ABSTRACT
An increasing number of state and non-state actors have displayed an indifference to international norms and law as well as conventional forms of conflict resolution, and have demonstrated a preparedness to adopt offensive strategies that have the potential to challenge the traditional security architecture. The terrorist attacks on New York and Washington in 2001, Madrid in 2004 and London in 2005, have underscored the need for reconstructing global and regional systems of security governance. Barriers to that task include different threat assessments by the major powers, divergent perceptions of security threats to states, and divergent strategic choices (ranging from unilateralism to a robust multilateralism) for meeting today’s security challenges. Similarly, the major states have variable inclinations towards relying upon ‘hard power’ and ‘soft power’ to resolve those security challenges (Nye 2003). The aim of this and subsequent chapters is a comparative analysis of the great and middleranked powers’ changing security agendas and their responses to the challenges of global and regional security governance. A further objective is to examine the dominant characteristics of national security cultures. The investigation will be based on the perceptions of governments, parliaments, security experts and the public of the G8 countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States) and China.1
