Search

In the last decade, as more European states have responded to threats from terrorism with new national security laws and policies, these laws and practices have sometimes come into conflict with human rights jurisprudence concerning rights to privacy, free expression, unlawful detention, and other rights. These issues are making their way to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which is trying to decipher where to draw the line with these policies in terms of their negative impact on human rights. In this paper, I examine how the ECtHR might be influencing national courts in the area of human rights law and national security policy. I also examine other factors driving national court behavior in these cases. This paper investigates these questions quantitatively analyzing the decisions of high courts over the last several years in three member states of the Council of Europe: the U.K., Denmark, and Spain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes and evaluates the emerging issue of rare earth elements (REEs) as a critical component of U.S. foreign policy and a potential source for international conflict. REEs are essential in the production of many high-tech and valuable products, from computers and telecommunications to military equipment and hybrid cars. REEs are in relative short supply for most countries in the world, and China holds a virtual monopoly, producing 97% of REEs. The situation is becoming increasingly sensitive to the U.S. and world as China rises up and becomes more competitive and a potential hostile power in the future. The U.S. government and corporations are declaring very publicly that there must be a major policy effort to obtain and secure large quantities of REEs for the long term. This paper examines the latest efforts by the U.S. to identify, extract, and protect REEs. It reviews briefly the history and basic characteristics of REEs and then brings everything up to date. It highlights the new public relations attempts at informing/warning the public about REEs. And, it analyzes the current trends and future expectations regarding REEs. The paper concludes with a number of policy recommendations and suggestions for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Korean Reunification will transform overall military structure in Northeast Asia. Reduction of tension around the Korean Peninsula will impact on major countries' military presence as well as their national security strategy. Especially, termination of nuclear danger by North Korea will reorganize nuclear policy of Six Party Talks countries which have challenged security environment in Northeast Asia. This paper researches what is new military architecture in Northeast Asia after Korean Reunification and major countries' security policy. First of all, Russia and China have to rebuild their national security strategy to cut down military expansion and Japan will finally repress its national ambition as a nuclear country. Then the unified Korea will lead new security environment in Northeast Asia and U.S. military presence will be remained for regional security and peace. Therefore, this paper argues how Korean Reunification works out as the main key to reorganize military structure in Northeast Asia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent scholarship analyzing Japanese defense policy has been sensationalistic. Challenging the constructivist argument that an antimilitarism norm has constrained Japanese militarization, realists have called attention to Japan's technologically advanced military, procurement of sophisticated weaponry, increased public support for the Japan Self-Defense Force, and a strategy of buck-passing as evidence of "normalization," "militarization," and the emergence of a "great power." However, is this really the case? Has Japan embarked on a new aggressive path, negating decades of pacifism? In this paper, I propose a cross-paradigmatic approach for analyzing Japan's military strength by combining constructivist, liberal, and realist arguments. First, this paper provides a systematic comparison of militaries in East Asia to measure relative power. In context of a rapidly militarizing East Asia and the emergence of new threats, Japan's military policy has been moderate modernization, not militarization. Second, this paper offers a typology of constraints on the Japanese military. Social, technical, normative, and political factors limit Japanese power projection capabilities in the present, and will become more debilitating in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is to investigate whether geographical escalation of the conflict on both sides, or expand, by statistical analysis model to further assess the probability of an escalation of the conflict. Several studies have shown that the conflict between the two countries more vulnerable to geopolitical conflicts in the geographical distance and the geographical location of the affected parties. Accordingly, this study attempts to explore the conflict when the geographical distance and location between two countries, and other factors and significant strength and relevance to the international conflicts, viewing the conflict while the chance to expand or upgrade. In view of this, this paper examines the conflicts from 1945 to 2006 by the escalation of international conflict, or whether it be geographical expansion in the geographical distance and the location of the parties and other factors. First, the paper examines the research of international relations related geopolitical literature and to summarize the geopolitical conflicts and the international impact of upgrade or expand conflicts, and analyze and summarize the variables associated with a significant. Secondly, the author uses the data from the Department cited the United States, Center for International Development and Conflicts management of University of Maryland which released by the International Crisis Behavior Project, hereinafter referred to as ICB 2009. The author tries to analyses the geographical relationship of the important factors and international conflict escalation or expansion by a "cross-tabulation analyses" and the "ordinal logistic model" analysis to see significant inter-correlation between independent variables and the dependent variable, and further analysis of the possible escalation of the conflict probability. Furthermore, the results of the statistical analysis are used to view the India-Pakistan South Asian regional security hot spots "Kashmir" conflict. Finally, author summarizes the major findings and findings and proposes research limitations and future research directions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the last ten years (2002-2012), the relations between the EU, Algeria, Mali and Mauritania have shifted from traditional trade and development to migration and security issues. In order to understand the recent shift in the European political agenda in controlling migration flows from Africa, the research analyzes the dynamic network structure of political relations between the EU, Algeria, Mali, and Mauritania. The research questions focus on the extent to which the EU has altered the structure of power through the establishment of external actors in the region, as well as the extent to which these networks represent a significant role in the formulation and implementation of national migration and border security policies in these African countries. The network analysis approach is used in order to test the centrality of actors in the region and their effective role in the implementation of national policies. The research argues that in the process of securing the European borders from unwanted migrants, the EU, on behalf of specific Member States, has altered the centrality of power within the network and managed to effectively internalize mechanisms of power through the administrative practices of these non-European States. Furthermore, the paper hypothesizes those nodes that are in or close to the center of the network have a higher degree of power and influence among other actors in relation to migration and border-security activities. By observing specific patterns of interaction (i.e. event participation) between officials (government and non-government), the paper claims that those external actors frequently involved in the various stages of policymaking have a greater level of influence on the formulation of migration-related policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to develop analytic approaches and practical lessons from primary and complementary sources -- from historical archives to emergent online media -- toward advancing policy-relevant scientific knowledge of conflicts as well as helping leaders overcome the fog of war and make better-informed decisions in complex environments. From Syria to Afghanistan and elsewhere, today's international security hotspots have a long history as well as fast developing dynamics. Decisions and actions may further shape strategic dispositions for generations to come. How can we systematically learn from the available records and exploit the emergent content of unfolding complex conflicts to draw accurate and meaningful insights that are methodologically sound as well as actionable? This paper outlines a general approach toward addressing this question and shows its application using two example cases: Afghanistan and Syria. Specifically, the paper highlights lessons learned from an ongoing study "Mining Afghan Lessons from the Soviet Era" (MALSE) based on USSR's Politburo archives to inform the U.S. led Coalition (ISAF/NATO) activities in Afghanistan and examines potential applications to other cases, such as the situation in Syria. The goal is to develop rigorous approaches, analytic tools, and data sources for gaining deeper understanding of complex conflicts and applying the knowledge gained to help military and policy leaders improve their consequential decisions under uncertainty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Critical security studies (CSS) is a diverse subfield of International Relations (IR). Perhaps one reason for this variety is the dominance of realist perspectives in traditional security studies. Despite some important exceptions, many realists avoid discussing even liberal, let alone more critical, perspectives on security issues. Thus, critical security studies is a broad arena in which many voices try to be heard on a range of security-related topics. In order to understand what issues are of importance in CSS, this paper provides an overview of different approaches. Of course, some scholars, such as Vivienne Jabri and Karin Fierke, blend Giddens, Habermas, Foucault, Robert Cox, Judith Butler, and others in intriguing ways in their studies of security and violent conflict. Given the significant breadth of scholarship, this paper is an exploratory study of the different 'schools of thought' as a means to survey the range of interpretations of peace in critical security studies. Clearly, the subject of peace is part of critical security studies, and yet the question remains as to how various scholars interpret it. Actually, initial findings indicate that, unlike (critical) peace studies, peace is not nearly the focus of study as much as problems of in/security. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the composition of the UN Security Council with two newly collected data sets on Council membership, one is on the elected members and the other on the nominated members. Using these data sets, I examine which countries are most likely to be nominated by the regional group and then be elected by the General Assembly. The primary interest of this paper is to analyze the effects of Members' policy preferences on the likelihood of gaining seats. Using ideal point estimates, I investigate whether elected members' policy preferences differ substantially from those of the permanent members and whether the elected members actually increase the heterogeneity in the Security Council. The regression results suggest that countries whose ideal points are closer to that of the United Sates are most likely to get elected among all UN Members, including the median voter. Despite the presence of relatively democratic procedures on electing non-permanent members, UN Members tend to elect pro-U.S. countries voluntarily so that the Council functions efficiently without being disturbed by countries with conflicting interests. Moreover, I find that countries which have a reputation for free-riding or transgressing are less likely to obtain seats on the Council. This result suggests that UN Member attempt to prevent the suboptimal provision of the public good by punishing members which fail to bear the burden or break important international norms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Few leaders worry about the status of their honor; they do worry, at times obsessively, about their credibility. The "credibility imperative" has occupied a central position in every major U.S. foreign policy debate in the last fifty years. It affects discourse and decisions in predictable - and deeply pathological - ways. This paper examines the continuing importance of honor in modern U.S. foreign policy. It first discusses the traditional importance of honor in international and interpersonal politics, and explains of the central role it plays in the construction of security in any system that lacks a central authority. Second, it describes the predictable, consistent effects that honor has on state behavior in general, and U.S. foreign policy in particular. Third, it argues that the lingering concern for honor is pathological, for a couple of reasons: There is no evidence that it helps states attain their goals, and it certainly has no relevance in those systems (like today's international) where no existential threats to member security exist. The paper then speculates about the genesis of the honor pathology, and why it continues to have such salience in the new century. Honor as a motivation for action seems as anachronistic today as horse-drawn carriages, alchemy and the duel. But it persists, if under different guises; and to the extent that it persists, it pathologizes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that dynamically developing border security policies of the European Union are influenced by transnational regulation originating from the United States. It shows that the process of transatlantic homeland security is increasingly taking place through network structures. The emergence of transatlantic networks and socialisation processes within them allowed for the US involvement in the EU policy-making. This is mostly due to growing personal relationships between policy makers, gradual substitution of formal legal instruments with psychological contracts, and informal understandings providing the contents for formal agreements. Consequently, the paper analyzes the implications of these developments, looks at still unresolved issues and proposes potential solutions. The empirical examples for this paper are derived in particular from the EU-U.S. cooperation on data protection in the context of homeland security. The networks under investigation include the High Level Political Dialogue on Border and Transportation Security and the High Level Dialogue on Data Protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A conference paper about the security strategies of transnational private organizations is presented which is prepared for presentation at the Annual Meetings of the American Political Science Association, in Toronto, Ontario, from September 3-6, 2009. The paper discusses topics including international relations (IR) and five general strategic orientations that organizations can adopt in order to generate security for themselves.

This paper aims to bring in the international level to the study of domestic unity and diversity. More precisely, the aim is to explain the level of internal political centralization by highlighting the role external security concerns play. The paper is an extract from the author's ongoing comparative research project on West European politics during late 19th century. The paper seeks to explain how international factors influence the outcomes of political conflicts at the national level. The focus of the project is on the political divisions in Austria, Belgium, Germany, France, the Netherlands and Switzerland around the turn of the 19th century. However, the particular emphasis of this paper is on France and the Netherlands; the two cases that represent two ends of the comparison: one that started the 19th century with remarkable diversity but faced centralist pressures due to external threats; and one that started the 19th century with a fair amount of unity but came to recognize and institutionalize internal divisions in an environment characterized by international security.The main argument is that interstate rivalry that dominated European politics at the time had a direct impact on domestic politics. For countries participating in the interstate power struggle, domestic uniformity was seen as a precondition for strength. Germany, Austria and France thus needed internal political unity to project state power. Historical evidence shows that the presence of external threat intensified the quest for internal unity. In this small continent with exposed national borders, internal unity and external strength were seen to be inextricably interrelated. In addition to the constitutional configuration, pressures towards unity were reflected in public policies towards national unity. In particular, during late 19th century all three countries introduced nation-wide public education policies and conscription. Not only was this the case for France and the Austria proper, but despite its federal constitutional shell, the pressures for political centralization existed in Germany as well - best symbolized by the Kulturkampf. These countries could not afford the perceived international weakness of internal divisions and domestic plurality. In this context, in addition to the degree of constitutional centralization, the project uses the degree of public policy centralization as an indicator of the degree of political unity.For Belgium, the Netherlands and Switzerland on the other hand, international neutrality - recognized and guaranteed by international law and the Great Powers - brought external security. Consequently, this provided a domestic environment conducive to compromise settlements creating political diversity. In addition to the level constitutional decentralization, all three allowed the coexistence of various ideological and religious school networks. Furthermore, contrary to Austria, Germany, and France, no national conscription was introduced. As a result, the politics of the three neutral countries came to reflect a high level of diversity both in constitutional and public policy terms. As it is the case with the first three cases, historical evidence supports the argument.The historical evidence the paper builds on relies on the archival research the author has carried out in the six countries under focus. At the core lies a macro-level deductive argument applied to particular events where the analysis seeks to combine general theory with historical contingency and human agency. The comparative historical analysis used in this research allows for a combination of historical accuracy and generalizability through the method of focused comparison. In this context, the research can be seen as part of the recent (re)discovery of comparative historical analysis in the social sciences. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes the concept of wedge strategy in alliance politics, and proposes a theory that explains under what conditions a state is likely to use coercion or rewards to weaken the ties between its adversary alliance. Then, the paper examines how the proposed theory can explain a few important cases of wedge strategies in international politics. The paper ends with implications for realist research programs. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to critically examine the conceptual development and practice of SSR within the framework of theories of state and state formation. This involves highlighting the importance of contextual understanding - both in terms of understanding the operational context in the existing structures of host states, as well as understanding the historical and theoretical complexities in social engineering. Using theories of state and state formation to inform the field of SSR is significant as it brings SSR closer to the existing discourses of state-building and post-conflict peace-building, as well as provides a theoretical foundation for such activities. The useful merger of development and security created the concept of SSR. The concept now needs an injection of state formation theory to be further developed.Although considerable advances have been made in our understanding of the processes of nation-building and SSR, we argue that the dominant formulations, as expressed in handbooks, strategic documents and policy formulations, need to be problematized in two respects. First, substantial parts of the literature, handbooks and official documents are characterized by a reliance on social engineering and on "methods" to effect complex socio-political transformations, a belief underpinned by a lack of contextual understanding of the aims (state-building) as well as the operative environments (target countries). Second, attempts to provide a rich context have focused on the processes of conflict prior to intervention, the conduct of intervention itself and on its aftermath. While this is important, we argue that more attention should be given to existing structures of state, society and polity in order to understand the possibilities of success of state-building and SSR. The processes of SSR are laudable and present important steps towards more holistic conceptions of security and international development. However, the findings of this paper cautions against having too high expectations on the possibility of SSR fulfilling its goals of creating states that are both stable and democratic and accountable. Instead, we should distinguish carefully what level of ambition is realistic for each specific project depending on local circumstances. A contextual understanding based on existing state-, society- and polity structures enable the design of better benchmarks and objectives as well as more realistic policies. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As Professor Bull has mentioned, the title of this panel is, "The New Special Relationship?: post-Gaullist France and America." The title of my paper is, "Washington, Sarkozy, and the Defense of Europe." My title is both consistent and misleading. Consistent because in some respects I treat defense issues in the paper; misleading because I go beyond that focus to mention the defense of Europe and Western civilization in a broader sense. This is partly because of my current proclivities, as manifested in my most recent book, "La Republique de Dieu," published in Paris earlier this year. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

"Ungoverned spaces" are increasingly cited as a key threat to the U.S. government and its interests throughout the world. Often these spaces are seen as synonymous with failed states, or states that are unable to effectively exercise sovereignty. A key goal of U.S. defense strategy is now to improve "effective sovereignty" in such areas, in order to deny sanctuary to terrorists, WMD proliferators, narco-traffickers, and gangsters. According to the World Bank, in 2006 the number of states lacking effective sovereignty rose to 26, from 11 in 1996. The larger project that this paper is part of proposes to analyze the concept of ungoverned spaces and determine whether they really are ungoverned and constitute threats to states. The essential issue is not lack of governance, but rather who governs these spaces. This paper aims to develop a more accurate framework for understanding contemporary security threats in a world of softened sovereignty. An improved understanding of when and how alternative forms of governance shelter or encourage hostile non-state actors has important policy implications for how states, particularly the United States, prioritize their responses to emerging threats. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While refugee and migration flows would only rarely be appropriately classified as issues of vital national interest, they have nevertheless emerged as major issues in contemporary international relations and foreign policy, as well as within many states significant domestic political problems. Long before September 11th galvanized a new preoccupation with border security, issues surrounding refugees and illegal migrants had in many countries transmuted from a matter of "low politics" to a matter of "high politics," involving a shift in the definition of national security threats and in the practice of security policy. In fact, migration-related anxieties have been immutably on the rise since the early 1980s, when the number of asylum seekers trying to enter the West began a steep and prolonged ascent, leading a majority of Europeans to declare "refugees and uncontrolled immigration" their most pressing security concern. Similarly, in the United States calls to increase the stringency of immigration policies—and tighten access to social services—have proven effective campaign fodder, especially in states with large immigrant populations. In fact, one 2005 poll indicated that 69 percent of Americans believe immigration-related issues now affect the way they vote. While our understanding of the consequences of such anxieties is relatively well developed, such is not the case with respect to their causes. Assessments within recipient states of the causes of migration crises have tended to privilege transparent, individual-level "pull factors" that drive migration, such as the search for a better socio-economic future over less obvious, yet also critically important, state and group-level "push factors," such as the desire to influence policy within potential receiving states. Using combination of large-N data and comparative case study analysis (of Kosovo and Haiti), this paper offers a new look at the underappreciated role of push factors in the creation and escalation of migration crises and, in particular, the role of attempted coercion in catalyzing and exacerbating crises. Specifically, the paper presents—and offers a plausibility probe of—a new theory to explain how and under what conditions states' material fears of massive inflows may come into conflict with their normative commitments to the protection of the displaced, and do so in ways that facilitate successful coercion of the strong by the relatively weak. This kind of coercion does not always succeed. Still, for reasons this paper will make clear, it succeeds with greater frequency than traditional IR theory would predict, given the power and capabilities asymmetries that tend to exist between coercers and their targets. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will historically and theoretically study conditions under which states develop bilateral versus multilateral security alliances. Specifically, the paper will discuss a question on why the United States built mainly bilateral alliances in the Asia-Pacific region while it established a multilateral alliance, namely the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in the early Cold War period.Understanding security alliances have been the subject of major research in international relations studies. However, there has been so far insufficient scholarly attention and rigorous archival research focusing on the question I proposed above. The findings of the proposed paper will not only be historical and theoretical, but will also attempt to provide insights on how future Asia-Pacific alliance policy can be managed.This paper argues that the difference between the German rearmament and the Japanese rearmament is a key for solving the puzzle. The nature of the German rearmament is very much different from that of the Japanese counterpart, because the Japanese rearmament was far modest and limited in its nature and scope. The large-scale German rearmament generated more complex interdependent interactions among the United States and its European allies, while the limited Japanese rearmament created less interdependent relations in the Asia-Pacific region. Therefore, the Atlantic alliance developed into NATO with multilateralism, while alliances in the Asia-Pacific remained bilateral in nature. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper studies the process of gaining public consent about a security threat, or threat legitimation. Threats require legitimation because they are 'social facts' and not objective truths or subjective perceptions. Threat legitimation occurs in the public discourse through rhetoric. Political and social actors deploy rhetorical resources and strategies to construct, reproduce, and change narratives about a threat. Unlike previous rhetorical studies, this paper also argues that the influence and power of rhetoric depends on the media environment. The first section of the paper outlines threat legitimation and the role of rhetoric and the media environment. The second section investigates four cases within two different media environments, radio and television. Through these four cases, the paper demonstrates the importance of rhetorical strategies for threat legitimation in US foreign policy, and how the media environment affects the use of rhetoric. ..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]

The Supreme Court's decision in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004) involved an extensive dispute over the meaning of presidential war powers and national security as these were explained and defended in The Federalist. Various opinions in Hamdi cited numerous Federalist numbers in support of the justices' own interpretation of presidential war powers regarding questions of national security. Yet the opinions of the justices obviously conflicted. Using the Hamdi decision as a springboard, this paper proposes to examine The Federalist in order to outline the political philosophy underlying the Constitution's executive war powers and their relationship to questions of national security. Since most of the Federalist numbers cited by the justices in Hamdi were written by Alexander Hamilton, I propose to examine additional writings of Hamilton's in order to more fully develop the presidential war powers and national security theory outlined by Publius in The Federalist. My paper will involve an interdisciplinary approach to the question of presidential war powers, combining the disciplines of law, political philosophy, history, and strategic studies to examine one of the most important constitutional issues confronting Americans today. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since 9/11, terrorism studies has undergone a rapid transformation from minor sub-field of security studies to a significant stand-alone field of teaching and research, with terrorism studies degree programmes, an ever-increasing cohort of dedicated PhD students, major research projects, the establishment of academic posts and specialised research institutions, and new scholarly journals. However, past and recent review exercises have generated a number of serious epistemological, methodological, and political-normative criticisms of the field as it currently stands. At this time of tremendous growth and expansion, this paper makes the argument that it is time for an explicitly 'critical' terrorism studies to overcome many of the identified weaknesses of orthodox terrorism studies. To this end, the paper explores some of the central weaknesses of contemporary terrorism studies, examines what a critical turn would involve, and reflects on the potential pitfalls of a critical terrorism studies, including how to manage the critical turn without discarding the best of orthodox terrorism studies. The paper concludes by outlining a research agenda which would interrogate more effectively some of the key assumptions in both mainstream and critical fields about the political use of terror. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human Trafficking, Human Security and the BalkansHuman trafficking in the Western Balkan region has been addressed in numerous multilateral and regional forums, reflecting, in part, the concerns of the United States and the European Union with the spillover effects of instability and organized crime. The paper argues that despite efforts at greater exploration and dialogue between governments, nongovernmental organizations, and international organizations, the region continues to reveal deep seated challenges to resolving the problem. Anti-trafficking efforts have lost sight of broader issues of human security, focusing on narrow rule-of-law approaches of criminalization and enhanced border control while downplaying the socioeconomic dynamics that place vulnerable populations at risk for trafficking. The paper also reveals how the absence of consensus on trafficking definitions and how best to address the trafficking problem has resulted in steps geared more towards the goal of EU accession and policy practice mired in contradictions. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following the Luxor massacre in 1997, the biggest Islamic militant organization in Egypt, Gamaa Islamia, declared a cease-fire against Hosni Mubarak's government. Its leadership who was already serving long-term prison sentences decided to give up on violence. While the belief that Gamaa's leadership merely surrendered to the government's demands as a result of severe pressure was widespread, the fact is that the cease-fire was not declared spontaneously. On the contrary, it came about as a result of multiple factors, one of them being the approach Egyptian security and justice officials developed as part of the nation's counter-terrorism strategy nowadays being applied in Saudi Arabia and Yemen: ideological transformation. Islamic scholars, who offered their services to the government, entered into religious and political debates with the imprisoned Gamaa Islamia members in order to persuade them to give up on violence. What torture and harsh prison sentences often failed to achieve, dialogue and debate managed to accomplish. As a result of the debates, the Gamaa Islamia leadership published 15 books while in prison officially renouncing violence and giving the reasons for their change of strategy. The central question of this paper will henceforth elaborate and evaluate Egypt's distinctive counter-terrorism policy of transformation in order to explain the change of mind expressed by one former senior group member with the following words: "We realized that if we were in power - we would have to share it anyway." The paper investigates this transformation of the Gamaa Islamia during their prison time and the Egyptian strategy of "ideologically changing" extremists. It results from extensive field research conducted in Cairo in 2006 and is thus based on the analysis of the group's written work as well as on interviews with its former and current senior members. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Deterrence has been a core principle of Israel's security policy since the state was founded in 1948. Has this policy been effective? This paper looks in detail at the role of deterrence in Israeli thinking in May-June 1967. Concern that Israel's strong image was eroding in Arab eyes was a key factor in Israel's decision to launch the war. Over time, Israeli strength did convince most Arab parties that Israel could not be defeated. One additional result, however, has been a re-definition of victory or deterrence success since the Six Day War. Israeli military victory is no longer sufficient because Arab parties have emphasized symbolic factors. As demonstrated in confrontations in 1968, 1973, and 2006, the Arab ability to avoid a humiliating military defeat a la 1967 is itself considered a political or psychological victory. More broadly, the definition of both deterrence and successful deterrence is dynamic and may evolve over time.[This paper is part of a larger project examining Israel's doctrine of deterrence and its implications for Israel, the Arab-Israeli conflict, and deterrence writ large.] ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Advocates of a related series of ideas termed as "network centric warfare," "rapid decisive operations," and "effects based operations," see the combination of long-range precision strike, information dominance, and networked information technologies as elements changing the nature of war, from a series of sequenced battles and campaigns towards a continuous battle of shock and dislocation. However, this emphasis on the importance of time and speediness ignores the reality that time is a culturally dependent conception that has differing implications for different cultures. This paper explores cultural interpretations of time and their influence on military strategy. Analyzing national security strategy and military doctrine, this paper suggests that the U.S. conception of time leads to an overly offensive national strategy. This paper offers a vignette from the Cuban Missile Crisis to demonstrate how to escape the offensively oriented time conception. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper examines the role of the UN Charter's prohibition of force in legitimating the exercise of power and in creating a likelihood of resistance against major powers that violate it. The paper includes large-n tests that assess the level of dissent within the Security Council and the responses of other major powers following a major power's use of armed force. It also includes a brief case study examining US legal argument and their impact on decision-making processes and outcomes during the Cuban Missile Crisis. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is a consideration of what, at its core, is a state-building question: is the United States adept at creating highly centralized internal security bureaucracies such as the DHS? After the attacks of 9/11, the resurrection of a national civilian defense program, under the moniker "homeland security," has become a crucial domestic policy of the federal government. Disaster planning and civilian defense, subjects that had been relegated to the academic sub-discipline of security studies, are now the daily grist of newspapers and television news channels. There has always been a tension among the general public, state and local government, and the federal government regarding civilian defense policy and its expected outcomes. One area that is worth closer analysis is how expectations are dealt with in a large nation that is, by constitutional design, a federal republic. This essay examines the fate of the DHS in light of its place within a federal republic and the conflicting types of civilian defense that its organizational structure produces. The paper is organized in two sections. The first section outlines a conceptual problem related to civilian defense and its objective. The second section outlines how DHS organizational development perpetuates the conditions necessary for the flaws summarized in the first section of the essay. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper develops four main arguments designed to clarify the nature and purpose of ESDP. First, it engages specifically with the American IR literature which detects in ESDP signs of balancing against US power. The paper argues that such an analysis is flawed. Secondly, it argues that the true drivers behind ESDP have been the recent shifts in the tectonic plates both of history and of geo-politics. Thirdly, it analyses the recent European Security Strategy document, which it presents as a new normative approach to security policy. Finally, it argues that the distinctiveness of ESDP also derives from the peculiarities of institutional interplay within the European Union - that the policy has been generated by years of complex negotiations and compromise between and within EU institutions. Given this institutional labyrinth, any form of "heroic" strategic ambition vis-à-vis the United States would be impossible to articulate. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The demographic literature on population growth among ethnic minorities observes a puzzling trend: Minorities tend to have higher rates of natural increase than majorities. With recourse to the sociobiological paradigm of interethnic behaviour proposed by van den Berghe (1978, 1981), this paper accounts for this puzzle by positing the notion of a demographic security dilemma. The realist tenet of the international-relations literature holds that conditions of anarchy give rise to a "security dilemma" in which even non-aggressive moves to enhance one's security are perceived by others as threatening and trigger countermoves that ultimately reduce one's own security (Jervis 1978). Although the "security dilemma" has been discounted as a viable explanation of political stability during the second half of the twentieth century (Holsti 1991, 1995, 1996) it has been shown to have a useful application to domestic ethnic conflict (Posen 1993). The paper refines this latter application. It hypothesizes that states where an already sizeable ethnic minority exhibits higher rates of natural increase than the dominant majority tend to take protective measures to bolster the majority's grip on power but that these measures, in turn, precipitate higher fertility rates as an unintended consequence. The paper uses the demographic exceptionalism of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a test case. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines how presidents were constrained by their predecessors in developing national security strategies during the Cold War. It focuses on the Eisenhower-Kennedy transition and the Carter-Reagan transition, given the change in political party and subsequent desire to craft a new foreign-affairs legacy in each case. The paper finds that although national security policies do create a general framework within which consecutive administrations operate, new presidents still have a window of opportunity to mark a new direction in foreign policy from their immediate predecessor. Perhaps the greatest consistency in foreign policy across these cases was in policy making at the United Nations, where differences in the role of the president's chief adviser at the U.N. were more stylistic than substantive. In conclusion, while the "inherited presidency" does present constraints for new presidents, the Cold War era illustrates that they nevertheless have the political flexibility to move beyond those constraints, at least in foreign affairs. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Because power defines relations among individuals and political communities, it is an important concept in the social sciences. If we accept Max Weber's suggestion that politics is essentially about allocation and distribution of power, then power is the concept of Political Science and International Relations discipline. But is power found in resources or in relationships? Is it located in structure or agency? In discussing the social nature of power, the paper will advance a conception of power based on the writings of Hannah Arendt. Understanding the nature of power in contemporary world affairs is crucially important both for the U.S. and the future of international order. The development of post-Cold War international relations, the process of European integration, and the inability of the United States to translate its material strength into desired political outcomes have put into question any conception of power based entirely on quantifiable material resources, whether military, economic, or technological. Although power is a 'contested concept', it had been absent from scholarly debate in International Relations for some time. This paper is a critical reflection of the paradox of American power and its implications for American security and global order. It focuses on the neo-conservative conception of American power that informs the foreign and defense policies of George W. Bush's Administration. According to this conception, U.S.' material preponderance coupled with America's universal values, give Washington the means and right to reshape world order. The paper argues that this view of power is deeply mistaken and can only lead to dysfunctional policies and practices. Material resources are not irrelevant to power but do not automatically produce political influence. Effective influence depends on more than military coercion. It depends on the degree to which a state's policies and practices are accepted as legitimate by other states and by international public opinion. The failure of neo-conservative policy-makers to grasp the social nature of power threatens to undermine the effective pursuit of American interests and national security, while gradually weakens the international society. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the changing characteristics of the fundamentally distrustful, conflict-ridden, and power and interest-centric international politics in Northeast Asia and their implications for the region's stability especially in the post-Cold War era. No doubt that the power and interest-centric realist paradigm maintains its explanatory dominance in capturing the lack of reconciliation or institutionalization of regional cooperation both in postwar and post-Cold War Northeast Asia. When it comes to prescribing for the lack of institutionalized multilateralism or security cooperation, however, the analytic power of realist perspective becomes "sterile." It is so because realists assume the goals, values and preferences of the units or nation states as largely fixed or determined by the anarchical international system. Such a realist paradigm has frequently led to a self-fulfilling prophecy: as if inevitably pressured by the system, states pursue their narrow and myopic national interests, further exacerbating security dilemma for all concerned. Strikingly pronounced indeed is the continued primacy of such contending national interests in Northeast Asian affairs, as manifested in the North Korean nuclear deadlock and the close integration of Japanese foreign policy with America's global anti-terror war. The present paper scrutinizes, in particular, the uniquely increasing trend in military spending in post-Cold War Northeast Asia as a way of further documenting the ominous changes as well as the problematic consequences of fallacious policy paradigms underlying the concerned state behaviors. To help prevent the security dilemma from spiraling into a slippery and perilous path of arms competition requires the concerned states and their policymakers to switch their realist assumptions, redefine their self-interests, and learn to embrace international societal norms and perspectives which build on reality. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the effect of partisanship on Senate oversight of national security policy from 1947-2004. The paper develops a theory of oversight and demonstrates that party competition affects both the costs of obtaining information from the executive and the opportunity costs of substituting oversight for statutory activity on the committee agenda. Using a unique data set compiled from hearings by the Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committees, we develop four different measurements of oversight. The results of the models confirm the impact of partisanship on both committees, although the effects are more substantial for Foreign Relations. In addition, evidence regarding the combined oversight effort of the two committees suggests that committees operate as agents of the majority party and that their monitoring activities are a modest factor in presidential approval ratings. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper contends that one can apply a cultural lens to the study of Chinese security policy through examination of the perceptual effects of military doctrine. Through the development of two brief historical cases, this paper shows the importance of PLA doctrine in shaping the way China viewed its interaction with the United States in the past. The paper also lays out the relevance of this today by probing the way in which modern Chinese doctrine might shape perceptions. I argue that this (relatively narrow) approach to strategic culture has significant advantages in terms of objectivity and clarity of causal statements that can enhance the utility of the study of strategic culture to policymakers and scholars alike. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the relationship between the federal government and the state and local governments in the time period 2001 - 2005 using the 9/11 attacks and Hurricane Katrina as endpoints. The paper shows that some of the poor fedreal response to Hurricane Katrina could have been predicted by information in the ICMA Homeland Security Survey conducted in spring 2005. The paper concludes with a series of propositions about the current state of federalism in the field of homeland security police. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the interaction between domestic political circumstances of authoritarian regimes and their foreign policy choices to explain why some of their leaders occasionally support violent non-state actors (VNSAs) ranging from ethnic secessionists, to guerilla groups, to anarchists, to terrorists, and to any type of revolutionary group that threaten a present leadership or an entire state and operate either within or outside of a target state. The students of conflict behavior have classified the ways in which states respond to changes in their external security environment into two categories: states either engage in alliance formation or arms buildup. Their analysis of the impact of domestic political circumstances on the choices over response strategies did not go beyond exploring the mechanisms through which leaders allocate on guns vs. butters. We do not know much about what happens when these conventional ways are not perceived sufficient to stop an aggressor from engaging in armed conflict. Despite increasing international effects of VNSAs, in general, terrorism in particular, political scientists continue ignoring their utility as an instrument of addressing external threats and interest advancement among states. In achieving a second-image explanation of various response strategies composed of alliance formation, arms buildup, negotiation / compromise, and supporting VNSAs, this paper conducts a comparative case study of Iran during the 1970s, Lebanon during the 1960s, and Syria during the 1990s. In conclusion, it aspires to develop a theoretical framework to evaluate the utility of supporting VNSAs in addressing external threats especially if we consider that target would get even more upset in the end and retaliate much worse. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper shows why states, acting in their own self-interest, may create informational asymmetries that lead to war. In our model, two actors with no private information invest in military capacity before engaging in crisis bargaining. If bargaining fails, a war ensues and the payoffs of a war depend on the capacities. We show that the actors have incentives to keep each other guessing about their exact levels of capacity -- even though doing so creates the risk of war. Thus, self interest and strategy, and not just institutional failures, are to blame for war. Our paper explains two related stylized facts: states devote considerable resources to secrecy in the national-security realm, and often disagree about the balance of capabilities. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [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]

This paper examines the reasons for the failure of the first major public health initiative in the error of homeland security and bioterrorism. The smallpox immunization initiative is a classic example of inappropriate and unsuccessful policy design. Policymakers attempted to conduct a national security style mobilization of effort using the institutional tools and actors of the public health domain. This paper applies the technique of policy mapping to evaluate the problems of policy design facing public health authorities in the new age of bioterrorism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To what extent has Japanese security policy been constrained by domestic norms and antimilitarism? How does the impact of domestic factors and norms compare to the effect of the external security environment? What theories best explain the past half-century of Japanese security policy, and what should we expect from Japan in the future? This paper makes three central arguments. First, the debate about the roots of Japanese security policy suffers from widespread misunderstanding about an important aspect of that policy: specifically, the level of Japanese military power. Scholars have either neglected to measure Japanese military power or have measured it superficially, fueling the misconception of Japan as ‘a military pygmy.’ Japan is no military pygmy; since the late 1970s Japan has transformed its military from a second-rate force to one of the world’s leading military powers. Second, constructivist theories–predicting that domestic antimilitarism will block major changes in Japan’s security policy–cannot account for this dramatic transformation. Third, the course of Japanese post-World War II security policy–both the period of meager defense effort and the period of vigorous military buildup–is consistent with a realist ‘free-riding’ strategy. This analysis has implications for international relations theory and the future of Japanese security policy. Antimilitarist norms have not prevented Japan from building a first-rate military. The fact that Japan accomplished this feat, in spite of a constitutional ban on military forces and widespread public opposition, should cast doubt on the power of domestic norms relative to other factors in security policy. Regarding U.S. foreign policy, this paper suggests that as long as Japan adheres to a free-riding strategy, it will not willingly build additional costly military capabilities or take on significant new roles within the U.S.-Japan alliance. Japan will deflect U.S. requests for significantly greater military contributions unless the United States reduces its military presence in East Asia, or unless other events cause Japan’s threat environment to deteriorate significantly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why do some international boundaries evolve into bilateral regimes with a high capacity to solve functional disputes while others become sites of smuggling, poor administration, and escalation? This paper criticizes political science theory on boundary efficiency and conflict management and outlines alternative hypotheses to better understand variation in efficiency and stability of international boundaries. International relations scholarship tends to see modern, territorial boundaries as efficient responses to the international system. States are said to have a set of clear preferences on how to manage and control their borders as a means of protecting their sovereignty against other states, filtering out non-state threats, and managing the movement of goods and people to maximize economic gain. Yet logically and empirically states facing uniform types of problems and conflicts at their borders have displayed a diverse trajectory of border control strategies. This paper combines the literature on the evolution of cooperation with the comparative politics literature on state-building. The goal is to specify a model and testable hypotheses governing border control. A causal argument is proposed that border authorities of two contiguous states will tend toward cooperation if they have the opportunity to interact. Over time a boundary that is locally and jointly managed by border guards of both sides will be more cooperative, escalation-resistant, and less costly to operate than a unilaterally administered boundary. The paper gives a number of testable hypotheses and suggests an explanation for why new states tend not to recognize such boundary regimes as relatively superior solutions to border control and to managing relations in anarchy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the applicability of the democratic peace (DP) thesis to a rapidly changing global security environment and, more specifically, to examine the motivation of the United States, the most prominent democratic power, to use force for the promotion of peace through the spread of democracy. In this paper, we distinguish between traditionally accepted instrumental, normative, and institutional use-of-force motivators that apply to democracies and non-democracies alike, but we also add a discussion of contextual use-of-force motivators which are unique to democracies. The basic assumption underlying the DP argument is that democratic states are less prone to wage wars than non-democratic states. But, if democracy makes states more peaceful, why do democratic states still use force? Illustrating each motivator in light of contemporary U.S. national security decisions shows that the DP thesis can provide valuable insight into the reasons why democracies may continue to use force and, in the extreme, wage war. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the preferences of major political factions are likely to influence policy choice on security issues, the origins of these preferences remains unclear compared to those on foreign economic policy. This paper examines efforts to explain preferences on security issues using data on congressional roll call voting. A large body of quantitative research in this area concludes that ideology drives these preferences, and that constituency economic interests have little or no effect. Unfortunately, this literature conceives of economic interests in an unrealistically narrow way, and does not consider the possibility that these interests may shape the ideology of members of congress. Using data on Senate voting on foreign policy from 1947 through 2000, this paper presents evidence that Senators’ home states’ stake in the international economic order, as well as their stake in military spending, played an important role in shaping foreign and defense policy. Although liberal-conservative "ideology" also matters, its effects are more consistent with an interest-based vote trading arrangement than with a coherent set of ideas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Terrorism poses complex challenges to American government at all levels. Due to the complexity of the threat, Americans cannot expect government to be able to deter or intervene in every terrorist attack. For that reason, government must plan to be better prepared to respond to acts of terror. To date, little has been done to learn more about how bureaucracies can better plan to respond to acts of terror. A critical element of this learning must include some understanding of what constitutes effective response. This paper presents preliminary findings of an intensive study of the response to the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City in 1995. The paper examines the existing literature on both the challenges of bureaucracy and emergency response. It concludes with preliminary findings based on interviews conducted in Oklahoma City with individuals who participated in the response efforts there in elite capacities. [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]

Since Maastricht (1992), the EU has begun to supplement its process of economic integration by developing common institutional structures in the security and defense realm. Although not officially challenging NATO, what is now called a European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) signifies an increased degree of cooperation among EU member states outside of NATO, thus challenging the Alliance’s role as the dominant security organization in Europe. The paper seeks to explain this process by addressing the question why, despite NATO’s continued existence and successful performance throughout the 1990, EU member states decided to establish their own common defense structures. Demonstrating that existing theories (realism, institutionalism, supranationalism) are unable to account for this post-Cold War shift in institutional allegiance, a social constructivist perspective traces the formulation of the national security interest back to conceptions of national identity. In essence, it is argued that a shift in collective identity has taken place among EU member states, replacing ‘the West’, the collective underlying NATO, with ‘Europe’, the collective underlying CFSP/ESDP. The paper is divided in two parts. First, addressing the problem of operationalization, the study seeks to improve our theoretical understanding of the identity concept and connect it to the definition of national security. Deploying identity as an intermediate variable that channels ideas into political behavior, it focuses on the recognition of national identity as evolving out of the interplay between collective and individual identity. It shows how the resulting definitions of Self and Other have crucial impact on how a state defines its security space, corresponding threats, and the means to address these threats. The identity shift is accounted for by the ability of the political elite to redefine the ideational parameters of national (collective/individual) identity during critical periods along a temporal axis. Second, the study takes a comparative perspective by looking at the shift in identity and institutional allegiance in Germany. It applies the constructivist approach to show how both Adenauer’s decision for NATO in the post-WW II period and the support of the Kohl government for CFSP/ESDP in the 1990s were attempts to (re)define German normality. While the first case reveals German desire to escape the totalitarian shadows of its own past and define itself as a ‘free’ society, the 1990s show a stronger identification with the European collective, built on the theme of ‘unity’ and the fear of ‘fragmentation’. Outlining increasing discomfort with an American defined post Cold-War world order, the study concludes by suggesting an ideational split of the ‘West’, with ‘Europe’ increasingly establishing its own security identity. [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]