| Titre : |
How Oil Influences U.S. National Security |
| Type de document : |
document électronique |
| Auteurs : |
Charles L. Glaser, Auteur |
| Editeur : |
The MIT Press |
| Année de publication : |
Fall 2013 |
| Collection : |
International Security num. Vol. 38, nr. 2 |
| Importance : |
36 p |
| Langues : |
Anglais (eng) |
| Tags : |
Energie Pétrole Etats-Unis Sécurité |
| Résumé : |
Scholars and policymakers in the United States commonly worry that a lack of “energy security” is hurting U.S. national security, yet little of their analysis actually links energy requirements with the probability of military conflict. Energy security is usually defined as “the reliable and affordable supply of energy, and most analyses focus on the physical security of oil supplies, the increasing price of oil, and the economic costs of oil disruptions. Their key recommendations call for the United States to reduce oil imports, decrease its vulnerability to oil supply disruptions, and prepare strategies for managing available supplies when disruptions occur. Not linking these energy issues directly to possibilities for international conºict leaves an important gap in our analysis. International conflict lies at the heart of standard conceptions of U.S. national security. Issues that are judged to engage U.S. national security are typically granted top priority on the national agenda, are given entitlement to U.S. resources, and are frequently thought to warrant the use of military force. Thus, without exploring the links between energy requirements and military conflict, we risk conflating U.S. national security with U.S. prosperity, and misjudging the nature of the challenges facing the United States. |
How Oil Influences U.S. National Security [document électronique] / Charles L. Glaser, Auteur . - [S.l.] : The MIT Press, Fall 2013 . - 36 p. - ( International Security; Vol. 38, nr. 2) . Langues : Anglais ( eng)
| Tags : |
Energie Pétrole Etats-Unis Sécurité |
| Résumé : |
Scholars and policymakers in the United States commonly worry that a lack of “energy security” is hurting U.S. national security, yet little of their analysis actually links energy requirements with the probability of military conflict. Energy security is usually defined as “the reliable and affordable supply of energy, and most analyses focus on the physical security of oil supplies, the increasing price of oil, and the economic costs of oil disruptions. Their key recommendations call for the United States to reduce oil imports, decrease its vulnerability to oil supply disruptions, and prepare strategies for managing available supplies when disruptions occur. Not linking these energy issues directly to possibilities for international conºict leaves an important gap in our analysis. International conflict lies at the heart of standard conceptions of U.S. national security. Issues that are judged to engage U.S. national security are typically granted top priority on the national agenda, are given entitlement to U.S. resources, and are frequently thought to warrant the use of military force. Thus, without exploring the links between energy requirements and military conflict, we risk conflating U.S. national security with U.S. prosperity, and misjudging the nature of the challenges facing the United States. |
|
Affiner la recherche
