Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T10:40:58.410Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Common security, non-provocative defence, and the future of Western Europe

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2009

Barry Buzan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Over the last few years the term common security has come into widespread use in debates about military policy. To date, however, this potentially important concept has not acquired any clear or generally accepted meaning. It is used by a variety of writers with quite different purposes in mind, and is therefore in danger of degenerating into an empty phrase. This article tries to bring common security into sharper focus. It starts by examining the general meaning of common security in terms of its core insight that the security of states in the contemporary international system is fundamentally interdependent. It goes on to test this meaning against the contents of four recent books all of which specifically address the idea. The discussion centres on the possible linkages between common security as an overall policy objective on the one hand, and a variety of specific policies for implementing it—including disarmament, arms control, minimum deterrence, and non-provocative defence–on the other. The next section makes the argument that a combination of minimum deterrence and non-provocative defence provides the most logically convincing implementation strategy for common security.

Type
Research Article
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 13 , Issue 4 , October 1987 , pp. 265 - 279
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Booth, Ken, Strategy and Ethnocentrism (London, 1979)Google Scholar; Buzan, Barry, People, States and Fear: The National Security Problem in International Relations (Brighton, 1983), ch. 8–9.Google Scholar

2. Report of the Secretary General, Study on Deterrence (New York, 23 07 1986), UNGA document A/41/432, pp. 105–6Google Scholar; Sagan, Carl, ‘Nuclear War and Climatic Catastrophe’, Foreign Affairs, lxii (1983–1984), pp. 257–92;CrossRefGoogle ScholarNye, Joseph S. Jr, ‘Nuclear Winter and Policy Choices’, Survival, xxviii (1986), pp. 119–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. Buzan, Barry, ‘Peace, Power, and Security: Contending Concepts in the Study of International Relations’, Journal of Peace Research, xxi (1984), pp. 109–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4. Buzan, People, States and Fear, ch. 3.

5. Herken, Gregg, ‘The Nuclear Gnostics’, in MacLean, Douglas (ed.), The Security Gamble: Deterrence Dilemmas in the Nuclear Age (Totawa, NJ, 1984), p 25Google Scholar; see also Buzan, Barry, An Introduction to Strategic Studies: Military Technology and International Relations (London, 1987), ch. 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6. Howe, Josephine O'Connor (ed.), Armed Peace: the Search for World Security (London, 1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Report of the Independent Commission on Disarmament and Security Issues, Common Security: A Programme for Disarmament (London, 1982)Google Scholar; Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Policiesfor Common Security (London, 1985)Google Scholar; Windass, Stan (ed.), Avoiding Nuclear War: Common Security as a Strategy for the Defence of the West (London, 1985).Google Scholar

7. Report of the Independent Commission, Common Security, p. 139.Google Scholar

8. R. Vayrynen, ‘Introduction: Towards a Strategy of Common Security’, E. Bahr, ‘Observations on the Principle of Common Security’, and A. Krass, ‘The Death of Deterrence’, in SIPRI, Policies, pp. 1–15, 31–6, 107–28.

9. Buzan, , An Introduction to Strategic Studies, ch. 12.4.Google Scholar

10. Rothschild, E., ‘Common Security and Deterrence’, in SIPRI, Policies, p. 99.Google Scholar

11. Krass, , ‘The Death of Deterrence’, pp. 121–7.Google Scholar

12. Buzan, , An Introduction to Strategic Studies, ch. 15.Google Scholar

13. Lodgaard, S., ‘Policies of Common Security in Europe’, in SIPRI, Policies, pp. 157–76Google Scholar; Windass, Avoiding Nuclear War.

14. Galtung, Johan, ‘Transarmament: From Offensive to Defensive Defence’, Journal of Peace Research, xxi (1984), pp. 127–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and There Are Alternatives: Four Roads to Peace and Security (Nottingham, 1984)Google Scholar; Fischer, Dietrich, Preventing War: Towards a Realistic Strategy for Peace in the Nuclear Age (London, 1984)Google Scholar; Sharp, Gene, Making Europe Unconquerable: The Potential of Civilian-based Deterrence and Defence (London, 1985).Google Scholar

15. Roberts, Adam (ed.), The Strategy of Civilian Defence: Non-Violent Resistance to Aggression (London, 1967), p. 336.Google Scholar

16. Boserup, Anders, Non-Offensive Defence in Europe (Copenhagen, 1985)Google Scholar; Centre of Peace and Conflict Research, Non-Offensive Defence (Copenhagen, since 1985).Google Scholar

17. Labour Party, Defence and Security for Britain (London, 1984), pp. 6, 22.Google Scholar

18. Buzan, , An Introduction to Strategic Studies, ch. 17.Google Scholar

19. For example, Report of the Alternative Defence Commission, Defence Without the Bomb (London, 1983)Google Scholar; Boserup, Non-Offensive Defence.

20. Roberts, Adam, Nations in Arms (London, 1976), ch. 3–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fischer, Dietrich, ‘Invulnerability Without Threat: the Swiss Concept of General Defence’, Journal of Peace Research, xix (1982), pp. 205–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21. Buzan, Barry, ‘People, States and Fear: the National Security Problem in the Third World’, in Azar, Edward and Moon, Chung-in (eds.), Third World National Security: Concepts, Issues and Implications (Lexington, 1987), ch. 1.Google Scholar

22. Lodgaard, , ‘Policies of Common Security’, pp. 165–7.Google Scholar

23. ‘Europe and Defence: a Guardian Survey’, The Guardian (16 02 1987), p. 9.Google Scholar

24. Saeter, Notably M., ‘The Detente Process and Common Security’, in SIPRI, Policies, pp. 177–85Google Scholar; and Lodgaard, , ‘Policies of Common Security’, pp. 157–76.Google Scholar

25. For example, May, Brian, Russia, America, the Bomb, and the Fall of Western Europe (London, 1984).Google Scholar

26. Buzan, , An Introduction to Strategic Studies, ch. 11, 12.Google Scholar

27. IISS, The Military Balance 1986–1987 (London, 1986).Google Scholar