首页> 外文OA文献 >European Security and Defence Policy: Taking Stock. ESF Working Paper No. 8, September 2002
【2h】

European Security and Defence Policy: Taking Stock. ESF Working Paper No. 8, September 2002

机译:欧洲安全与防务政策:盘点。 EsF 2002年9月第8号工作文件

摘要

Contains four separate papers: Chairman's Summing Up, by Francois Heisbourg; European Security andd Defence Policy: A European View, by Nicole Gnesotto; Changes in European Security Landscape: A Russian View, by Victor Kremenyuk; Power and Weakness, by Robert Kagan. The presenters and the participants in the discussion were invited by the Chairman to bear in mind the following questions: - What is the most relevant response to the emerging threat of terrorism of mass destruction? Are the traditional tools of military power the most relevant vis à vis what looks less like a Hobbesian jungle (where power goes to the big and the strong) than a fight against mutating viruses in which small is both ugly and powerful? Following, are military capabilities, and the readiness to use them, the primary benchmark for measuring power? - Is NATO condemned to play an essentially regional role in managing a Kantian Europe (“OSCE in uniform”); or will it play a global role? And wouldn’t the latter option imply that the US military be fully part of NATO, not simply the comparatively small US European command (EUCOM): is such an evolution likely? - Is the EU as feckless as it is sometimes portrayed? Are we all Woodstock-era flower children, despite the fact that most EU members have an imperial legacy and notwithstanding the recurring use of force by a number of European countries in recent years as well as in the previous decades? - Conversely, is the US as ready to act decisively as we are sometimes invited to believe? More specifically, what does the US refusal to assault Tora Bora tell us about the US military’s readiness to run risks?
机译:包含四篇单独的论文:弗朗索瓦·海斯堡(Francois Heisbourg)的《主席总结》; 《欧洲安全与国防政策:欧洲观点》,妮可·格尼索托(Nicole Gnesotto); Victor Kremenyuk,《欧洲安全格局的变化:俄罗斯的观点》; 《权力与弱点》,罗伯特·卡根(Robert Kagan)。主席邀请主持人和讨论者注意以下问题:-对新出现的大规模毁灭性恐怖主义威胁最相关的应对措施是什么?传统的军事力量工具与看起来像霍布斯丛林(权力由强者和强者所组成)相比,而不是与变异小而丑陋而强大的病毒的斗争最相关吗?其次,军事能力以及使用它们的意愿是否是衡量力量的主要基准? -北约是否被谴责在管理康德欧洲方面发挥实质性的区域性作用(“统一的欧安组织”);还是会发挥全球作用?而且,后一种选择不就意味着美国军方将完全成为北约的一部分,而不仅仅是相对较小的美国欧洲司令部(EUCOM):这样的发展可能吗? -欧盟是否像有时描绘的那样完美无瑕?尽管大多数欧盟成员国都有帝国遗产,尽管近年来以及过去几十年中许多欧洲国家都反复使用武力,我们是否都是伍德斯托克时代的花童? -相反,美国是否愿意像我们有时被邀请相信那样采取果断行动?更具体地说,美国拒绝对Tora Bora的攻击告诉我们什么,美国军方已准备好承担风险?

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号