The role of the United States in the transformation of the European security architecture
https://doi.org/10.20310/1810-0201-2022-27-1-288-299
Abstract
The role of the United States of America in the transformation of the European security architecture after the end of the “Cold War” is examined. A comparative assessment is provided of the approach of the two American administrations to the role of the United States in building the key elements of the European security architecture in the context of a paradigm shift in world development and the transformation of the system of international relations established by treaties and agreements of the Yalta and Potsdam conferences. The analysis allows us to conclude that, remaining the only superpower, the United States considered the architecture of European security as the basis for building a global Eurasian security system. The US decision to transform the European security architecture based on NATO was a successful solution to the “German question” for Washington.
About the Author
I. V. Mikhailov
Derzhavin Tambov State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Igor V. Mikhailov, Candidate of History, Associate Professor, Head of International Relations and Political Science Department
33 Internatsionalnaya St., Tambov 392000
References
1. Yurgens I.Y., Dynkin A.A., Baranovskiy V.G. (gen. ed.). Arkhitektura evroatlanticheskoy bezopasnosti [Euro-Atlantic Security Architecture]. Moscow, Ekon-Inform Publ., 2009, 124 p. (In Russian).
2. Baranovskiy V.G. Evroatlanticheskoye prostranstvo: vyzovy bezopasnosti i vozmozhnosti sovmestnogo otveta: doklad dlya Komissii Evroatlanticheskoy initsiativy v oblasti bezopasnosti (EASI) [Euro-Atlantic Space: Security Challenges and Opportunities for a Joint Response: Report to the Commission of the Euro-Atlantic Security Initiative (EASI)]. Moscow, IMEMO RAN Publ., 2010, 41 p. (In Russian).
3. Karaganov S.A., Bordachev T.V. K novoy arkhitekture evroatlanticheskoy bezopasnosti: doklad rossiyskikh ekspertov k konferentsii diskussionnogo kluba «Valday» [Toward a New Euro-Atlantic Security Architecture: Report by Russian Experts to the Conference of the Valdai Discussion Club]. London, Council on Foreign and Defense Policy Publ., 2009, 26 p. (In Russian).
4. Trenin D.V. Evropeyskaya bezopasnost’: ot «lish’ by ne bylo voyny» do poiska novogo ravnovesiya [European Security: from “As Long As There is No War” to the Search for a New Balance]. Moscow, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Publ., 2018, 29 p. (In Russian).
5. Lebedeva M.M., Yuryeva T.V. Arkhitektura evropeyskoy bezopasnosti: global’nyy i regional’nyy aspekty [European security architecture: global and regional perspective]. Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta – MGIMO Review of International Relations, 2011, no. 5 (20), pp. 122-131. (In Russian).
6. Parkhalina T.G. (executive ed.). Sozdaniye novoy sistemy evropeyskoy bezopasnosti i rol’ mezhdunarodnykh organizatsiy [Creation of a new European security system and the role of international organizations]. Moscow, INION Publ., 1996, 179 p. (In Russian).
7. Troitskiy M.A. Transatlanticheskiy soyuz. 1991–2004. Modernizatsiya sistemy amerikano-evropeyskogo partnerstva posle raspada bipolyarnosti [Transatlantic Union. 1991–2004. Modernization of the AmericanEuropean Partnership System after the Collapse of Bipolarity]. Moscow, 2004. (In Russian).
8. Goldgeier J. Not Whether But When. The U.S. Decision to Enlarge NATO. Washington, Brookings Institution, 1999, 224 p.
9. Asmus R.D., Kugler R.L., Larrabee S.F. Building a New NATO. Foreign Affairs, 1993, September/October, pp. 28-40.
10. Brown M.E. Flawed Logic of NATO Expansion. Survival, 1995, no. 1, pp. 34-52.
11. Mandelbaum M. Preserving the New Peace (The Case against NATO Expansion). Foreign Affairs, 1995. May/June, pp. 9-13.
12. Sloan S.R. NATO’s Future: Beyond Collective Defense. Washington, National Defense University Publ., 1995, VII, 73 p.
13. Blank S.J. (ed.). NATO after Enlargement: New Challenges, New Missions, New Forces. Carlisle, Center for Strategic and International Studies, U.S. Army War College Publ., 1998, V, 258 p.
14. Brzezinski Z. The Grand Chessboard. American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. New York, The Basic Books Publ., 1998, 305 p.
15. Ikenberry J.G. After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint and the Rebuilding of Order after Major Wars. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2001, 293 p.
16. Kissindzher G. Nuzhna li Amerike vneshnyaya politika [Does America Need a Foreign Policy?]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 2003, 230 p. (In Russian).
17. Huntington S.R. The Lonely Superpower. Foreign Affairs, 1999, vol. 78, no. 2, pp. 35-49. (In Russian).
18. Bogaturov A.D. «Strategiya vyravnivaniya» v mezhdunarodnykh otnosheniyakh i vneshney politike SShA [“Equalization strategy” in the US international relations and foreign policy]. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnyye otnosheniya – World Economy and International Relations, 2001, no. 2, pp. 20-29. (In Russian).
19. Utkin A.I. Amerikanskaya strategiya dlya XXI veka [American Strategy for the 21st Century]. Moscow, Logos Publ., 2000, 271 p. (In Russian).
20. Shakleina T.A. Rossiya i SShA v novom mirovom poryadke. Diskussii v politiko-akademicheskikh soobshchestvakh Rossii i SShA (1991–2002) [Russia and the USA in the New World Order. Discussions in the Political and Academic Communities of Russia and the USA (1991–2002)]. Moscow, Institute for US and Canadian Studies Publ., 2002, 445 p. (In Russian).
21. Mearsheimer J. Bound to Fail. The Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order. International Security, 2019, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 7-50.
22. Nye J. Do Morals Matter? Presidents and Foreign Policy from FDR to Trump. New York, Oxford University Press, 2020, 254 p.
23. Gorbachev M.S. Izbrannyye rechi i stat’i: v 7 t. [Selected Speeches and Articles: in 7 vols.]. Moscow, Politizdat Publ., 1990, vol. 7, 624 p. (In Russian).
24. Akhtamzyan A.A. Ob”yedineniye Germanii i ego mezhdunarodno-politicheskiye posledstviya [German reunification and its international implications]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 25: Mezhdunarodnyye otnosheniya i mirovaya politika – Moscow University Bulletin of World Politics, 2010, no. 4, pp. 3-26. (In Russian).
25. Joshua R. Itzkowitz Shifrinson. Deal or No Deal? The End of the Cold War and the U.S. Offer to Limit NATO Expansion. International Security, 2016, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 7-44.
26. Espin L. Ugrozy natsional’noy bezopasnosti SShA i novyye zadachi vooruzhennykh sil (vystupleniye ministra oborony SShA 16 maya 1993 g. pered vypusknikami kolledzha Belua, shtat Viskonsin) [Threats to US national security and the new tasks of the Armed Forces (speech by the US Secretary of Defense on May 16, 1993 to the graduates of Beloit College, Wisconsin)]. SShA: ekonomika, politika, ideologiya [USA: Economy, Politics, Ideology], 1993, no. 9, pp. 13-17. (In Russian).
27. Kennan D. Samaya rokovaya oshibka [The most fatal mistake]. SShA: ekonomika, politika, ideologiya [USA: Economy, Politics, Ideology], 1997, no. 6, pp. 59-60. (In Russian).
28. Gaddis J. History, Grand Strategy and NATO Enlargement. Survival, 1998, no. 1, pp. 145-151.
29. Holbrooke R. America, a European Power. Foreign Affairs, 1995, pp. 38-51.
30. Telbot S. Dlya chego nuzhno rasshiryat’ NATO? [Why expand NATO?]. SShA: ekonomika, politika, ideologiya [USA: Economy, Politics, Ideology], 1995, no. 11, pp. 49-58. (In Russian).
31. Mikhaylov I.V. Problema rasshireniya NATO v rossiysko-amerikanskikh otnosheniyakh [The problem of NATO expansion in Russian-American relations]. Amerikanskiy ezhegodnik [American Yearbook], 2020, no. 2020, pp. 176-183. https://doi.org/10.32608/1010-5557-2020-2020-176-183. (In Russian).
Review
For citations:
Mikhailov I.V. The role of the United States in the transformation of the European security architecture. Tambov University Review. Series: Humanities. 2022;22(1):288-299. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20310/1810-0201-2022-27-1-288-299
Views:
57
Email this article 