지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2003.9
- 수록면
- 5 - 41 (37page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Marking a dramatic break with doctrines that have governed more than half a century of U.S. foreign and military policy, President George W. Bush declared in June 2002 that new threats require the U.S. to adopt a new policy of 'preemptive action.' In line with this new Bush doctrine, the White House drew up a new national security strategy that would enable the U.S. to launch preemptive military strikes against groups or countries that pose a threat to America and its allies. Iraq was taken as a test case.
More than fifty years ago, at the beginning of the Cold War, the U.S. National Security Council explicitly rejected the notion of 'preventive' or 'preemptive' war, calling it 'repugnant' to American values and principles. That policy stood the U.S. in good stead for decades, and played a crucial role in preventing the Cold War from turning into a hot war. But, U.S. strategists have argued that terrorist groups and rogue states are not like the former Soviet Union, governed by predictable and logical principles of self-preservation. Precisely because the usual calculus of self-interest is meaningless to them, the U.S. cannot afford to wait for the threats they pose to U.S. security to fully materialize before it acts. The best defense here is a good offense. Thus, the war against terrorism after September 11<SUP>th</SUP> has pushed the Bush administration to take an 'offensive realism.'
The so-called 'neoconservatives' in and out of the Bush administration are conducting offensive realist strategies, driven by the ideological foundations of a sense of moral superiority legitimizing that American values should be retained and propagated throughout the world; of a Hobbesian world view that stresses the inevitability of war for a civilized world; and of active interventionism for the spread of democracy and market economy. It has had a profound impact on US foreign policy changes since the 9ㆍ11 terrorist attacks. The ultimate goal of neoconservative security strategies is 'Pax Americana,' and neocons endorse the strategies for hegemonic stability, the counterproliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and the preservation of nuclear strategic superiority, and the expansion of the 'democratic peace zone.'
There are voices at home criticizing the neocons' growing power as one that "is quickly heading for militarism and will fuel anti-U.S. sentiments around the world, thereby aggravating the U.S. economy." At the same time, the September 11<SUP>th</SUP> terrorist attacks have served to build a public consensus that America must deal a tough blow to terrorist attacks. What is more, while critics merely point out possible abuses of neoconservative strategies and their means of achieving them, for example 'the preemptive strike doctrine,' they do not vociferously refute the necessity of neoconservatism. In this light, neoconservative tendencies are not likely to be a fleeting phenomenon.
More than fifty years ago, at the beginning of the Cold War, the U.S. National Security Council explicitly rejected the notion of 'preventive' or 'preemptive' war, calling it 'repugnant' to American values and principles. That policy stood the U.S. in good stead for decades, and played a crucial role in preventing the Cold War from turning into a hot war. But, U.S. strategists have argued that terrorist groups and rogue states are not like the former Soviet Union, governed by predictable and logical principles of self-preservation. Precisely because the usual calculus of self-interest is meaningless to them, the U.S. cannot afford to wait for the threats they pose to U.S. security to fully materialize before it acts. The best defense here is a good offense. Thus, the war against terrorism after September 11<SUP>th</SUP> has pushed the Bush administration to take an 'offensive realism.'
The so-called 'neoconservatives' in and out of the Bush administration are conducting offensive realist strategies, driven by the ideological foundations of a sense of moral superiority legitimizing that American values should be retained and propagated throughout the world; of a Hobbesian world view that stresses the inevitability of war for a civilized world; and of active interventionism for the spread of democracy and market economy. It has had a profound impact on US foreign policy changes since the 9ㆍ11 terrorist attacks. The ultimate goal of neoconservative security strategies is 'Pax Americana,' and neocons endorse the strategies for hegemonic stability, the counterproliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and the preservation of nuclear strategic superiority, and the expansion of the 'democratic peace zone.'
There are voices at home criticizing the neocons' growing power as one that "is quickly heading for militarism and will fuel anti-U.S. sentiments around the world, thereby aggravating the U.S. economy." At the same time, the September 11<SUP>th</SUP> terrorist attacks have served to build a public consensus that America must deal a tough blow to terrorist attacks. What is more, while critics merely point out possible abuses of neoconservative strategies and their means of achieving them, for example 'the preemptive strike doctrine,' they do not vociferously refute the necessity of neoconservatism. In this light, neoconservative tendencies are not likely to be a fleeting phenomenon.
목차
Ⅰ. 미국적 국제주의와 부시 독트린
Ⅱ. 미국의 신보수주의 역사, 이념, 전략
Ⅲ. 미국의 세계전략: 반테러, 반확산, 팍스 아메리카
Ⅳ. 신보수주의의 미래
[참고문헌]
[ABSTRACT]
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
미국 신보수주의 분석
국가전략
2003 .01
-
신보수주의 복지이론의 이해
한국사회정책
2014 .09
-
미국의 신보수주의 외교이념과 민주주의: 현실주의와 도덕철학의 한 결합양식
국가전략
2005 .01
-
미국 신보수주의의 이론적 구성과 한계
국제정치논총
2008 .12
-
미국 신보수주의 정치적 이념의 구성과 주장
한국동북아논총
2005 .03
-
테러와 테러정책에 대한 미시경제학적 분석
군사학연구
2004 .01
-
신보수주의의 이념적 뿌리와 정치적 함의 : 레오 스트라우스를 중심으로
한국정치학회보
2004 .03
-
미국과 영국의 테러조직 지정 및 관리에 대한 고찰
Crisisonomy
2011 .01
-
신보수주의의 정치와 도덕 : 영화의 사례
도덕윤리과교육
2016 .05
-
Nuclear Power Plant Security and Counter-Terrorist Strategy
인하대학교 정석물류통상연구원 학술대회
2009 .10
-
The Neoconservative Approach to North Korea: Its Prospects under the next U.S. Administration
The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis
2015 .01
-
국제 테러리즘에 대한 효과적 대응 방안
한국군사학논총
2020 .01
-
Lurking Attacks on India : Finding and Fighting Terrorists
Global Asia
2010 .06
-
대테러 범죄 유형과 발생에 대한 대응
한국경찰학회보
2008 .01
-
Terrorists and Tough Neighbors : Modi’s Foreign Policy Priorities
Global Asia
2014 .06
-
국제법적 관점에서 본 9.11 反테러戰爭
국제법학회논총
2002 .04
-
아프가니스탄 폭탄테러공격에 관한 지리-공간 분석
한국경호경비학회지
2012 .01
-
중국의 테러대응 정책과 그 시사점
한국공안행정학회보
2018 .01
-
북한에 의한 테러유형과 대응방안
통일정책연구
2004 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
부시 2기 외교정책의 딜레마 : 미국 및 세계 여론의 제약요인
김성한
,
정한울
국제정치논총
2006
.04
북한의 핵·미사일 위협과 동북아 국제관계 : THAAD 배치의 정치동학
이기완
국제관계연구
2016
.12
미국 공화당 대통령 수락연설에 나타난 미국 보수주의의 변화 탐색
장혜영
한국정당학회보
2016
.11
텍스트마이닝을 이용한 북한 엘리트 권력집단 분석
이창용
,
문호석
대한산업공학회 추계학술대회 논문집
2016
.11
북한급변사태에 관한 이론적 논의 : 선제공격론과 인도주의적 개입을 중심으로
허재영
,
송경호
현대북한연구
2016
.08
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-350-018351475