we ask how clandestine transnational actors (CTAs) and the new border security practices designed to cope with them reflect and affect large-scale changes in both domestic and international orders. This question is approached through a conceptual framework known as “Identities-Borders-Orders.” We argue that, as a “sole superpower,” the U.S. faces two dilemmas in trying to attain national security: the “hegemonic dilemma” and the “new security dilemma.” We illustrate these dilemmas through a case study of America’s response to 9/11, particularly emergent border management practices such as “Smart Borders.” ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

this paper offers a critique of the concept of asymmetric threat common to U.S. defense writing and instead offers a different way to think about the thrreats confronting the U.S. and the overall threat environment [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How do hegemonic states create followers and supporters? I argue that Washington can use trade agreements to deliberately promote shifts in the societal distribution of power in a target country. I term this process the second face of security since it entails a less direct and more nuanced method of creating security. Specifically, trade agreements can strengthen the political and economic power of outward oriented internationalists in foreign states (while inward oriented nationalists will be weakened economically and politically). These domestic winners will then apply pressure on the government to support their preferred grand strategy. The long-term consequence can be the alteration in the foreign state's economic and political institutions. Thus, by strengthening the transnational links to moderate members, Washington can temper another's national and international policies. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How do states create security? The US faces just such quandary today, a hegemon actively engaged in critical regions of the world. Foreign policy analysis might suggest why the US chooses the course of action it does, while security studies might describe the current security dilemmas in a region, but there remains a gap between the articulation of a policy and the production of international security. This project aims to bridge this gap by offering an account of the process through which foreign policy decisions and agreements come to define a regional security regime. I will first discuss the theoretical sources of the gap between unit and system level approaches that produced the quandary articulated above. Next, I will examine the FPA approach to foreign policy, criticizing its exclusive focus on decision-making. Then, I will offer an analytical lens to bridge this gap. This new lens builds on constructivist insights that security regimes are sets of rules. By studying foreign policy as a process that adds implementation to the insights of FPA, it becomes possible to study the production of rules and the creation of a new security regime. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]