scholarly journals Stewart, Larry R. (Ed.). Canadian Defense Policy : Selected Documents 1964-1981. Kingston, Centre for International Relations, Queen’s University, Coll. « National Security Séries », no 1/82, 354 p.

1982 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 785
Author(s):  
Hélène Galarneau
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
National Security ◽  
Defense Policy ◽  
Queen's University

National Security and U.S. Immigration Policy, 1776–1790

2008 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robbie Totten
Keyword(s):  
Great Britain ◽  
International Relations ◽  
National Security ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Early Republic ◽  
Security Concerns ◽  
New Nation ◽  
The Military

An examination of U.S. immigration policy during the early Republic from a security perspective—a common analytical focus within the field of international relations—reveals the inadequacy of traditional economic and ideological interpretations. Security concerns, based on actual threats from Great Britain and Spain, permeated the arguments both for and against immigration. Those in favor of immigration hoped to strengthen the nation, primarily by providing soldiers and money for the military; those opposed to immigration feared that it would compromise national security by causing domestic unrest and exposing the new nation to espionage and terrorism. These issues are not unlike those that beset contemporary policymakers.

Why Talk Tough? Explaining Japanese Prime Ministers’ Proactiveness in National Defense Rhetoric

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Liu
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
National Security ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Political Rhetoric ◽  
Threat Perception ◽  
National Defense ◽  
National Security Policy ◽  
Prime Ministers ◽  
Dependent Variables ◽  
External Threat

Abstract What explains variations in the proactiveness of Japanese Prime Ministers (PMs) toward national defense? Although the Japanese Constitution renounces the use of force, leaders sometimes speak assertively over national security. Drawing on competing international relations and Japanese foreign policy theories, this study seeks to quantitatively model and analyze predictors of political rhetoric in PMs’ speeches and statements from 2009 to 2019. Each statement is coded into four sets of binary dependent variables through content analysis and tested against five competing hypotheses. The main finding reveals that leaders become more likely to advocate for specifically assertive national security policy when Chinese vessel intrusion increases, but not when North Korea missile tests and aircraft scrambles increase. Instead of a diversionary use of words, an emboldening effect is evident in rhetoric that evokes responsibility in international defense, moderated by ruling government strength. The findings advance academic understandings of Japanese national security policy messaging and highlight the effect of external threat perception on political rhetoric.

scholarly journals Guns or Food: On Prioritizing National Security over Global Poverty Relief

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco García-Gibson
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
International Relations ◽  
National Security ◽  
Moral Duty ◽  
Global Poverty ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Poverty Relief ◽  
Moral Duties ◽  
International Anarchy

Political realists claim that international relations are in a state of anarchy, and therefore every state is allowed to disregard its moral duties towards other states and their inhabitants. Realists argue that complying with moral duties is simply too risky for a state’s national security. Political moralists convincingly show that realists exaggerate both the extent of international anarchy and the risks it poses to states who act morally. Yet moralists do not go far enough, since they do not question realism’s normative core: the claim that when national security is really at risk, states are allowed to disregard their moral duties. I contend that there is at least one moral duty that states should not disregard even if their inhabitants are at risk of death by military aggression: the duty to reduce extreme global poverty. The reason is that even granting that national security is about securing individuals’ right to life, global poverty relief is about that as well.

scholarly journals Terrorism as war by other means: national security and state support for terrorism

2011 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Faruk Ekmekci
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
National Security ◽  
Conventional Approach ◽  
State Support ◽  
Terrorist Organizations ◽  
Nation States ◽  
The Face ◽  
State Actors

The conventional approach in the discipline of International Relations is to treat terrorist organizations as "non-state" actors of international relations. However, this approach is problematic due to the fact that most terrorist organizations are backed or exploited by some states. In this article, I take issue with the non-stateness of terrorist organizations and seek to answer the question of why so many states, at times, support terrorist organizations. I argue that in the face of rising threats to national security in an age of devastating wars, modern nation states tend to provide support to foreign terrorist organizations that work against their present and imminent enemies. I elaborate on my argument studying three cases of state support for terrorism: Iranian support for Hamas, Syrian support for the PKK, and American support for the MEK. The analyses suggest that, for many states, terror is nothing but war by other means.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document