Social, political and academic discussions in USA over "shared security'' concept (1993-1996)

This article analyses academic and social political discussions in the USA over world arena ''humanitarian intervention'' as the main component of foreign policy strategy building of Washington after the Cold War end. Anthony Lake, National Security Advisor, officially announced the integral foreign policy strategy of Clinton's administration on September 27, 1993. The then ruling Democratic Party, restoring neo-Grotian and neo-Wilsonist traditions, aimed the policy at cooperation with International community within UN. Thereupon during the first presidency of Bill Clinton a liberal-conservative consensus developed in the American society, which reflected in the works of representatives of the neo-liberal school in Groves of Academy around the ideas of ''humanitarian intervention''. The so-called ''realists-pragmatists'' and ''neo-isolationists'', mostly among republicans, resting on the neo-Kantian traditions, achieved ''selective engagement'' in international conflicts including the ''humanitarian hawk'' approach in the sphere of providing national security. In any case, before ''separate management'' establishment in the mid-term Congress elections in November 1994, the concept of ''shared security'' in the period under review served as a basis for bipartisan consensus in the American society as it is evidenced by Presidential Directives (PDD-13 and PDD-25), the discussions of Roth-Biden amendment in the USA power circles and the conclusions of the ''Stimson working group''. Some have called for the United States to abandon UN peacekeeping altogether and focus their efforts solely on unilateral US action. They believe that UN peacekeeping can serve US interests. However, recognizing the failures of the past and growing financial constraints, they also suppose that the United Nations needs a new approach to peacekeeping, with greater selectivity, tougher mandates, financial reforms, and better training, equipment, and support. Hoping to forge a consensus between parties and between branches of the federal government, the group warns: ''As the world's predominant power, the United States cannot disconnect itself from the international environment. But the United States does not have to act alone. Effective United Nations peace operations offer an alternative for the United States to share the burden of world peace with like-minded nations''.After establishing of the ''separate management'' in November 1994 the concept of ''shared security'' for ''humanitarian interventions'' for ensuring national security was being continuously forced by ''selective engagement'' policy and unilateral military activities of the USA on the world arena.

Keywords

Authors

References