National security

• Terrorism: person or groups deliberately targeting critical infrastructure for political gain. In the 2008 Mumbai attacks, the Mumbai central station and hospital were deliberately targeted.
• Sabotage: person or groups such as ex-employees, anti-government groups, environmental groups. Refer to Bangkok's International Airport Seized by Protestors.
• cyberattacks during the 2008 South Ossetia war
  are examples.
• Natural disaster: hurricane or other natural events that damage critical infrastructures such as oil pipelines, water, and power grids. See Hurricane Ike and Economic effects of Hurricane Katrina for examples.

Economic security, in the context of

Environmental security, also known as ecological security, refers to the integrity of

The scope and nature of environmental threats to national security and strategies to engage them are a subject of debate.[3]^: 29–33 Romm (1993) classifies the major impacts of ecological changes on national security as:^[3]: 15

• Transnational environmental problems. These include global environmental problems such as
  global warming, deforestation, and loss of biodiversity.^[3]
  ^: 15
• Local environmental or resource pressures. These include resource scarcities leading to local conflict, such as disputes over water scarcity in the Middle East; migration into the United States caused by the failure of agriculture in Mexico;^[3]: 15 and the impact on the conflict in Syria of erosion of productive land.^[25] Environmental insecurity in Rwanda following a rise in population and dwindling availability of farmland, may also have contributed to the genocide there.^[26]
• Environmentally threatening outcomes of warfare. These include acts of war that degrade or destroy ecosystems. Examples are the Roman Empire destruction of agriculture in Carthage; Saddam Hussein's burning of oil wells in the Gulf War;^{[3]: 15–16} the use of Agent Orange by the UK in the Malayan Emergency and the US in the Vietnam War for defoliating forests.

Resources include water, sources of energy, land, and minerals. Availability of adequate natural resources is important for a nation to develop its industry and economic power. For example, in the

• The high cost of maintaining large military forces can place a burden on the economic security of a nation And annual defence spending as per cent of GDP varies significantly by country.^[31] Conversely, economic constraints can limit the scale of expenditure on military capabilities.
• Unilateral security action by states can undermine political security at an international level if it erodes the rule of law and undermines the authority of international institutions. The invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the annexation of Crimea in 2014 have been cited as examples.^[32][33]
• The pursuit of economic security in competition with other nation states can undermine the ecological security of all when the impact includes widespread topsoil erosion, biodiversity loss, and climate change.^[34] Conversely, expenditure on mitigating or adapting to ecological change places a burden on the national economy.

If tensions such as these are mismanaged, national security policies and actions may be ineffective or counterproductive.

Increasingly, national security strategies have begun to recognise that nations cannot provide for their own security without also developing the security of their regional and international context.^{[14][27][11][12]} For example, Sweden's national security strategy of 2017 declared:

"Wider security measures must also now encompass protection against epidemics and infectious diseases, combating terrorism and organised crime, ensuring safe transport and reliable food supplies, protecting against energy supply interruptions, countering devastating climate change, initiatives for peace and global development, and much more."^[12]

The extent to which this matters, and how it should be done, is the subject of debate. Some argue that the principal beneficiary of national security policy should be the nation state itself, which should centre its strategy on protective and coercive capabilities in order to safeguard itself in a hostile environment (and potentially to project that power into its environment, and dominate it to the point of strategic supremacy).^[35][36][37] Others argue that security depends principally on building the conditions in which equitable relationships between nations can develop, partly by reducing antagonism between actors, ensuring that fundamental needs can be met, and also that differences of interest can be negotiated effectively.^[38][8][9] In the UK, for example, Malcolm Chalmers argued in 2015 that the heart of the UK's approach should be support for the Western strategic military alliance led through NATO by the United States, as "the key anchor around which international order is maintained".^[39]

Approaches to national security can have a complex impact on

National security ideology as taught by the

China's military is the People's Liberation Army (PLA). The military is the largest in the world, with 2.3 million active troops in 2005.

The Ministry of State Security was established in 1983 to ensure "the security of the state through effective measures against enemy agents, spies, and counterrevolutionary activities designed to sabotage or overthrow China's socialist system."^[41]

European Union national security has been accused of insufficiently preventing foreign threats.[46]

The state of the Republic of India's national security is determined by its internal stability and geopolitical interests. While Islamic upsurge in Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir demanding secession and far left-wing terrorism in India's red corridor remain some key issues in India's internal security, terrorism from Pakistan-based militant groups has been emerging as a major concern for New Delhi.

The National Security Advisor of India heads the National Security Council of India, receives all kinds of intelligence reports, and is chief advisor to the Prime Minister of India over national and international security policy. The National Security Council has India's defence, foreign, home, finance ministers and deputy chairman of NITI Aayog as its members and is responsible for shaping strategies for India's security in all aspects.^[47]

A lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay filed a

In the years 1997 and 2000, Russia adopted documents titled "National Security Concept" that described Russia's global position, the country's interests, listed threats to national security, and described the means to counter those threats. In 2009, these documents were superseded by the "National Security Strategy to 2020". The key body responsible for coordinating policies related to Russia's national security is the Security Council of Russia.

According to provision 6 of the National Security Strategy to 2020, national security is "the situation in which the individual, the society and the state enjoy protection from foreign and domestic threats to the degree that ensures constitutional rights and freedoms, decent quality of life for citizens, as well as sovereignty, territorial integrity and stable development of the Russian Federation, the defence and security of the state."

Total Defence is Singapore's whole-of-society national defence concept^[50] based on the premise that the strongest defence of a nation is collective defence^[51] – when every aspect of society stays united for the defence of the country.^[52] Adopted from the national defence strategies of Sweden and Switzerland,^[53] Total Defence was introduced in Singapore in 1984. Then, it was recognised that military threats to a nation can affect the psyche and social fabric of its people.^[54] Therefore, the defence and progress of Singapore are dependent on all of its citizens' resolve, along with the government and armed forces.^[55] Total Defence has since evolved to take into consideration threats and challenges outside of the conventional military domain.

National security of Ukraine is defined in Ukrainian law as "a set of legislative and organisational measures aimed at permanent protection of vital interests of man and citizen, society and the state, which ensure sustainable development of society, timely detection, prevention and neutralisation of real and potential threats to national interests in areas of law enforcement, fight against corruption, border activities and defence, migration policy, health care, education and science, technology and innovation policy, cultural development of the population, freedom of speech and information security, social policy and pension provision, housing and communal services, financial services market, protection of property rights, stock markets and circulation of securities, fiscal and customs policy, trade and business, banking services, investment policy, auditing, monetary and exchange rate policy, information security, licensing, industry and agriculture, transport and communications, information technology, energy and energy saving, functioning of natural monopolies, use of subsoil, land and water resources, minerals, protection of ecology and environment and other areas of public administration, in the event of emergence of negative trends towards the creation of potential or real threats to national interests."^[56]

The primary body responsible for coordinating national security policy in Ukraine is the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine. It is an advisory state agency to the

• Protecting sovereignty
• Constitutional order
• Territorial integrity and inviolability of the republic
• Developing strategies and continuous improvement of policy in the sphere of defence and state security
• Comprehensive scientific assessment of the military threat nature
• Determining position toward modern warfare
• Effective control over the execution of the tasks of the state and its institutions keeping defence capabilities of Ukraine at the level of defence sufficiency

The primary body responsible for coordinating national security policy in the UK is the

The concept of national security became an official guiding principle of foreign policy in the United States when the National Security Act of 1947 was signed on July 26, 1947, by U.S. President Harry S. Truman.^[3]: 3 As amended in 1949, this Act:

• created important components of American national security, such as the precursor to the Department of Defense;
• subordinated the military branches to the new cabinet-level position of Secretary of Defense;
• established the National Security Council and the Central Intelligence Agency;^[58]

Notably, the Act did not define national security, which was conceivably advantageous, as its ambiguity made it a powerful phrase to invoke against diverse threats to interests of the state, such as domestic concerns.^[3]: 3–5

The notion that national security encompasses more than just military security was present, though understated, from the beginning. The Act established the National Security Council so as to "advise the President on the integration of domestic, military and foreign policies relating to national security".^[2]: 52

The act establishes, within the National Security Council, the Committee on Foreign Intelligence, whose duty is to conduct an annual review "identifying the intelligence required to address the national security interests of the United States as specified by the President" (emphasis added).^[59]

In Gen.

To address the institutionalisation of new bureaucracies and government practices in the post–World War II period in the U.S., the culture of semi-permanent military mobilisation joined the National Security Council (NSC), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Department of Defense (DoD), and the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) for the practical application of the concept of the national security state:[61]^[62][63]

During and after World War II, U.S. leaders expanded the concept of national security, and used its terminology for the first time to explain America's relationship to the world. For most of U.S. history, the continental United States was secure. But, by 1945, it had become rapidly vulnerable with the advent of long-range bombers, atom bombs, and ballistic missiles. A general perception grew that future mobilization would be insufficient and that preparation must be constant. For the first time, American leaders dealt with the essential paradox of national security faced by the Roman Empire and subsequent great powers: Si vis pacem, para bellum — "If you want peace, prepare for war."^[64]

— David Jablonsky

Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer offers a seven-characteristic definition for 'national security state' as where the military and broader national security establishment, e.g., exert influence over political and economic affairs; hold ultimate power while maintaining an appearance of democracy; are preoccupied with external and/or internal enemies; define policies in secret and implement those policies through covert channels.^[65]

The U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff defines national security of the United States in the following manner :^[66]

A collective term encompassing both national defense and foreign relations of the United States. Specifically, the condition provided by: a. a military or defense advantage over any foreign nation or group of nations; b. a favorable foreign relations position; or c. a defense posture capable of successfully resisting hostile or destructive action from within or without, overt or covert.

In 2010, the White House included an all-encompassing world-view in a national security strategy which identified "security" as one of the country's "four enduring national interests" that were "inexorably intertwined":^[67]

"To achieve the world we seek, the United States must apply our strategic approach in pursuit of four enduring national interests:

• Security:  The security of the United States, its citizens, and U.S. allies and partners.
• Prosperity:  A strong, innovative, and growing U.S. economy in an open international economic system that promotes opportunity and prosperity.
• Values: Respect for universal values at home and around the world.
• International Order:  An international order advanced by U.S. leadership that promotes peace, security, and opportunity through stronger cooperation to meet global challenges.

Each of these interests is inextricably linked to the others: no single interest can be pursued in isolation, but at the same time, positive action in one area will help advance all four."

— National Security Strategy, Executive Office of the President of the United States (May 2010)

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said that, "The countries that threaten regional and global peace are the very places where women and girls are deprived of dignity and opportunity".^[68] She has noted that countries, where women are oppressed, are places where the "rule of law and democracy are struggling to take root",^[68] and that, when women's rights as equals in society are upheld, the society as a whole changes and improves, which in turn enhances stability in that society, which in turn contributes to global society.^[68]

The Bush administration in January 2008 initiated the Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative (CNCI). It introduced a differentiated approach, such as identifying existing and emerging cybersecurity threats, finding and plugging existing cyber vulnerabilities and apprehending those trying to access federal information systems.^[69]

President Obama said the "cyber threat is one of the most serious economic and national security challenges we face as a nation" and that "America's economic prosperity in the 21st century will depend on cybersecurity".^[70]

• Deep state
• Fourth branch of government
• Homeland security
• Human security
• International security
• Military–industrial complex
• Security
• National interest
• National economic security

Further reading

Library resources about
National security

---

• Resources in your library
• Resources in other libraries

• Brzezinski, Zbigniew. Power and Principle: Memoirs of the National Security Adviser, 1977–1981. New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1983.
• Cordesman, Anthony H. Saudi Arabia: National Security in a Troubled Region. Santa Barbara, Calif: Praeger Security International, 2009.
• Devanny, Joe, and Josh Harris, The National Security Council: national security at the centre of government. London: Institute for Government/King's College London, 2014.
• Jordan, Amos A., William J. Taylor, Michael J. Mazarr, and Suzanne C. Nielsen. American National Security. Baltimore, Md: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999.
• MccGwire, Michael. Perestroika and Soviet National Security. Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1991.
  ISBN 978-0815755531
• Mueller, Karl P. Striking First: Preemptive and Preventive Attack in U.S. National Security Policy. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Project Air Force, 2006.
• National Research Council (U.S.). Beyond "Fortress America": National Security Controls on Science and Technology in a Globalized World. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2009.
• Neal, Andrew. Security in a Small Nation: Scotland, Democracy, Politics. Open Book Publishers, 2017.
  ISBN 9781783742707
• Rothkopf, David J. Running the World: The Inside Story of the National Security Council and the Architects of American Power. New York: PublicAffairs, 2005.
• Tal, Israel. National Security: The Israeli Experience. Westport, Conn: Praeger, 2000.
• Tan, Andrew. Malaysia's security perspectives. Canberra : Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University, 2002.

External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to National security.

Wikiquote has quotations related to National security.

• National Security Internet Archive (NSIA) at the Internet Archive