Conceptual Framework and Nature of the General Theory of National Security

 

Volodymyr Lipkan*

Security is an elite destiny

V. Lipkan

Introduction

The general theory of national security represents an essential element of intellectual cultures of the mankind and embraces extensive political and legal experience of prior generations reflecting main trends, milestones and outcomes of previous research into the problems of ensuring security of an individual, nation and state. This cognitive expertise, ideas and breakthroughs have now a tangible influence on the current concept of formation and operation of the national security system, its legal vision and development prospects.

In an attempt to see into the present day and head way for a better and secure future, people are used to getting back to the past, time-proven security forms and mechanisms and will undoubtedly keep on doing so. It is not a mere tribute to the past or blind faith in traditions and authorities. It rather constitutes a human orientation in geo-historical time and geopolitical environment, a natural need and aspiration of every generation to gain an attractor (peak of security of an individual, nation or state) and once settled down in between the past and the future, to get maximum realization of personal needs and interests through the robust functioning of the security mechanism.

In this respect a much-written-about meandering evolution of security systems, the formation and effective performance of its components is becoming yet more important.

The general theory of national security enables to get a better understanding of how the cognition of the national security nature evolved in that eternal collision of different views and positions and how the knowledge about reasonable balance between security-related interests of an individual, nation and state, human rights and freedoms, social and public order, national security forms and methods was gained and sharpened.

The extending experience and the increasing knowledge about national security contribute to the growing importance of national security studies – the general theory of national security. After analysing numerous research papers, the author suggests that, alternatively, the general theory of national security should be labeled as natiosecuritology from the Latin ‘natio’ – a tribe, people; and ‘logos’ – a science, study, movement. Preference is hereinafter given to the title “general theory of national security”.

One of its objectives is to describe the foundations of building up a tree of theories about national security and to explain the operating and development mechanism of Ukraine’s national security system.

1. Scope and Nature
of the General Theory of National Security

The general theory of national security represents a modern cross-discipline trend in the fundamental science, which studies the level of a nation’s interests being safeguarded from natural and man-caused dangers using various methods, including investigation of the self-organization of so-called disrupters (destabilizing systems).

The core of the concept consists in harmonizing research principles for organizational structures (method of extrapolation, determination of NSS dysfunction by identifying threats and dangers to a system) with those applied in self-organizational structures, namely: investigation of NSS as a complex open non-linear and dynamic system, assessment of self-organizing mechanisms, forecasting of fundamental parameters of system evolution. The NSS structure is viewed as a component of a nation’s security concept.

The general theory of national security (GTNS) comprises a system of knowledge which describes and explains a set of national security phenomena and consolidates the rules discovered in this area into a uniform harmonized system with a common idea of building a strong and developed, self-sustaining and independent state.

Overall, the general theory of national security abides by the following principles:

 

- Relevance of the scientific theory to an object in question;

 

- Comprehensive and consistent description of a particular area of activity;

 

- Need for substantiating liaison between different components of a theory ensuring that certain assertions pass over to the others;

 

- Inherent non-contradiction of a theory and its adequacy to research data.

 

In addition, this scientific trend allows for predicting and explaining the formation and activation of destabilizing factors and mechanisms of proliferation – a specific type of system mutation that transforms one system into the other. This being said, one can assuredly declare the heuristicity of the general theory of national security. Its simplicity and consistency are determined by the possibility of a general review of its foundations and principles.

The conceptual framework of the general theory of national security incorporates the recommendations set forth in many research papers. The suggested scientific trend is based on a number of new principles and guidelines:

 

It studies the security of an individual, nation and state that, being a harmonized trinity, create the system of national security;

 

Given the global complexity of the system and its partial information description one should consider the intuition, expertise, unifying and predictive power and other psycho-physiological qualities and abilities of the man;

 

Since dangers and threats to NSS can not undergo in-situ experiments, the only way of national security research goes through formulating techniques, assumptions, patterns and algorithms resulting from a synergetic approach to the destabilizing factors that differ by nature;

 

The validity of techniques, assumptions, patterns and algorithms is tested through computer-based simulation of destabilizing systems with various intensity, forecasting and monitoring the processes of self-organizing by means of methodological tools of different sciences, in particular synergetics and cybernetics.

 

The research is mainly targeted at:

 

Establishing fundamental rules of system transition from dynamic equilibrium to chaos;

 

Quantitative and qualitative description of complex non-linear interacting mechanisms of the specified systems, objects and structures at different stages of origination and progress of threats and dangers and their consequences in time and spatial kinetic set;

 

Setting up scientific foundation of diagnosing, monitoring, early warning and cessation of threats and dangers.

 

The fundamentals of this scientific trend lie in superior theories, including, but not limited to, theory of social administration, general theory of security, general theory of systems. Moreover, by its integrating nature GTNS incorporates fundamental provisions of other sciences to include nation theory, social contract theory, catastrophe theory, crisis theory, dynamic systems theory, autogenesis theory and others.

As a cross-discipline trend GTNS uses rules, methods, criteria and principles of natural, technical, social sciences, namely:

 

Management and Information Science (cybernetics, theory of social administration, integral systems theory, automatic control theory, decision theory, game theory, catastrophe theory, crisis theory, systems theory, effectiveness theory, operations research, meta-modeling theory, motivation theory, development theory, reflection theory, functional systems theory, genetic information theory, hypersystems theory, macrosystems theory, etc.);

 

 Physics (dissipative systems theory, lasers theory, optimum theory, nuclear physics and nuclear energetics, general and applied particle and solid-state physics, radio electronics, spectroscopy, atmospheric physics, geophysics, statistic physics, quantum mechanics);

 

Biology and physiology (genetics, evolution theory, ecology, neurophysiology, evolutionary epistemology theory, co-evolution theory, evolutionary morphology);

 

Mathematics (methods of mathematic system analysis, math statistics and probability theory, math modeling, bifurcation theory, risk theory, dissipative structures theory, set theory);

 

Chemistry (theory of chemical and physical reactions, process and material chemistry, organic and inorganic chemistry, biochemistry);

 

Machine science (analysis and synthesis of complex systems, reliability theory, kinematics and dynamics of machines and mechanisms);

 

Mechanics (gas and liquid mechanics, deformed solid state mechanics);

 

Geology (comprehensive methods of geology, geophysics and geochemistry, ocean science);

 

Social sciences (fundamentals of state and law, philosophy, sociology, geopolitics, geoeconomics, geostrategy, ethnogenesis theory).

 

The conceptual and categorical framework objectively formed in the general theory of national security comprises basic and specific notions such as national security (insecurity), national threat, safeguard, ensuring, support, probability, risk, catastrophe, crisis, vital functions, system environment, adverse factor, dangerous impact, system response, algorithm of managing, national idea, national interests, national outlook, national sufficiency, national security system, state administration of national security system, etc.

A laser-like focus in the general theory of national security is put on working out criteria and measurement scales which provide for quantification of dangers and threats, degree of security and vulnerability of the system and its components. In turn, they form quantitative and qualitative parameters of management decision-making process that are used to shape a system of national security objectives and to evaluate the effectiveness of actions to complete.

The quantitative analysis and working out of scales to measure the status of national security within NSS are based on the following basic criteria:

 

threats (dangers) to life and vital functions;

 

threats and dangers to the national security system.

 

Threat criteria bear a probable nature and are determined by frequency of materialization of threats (dangers) to NSS and their damage effect. In some cases threat criteria stand for likelihood or regularity of unfavourable, dangerous or catastrophic phenomena.

General analysis of threats (dangers) to NSS is conducted by studying threats (dangers) for each case of disrupters being activated and their number for a definite period of time. It enables to seek remedies of solving national security problems and managing threats (dangers) locally, regionally and nationwide.

In applying risk criteria within GTNS the management is aimed at achieving the objectives by the system involving purposeful impact of command agent on national security system. Sustainable and effective performance of all its algorithms contributes to the completion of system objectives. Evidently, the matters of ensuring the development of national security support subsystems and suppression of destabilizing systems should be treated as secondary.

Therefore, the fundamental scientific basis of NSS management consists in selecting an effective tool of attaining system objectives, outlining priorities in ensuring national security and working out urgent and prospective actions to mitigate threats and enhance the quality and lifespan of basic algorithms within the national security system.

The utilization of methodological tools available in synergetics and system research will enable to model the dynamics of self-organizational systems, thus predicting, preventing and counteracting the destabilizing systems.

Such principles as fundamentals of system generation, performance and development constitute its crucial operating element in addition to its purpose, functions and methods.

One of them refers to the principle of in-depth defense destined to absorb possible human faults or support system malfunction. It involves a series of barriers that, once passed over, prevent the effect of destabilizing system disrupters from being spread. Such barriers are capable of deterring the disrupters and being committed to exploitation and security purposes.

Obviously, once the national security system has been organizationally and functionally put in place, it will call for training of managers, extensive skill development and professional re-training.

National security professional training should become a remarkable event evidencing that a state is validly willing to have a strong power, which is primarily measured by the intellectual potential of its elite. Systemic thinking plays an essential role in the state-building process, as it gives an opportunity to shake off systemic atomism and deal with all state problems through the need of ensuring national security (GTNS-centric approach) and satisfying national interests. That is why national security professional training should be a state priority, thus expressing its aspiration for development rather than mere existence. Given that people represent the highest social value and the state guarantees human rights and freedoms, top executives should be trained as national security systemologists. National interest priority ought to be reflected in the state decision-making process and transposed into any regulation, harmonization of legislation and local adoption of international law best practices.

This being said, for the purpose of creating a managerial elite in national security it prospectively urges to work out the following measures:

 

drawing up centralized programs of consistent skill development and re-training;

 

elaborating and implementing regional and industry specific programs of national security professional training;

 

developing and adopting international programs for professionals in managing self-organizational systems in the case of destabilization with different intensity, etc.

 

Consequently, fundamental and applied research should reasonably provide for:

 

methodological support of formulating a national security neoparadigm;

 

a number of applied theories in NSS with the theory of state administration of national security system playing an essential role;

 

development and utilization of a uniform system of criteria to assess threats to the national security system;

 

meta-modeling of probable threats to NSS with further preparation of a standard plan of actions for stabilization algorithms;

 

elaboration and application of uniform methods and systems of control, diagnosis, identification and safeguard;

 

design of comprehensive dynamics and integration programs of the national security system based on geopolitical analysis of the environment.

 

To recap, the state governance professionals should be trained under the principle of consistency and compliance with national interests. These principles represent principal foundations for creating a  systemic mindset in State senior managers.

2. Interdisciplinary Nature
of the General Theory of National Security

Considering the specifics of modern science formation special attention is paid to the increasing cross-discipline nature of essential research trends. Interdisciplinarity is said to be a sign of complexity. Its analysis is focused on research trends which produce other more sophisticated scientific disciplines to include the general theory of national security. Having this in mind, an interdisciplinary approach in the general theory of national security is worth studying.

The cross-discipline nature of the general theory of national security is primarily uncovered in investigating complex problems of ensuring national security that urge to use the methodology of many scientific disciplines and movements. In GTNS research different scientific disciplines complement each other contributing to the integrity of analyzing the national security phenomenon. Each of these disciplines has its own approach and is committed to complete its subtask. Some of them are focused on supplements and elaboration of specialized theories of national security; the others deal with working out new forms of knowledge expression, getting an insight into the genetic background, place and objectives to be tackled in the general system of GTNS.

Most researchers switch their scientific focus on the complexity of many problems. For example, Yu.V. Sachkov states that the key problems of current scientific cognition are of a complex nature.

Analyzing complex problems of the science it is worth considering specific features of scientific cognition: scientific evolution brings knowledge, unveils qualities and rules of a new class of phenomena and processes and further sharpens ways and methods of scientific research. The sophisticated nature of the general theory of national security is revealed in addressing the question of how it actually improves scientific efforts. Its solution is based on the structural analysis of scientific cognition that divides scientific research into fundamental and applied.

Where should we include general theory of national security?

Fundamental research is often labelled as a searching one. It is said that fundamental research creates new methods rather than applies and enhances the established ones. In many cases fundamental science is called “pure”.

On the one hand, given the development trends followed by fundamental science, the general theory of national security is to work out uniform principles of ensuring national security that would reveal this phenomenon as a whole unit. In the long run it will result in a final system of equations causing national security to be viewed in a more comprehensive manner compared to the originally defined.

On the other hand, in line with development prospects of applied sciences, the general theory of national security is destined to get an in-depth insight into different forms and types of national security system components. Evolution of diversity drives the processes in the Universe. The national security phenomenon is inexhaustible and more sophisticated than originally studied. The matter of sources and drivers of applied sciences is concerned with both practical problems of production development and intellectual demands of the man.

Applied sciences deal with practical objectives. It should be pointed out however that applied research is mainly focused on investigating rather than designing security systems or technologies. The difference between fundamental and applied research lies in the specifics of selecting research lines and targets. Nevertheless, methods and outcomes have their own value. In fundamental sciences problem-selecting is primarily determined by the internal logic of its development and the technical means for appropriate experiments. On the contrary, in applied sciences the selection of problems and targets of research is directly linked to the influence of public demands – technical, economic, social objectives.

Interdisciplinary approach is to a great extent determined by the hierarchical component in setting and handling research objectives and their solution is viewed as a hierarchical structure of patterns pertaining to different phenomena and processes. Its uniting core involves working out a basic model, principal features of those patterns and processes.

In the general theory of national security the basic model represents a common view on national security liaised with the knowledge of the rules of keeping balance between interests of an individual, society and state. Scientific evolution gives birth to new more sophisticated basic models. Unlike the standpoint of the classical science where the general theory of national security reflects a fundamental vision on the discrete aspect of the national security system structure, the synergetic model promotes a fundamental vision on its continuous aspect. The synergetic model is liaised with the views on self-organization and spontaneity which is a matter of principle for analyzing complex non-linear dynamic systems.

Analysing the formation of the general theory of national security one should consider that it serves the basis, the conceptual core of formulating applied theories of national security. The key development vector of fundamental sciences represents the internal needs and interests of the science, the homeostasis and integrity of scientific trends on national security by producing unifying ideas and methods of cognition characterizing the fundamentals of life. Conversely, applied theories are outward-oriented just as other practical types of ensuring security in a particular area.

The perception by the scientific community of the GTNS formation matrix with its relevant applied theories is an engine to spur their development. The content analysis of security literature conducted led the author to the conclusion that in the early 20th century most researchers were focused on addressing the problems of information security – which comes as no surprise – by creating an information community, thus generating the need for appropriate controls. One of the key components of such control involves managing the interests of information community, i.e. information security management.

It is worth mentioning the increasing interest in personal safety triggered by turning state’s attention to the needs and interests of an individual who could feel uncomfortable with the level of security provided by the competent government authorities. Since the Constitution guarantees the right to life, health, respect, dignity and personal safety the citizen is entitled to opt for any legal remedies of such safeguard. It appears to be the cause of the recent boom of the private security system.

In studying the interaction between fundamental and applied research it should be pointed out that the development of supplements to the fundamental theory in some lines of research is not just a mere deduction of deriving new consequences out of basic provisions of the theory. Every applied theory of national security possesses a specific conceptual and categorical apparatus and development rules to be revealed through special experimental and theoretical means. At the same time, the notions and laws of the general theory of national security will serve as a basis for consolidating all the knowledge and information about national security.

Thus, the general theory of national security represents a scholastic system of knowledge incorporating numerous applied theories rather than a separate theory. Among the objectives of the general theory of national security is to formulate rules and principles for the sustainable development of diverse knowledge about national security as an integral system and to develop its control on the basis of scientific criteria and to work out acceptable parameters of assimilation and integration with other scientific theories and trends that are in some way related to addressing the matters of national security. Furthermore, the general theory of national security constitutes the core of generating scientific trends about national security and an integrity-creating scientific line capable of preserving its specific features researching into a definite object and subject.

The above leads to the statement that GTNS applied theories comprise the content of the general theory of national security and a crucial element of interdisciplinary line of research. The general theory of national security determines the designing of investigations in a quite broad area – national security – and the specifics of setting and handling research objectives, i.e. GTNS thinking in a certain area  of applied scientific research. In addition, the general theory of national security affects the whole system of knowledge about national security, philosophical mindset and its system of values. The general theory of national security lays down the foundation of new fundamental principles of the world order and evolution leading to their subordination.

It can be clearly observed that current scientific research addresses the security matters. One can even coin it security renaissance - regular process of reviving interest in security driven by objective and subjective, common and specific factors that define the speed, direction, depth and nature of security-related processes.

It results in a tendency towards absolutization of security as a central and basic operating criterion of all living creatures. Admittedly, these processes have an influence on human outlook and formation of a new philosophical security-focused trend that refers to a form of worldview deeply concerned with security which defines all other forms and types of activity and, in more abstract terms, functioning of the whole system. Security is a measure in addressing any matter. Security is a measure applied in addressing any matter enabling us to come up with the following maxim – security is above all things but not by all available means.

The formation of the general theory of national security should also consider the inverse relation: the expansion of applied theories of national security has a rebound effect on GTNS. Naturally, the pioneering trend will be followed by a unifying meta-scientific streamline, i.e. the extensive development of applied research will foster the formation of a new fundamental science. It appears to be of scientific interest to model those applied theories that will become the cornerstone of a new trend in dealing with fundamental problems.

Most researchers specializing in cross-discipline problems reasonably state that fundamental sciences are developed through applied research carried out by previous fundamental theories. Similarly, the general theory of national security as a fundamental scientific streamline in national security is formed through applied research of other fundamental theories in this area as well as integration on the basis of the methodology of interdisciplinary approach multidirectional knowledge about national security gained by other sciences and, theories.

The formation of the general theory of national security is practically needed, because it will play a fundamental role – to serve as a basis for current trends on national security that represent and constitute a substratum of a security-centered epoch.

One of the important lines of modern applied research in national security comprises the application of its ideas and methods to anthroposociocultural processes focusing on the identification and generation of unifying ideas to form a new conceptual vision. The use of the synergetic approach in the research of the national security system enables to funnel scientific efforts into addressing the ideas related to the processes of getting an in-depth insight into the nature of self-organization maintained by complex non-linear dynamic systems, understanding the fundamentals of selectiveness, determination of functioning and management of those systems.

The evolution of fundamental sciences does not directly concern practical demands, and their proactive development eventually precedes scientific and technical progress. Similarly, the general theory of national security is committed to see into the Universe and to satisfy one human intellectual need – the need for knowledge. It is satisfied and developed by working out a scientific method, its theoretical and experimental foundations that can be transposed into the following maximum: “Know security and it will set you free”.

The above considerations on the role of fundamental and applied scientific fields contribute to a better understanding of the specific nature of setting and handling cross-discipline problems of the general theory of national security.

The general theory of national security is a pillar of synthesizing different scientific fields and theories of national security. The structure of applied research also incorporates a hierarchical component that in turn contains theoretical ideas and vision with various level of generalization. An applied arm of research method facilitates the sensitive analysis of the reality which constitutes the prerequisite for development of the general theory of national security.

The above can be summarized in the following conclusions. 1. On the one hand, the problem of national security is system-wide, i.e. calls for treating national security as a system and using systemic thinking for its adequate understanding; and comprehensive on the other hand, i.e. covering multi-subject knowledge. It can be stated that the problem of national security bears an interdisciplinary nature. 2. The lack of an integral system of knowledge about national security produces the need for its formation under the current circumstances. The specifics of object and subject (a variety of aspects, directions and features) and the interdisciplinary nature of the problem generate a need for formulating a relevant cross-discipline research methodology. Thus, the research on national security should be based on interdisciplinary methodology. 3. Finally, the application of interdisciplinary methodology produces common solutions which may be applied to both integrity-creating field – general theory of national security – and other applied theories in national security. Therefore, the problem-solving should consider GTNS cross-discipline nature. It naturally leads to the following trinity which enables to substantiate the interdisciplinary nature of the general theory of national security: a cross-discipline problem calls for interdisciplinary methodology in order to get a cross-discipline solution.

At some point it can be stated that the general theory of national security represents a meta-scientific field, i.e. a scientific field to study other theories and scientific trends on national security. This assertion involves that the general theory of national security studies the system of provisions and notions of applied theories, defines their scope and principles of conceptual and categorical apparatus, thus giving an opportunity to shape them in a more reasonable fashion.

It leads to the conclusion that the formation of the general theory of national security as a scholastic system of knowledge about national security is viewed as an urgent need experienced by Ukrainian community as part of European integration policy that involves adoption into the international security system and strengthening of the European security system. The scope of problems addressed by the general theory of national security is quite wide, however, its second-to-none object and subject enables to admit that the general theory of national security belongs to interdisciplinary scientific fields. Moreover, the cross-discipline approach will guide and drive the formation of its effective methodology that is by its nature and conception intended to become fundamental and basic for applied scientific trends and theories of national security.

In turn, the general theory of national security comprises an integrity-creating component for applied theories which will possess their own specific rules of development. Above all, the general theory of national security is an interdisciplinary scientific field. Obviously, its scope of problems is determined by a cross-discipline aspect and deliverables of concrete investigations bear an inherent interdisciplinary nature. It proves the fact that the integral system of knowledge about national security – general theory of national security – represents an interdisciplinary scientific field.

3. Architecture of the Scientific Approach
to the Study of National Security Components

According to the above provisions, it is worth outlining the algorithm of modeling management subsystems in definite areas of activity. It is a must since the modeling comprises a process and actions within it follow a certain sequence and are interrelated. So, the subsystems of national security management should be modeled as follows.

 

Step 1: dealing with the concept and nature of a concrete type of security, its role in the system of national security.

Defining the notion of a concrete type of security should take into account the fact that national security represents a kind of social activity which involves an intentional purposeful impact by a command agent on national security system, under which public and private institutions create favourable conditions for progressive development of Ukrainian national interests, sources of Ukraine’s well-being and ensure the effective performance of the national security system in Ukraine.

Hence, the definition of environmental security should consider its specific features, objective laws, rules and principles of development and finally its characteristics. Every notion of any security type is described keeping in mind that it constitutes an element of national security.

The structure of definition is to be correlated with that of the national security concept. Below is a sample definition of environmental security to read as follows: environmental security is a component of national security, a kind of social activity which involves an intentional purposeful impact by a command agent on national security system, under which public and private institutions create favourable conditions for environmental equilibrium and guarantee the protection of human habitat, biosphere, atmosphere, hydrosphere, lithosphere and cosmosphere, flora, fauna and natural resources.

Following that algorithm environmental security can be defined as a component of national security, a kind of social activity which involves an intentional purposeful impact by a command agent on national security system, under which public and private institutions create favourable conditions for the state’s ability to recover gross domestic national product, quantitative and qualitative balance in international relations, economic competitiveness and sustainable performance of the credit and financial system.

Such approach will enable to unify approaches to the study of basic notions of the national security theory, which is phased in on the basis of a logical definition of common and fundamental notions, principles and norms. It will lay down the foundation for mutual understanding by professionals in different areas of activity united by national security goals and objectives. On top of it, the theory will operate on the basis of its own language, principles of its structure and effective use that currently make its existence more important and constitute a verifying factor of its practical role.

It is worth mentioning here the methodology of this scientific field – a set of goals, principles and functions that in their integrity create a new quality and are realized by adequate means. All the components should be integrated in a single system and correlated.

 

Step 2: simulating a threat to national security in a specific area taking into account real and regulatory threats as defined by the Law of Ukraine On Fundamentals of National Security of Ukraine as well as potential and non-regulatory ones that are omitted therein and within security law, but still affect relevant matters.

Similarly, defining the notion of threats in a particular area of activity should be guided by GTNS method which represents the principle of self-organization of national security research.

Once applied, this method contributes to the correlative liaison between basic notions of the general theory of national security and applied theories which study theoretical and practical problems of national security in concrete areas of activity.

That is why, the consideration of threats to national security in concrete spheres of life should be focused on regulatory threats as defined by the above Law and non-regulatory ones omitted therein.

 

Step 3: formulating a model of national security system in a specific area of activity.

National security system is not identical to that of ensuring national security with the former being complementary and functional and playing a role of support element. Consequently, its modeling in a concrete area of activity should take into account:

 

the paradigm of national security in a definite sphere of NS;

 

objects, agents and subject of national security in a definite sphere of NS;

 

national interests in a certain area of national security to be correlated with the nation’s concept and national idea;

 

the general model of national security system in a definite sphere of NS;

 

the system of priority national interests in a particular area of activity;

 

the position and function of the system for ensuring national security in the general system of national security.

 

Step 4: modeling a system of ensuring national security in a certain area taking into account:

 

nature, purpose and operating objective of the system for ensuring national security in a specific area of activity;

 

components of the public security system and its competence;

 

components of the private security system and its competence;

 

public private partnership;

 

analysis of performance and accountability of agencies empowered to ensure national security of Ukraine;

 

system of control and supervision over the activity of agents that ensure national security.

 

For ease of comprehension, the system for ensuring national security derives from and operates according to the objectives of the national security system. Thus, the structure of ensuring the system depends on operating objectives of the national security system as well as threats and dangers.

 

Step 5: modeling key directions of state policy for national security in a particular area considering national interests set forth at Step 3 and national threats outlined at Step 2. Those directions should be obviously correlated with threats and dangers to national security and not the structure of ensuring systems analyzed at Step 4. Whether state policy is effective is determined by the result achieved in managing threats and dangers, i.e. by the level of national interests being realized. Logically, the fundamental criterion of state policy comprise national interest, threats and dangers to them rather than funds and resources of subjects which pursue national security. Still, resources play an important but not a decisive role if compared with threats. One more challenge in this respect involves working out the criteria on which security means are eligible to specific categories of national interests.

Therefore, the general modeling algorithm should contain the following interrelated elements: system of priority of national interests – system of threats – system of means – system of bodies.

A systemic approach to the modeling of the national security management system in any area of activity will be of a system-wide nature that is directly related to the systemic nature of national security as a multi-layered structure.

Failure to implement or ineffective performance of ensuring system elements specified at Step 4 or availability of activities omitted by the current legislation will encourage recommendations on optimizing the organizational and functional structure of the system for ensuring national security.

Notes and References

Doctrine Sources

1. Avdeev, R.F. (1994). Philosophy of Information Civilization. Moscow.

2. Beliakov, K.I. (2001). Governance and Law in the IT Era: Monograph. Kyiv: KVIT Publishing House. 308 pp.

3. Bilous, O.G. / Lukyanenko, D.G. / Goncharenko, M.O. / Zlenko V.A. / Zernetska, O.V. (2001). Globalization and Development Security. Kyiv: NASU; Institute of World Economy and International Relations; Kyiv National Economic University. 734 pp.

4. Bodruk, O.S. (2001). Structure of Military Security: Domestic and International Specifics. Kyiv: National Institute of International Security Problems. 299 pp.

5. Vasylenko, A.I. (1998). Cross-cultural Political Processes. Moscow: URSS.

6. Vasylkova, V.V. (1999). Order and Chaos in the Evolution of Social Systems (Synergetics and Social Self-organizing Theory). World of Culture, History and Philosophy. Saint Petersburg: Lan. 480 pp.

7. Vozzhenikov, A.V. (2000). National Security: Theory, Policy, Strategy. Moscow: Modul NPO. 234 pp.

8. Gavrysh, S.B. Theoretical Background of Research into Crime Target // Pravo i Politica. No 11.

9. Golubyev, V.O. / Gavlovsky, V.D. / Tsymbaliuk, V.S. (2001). Information Security: Problems with Fighting against IT Crimes. Zaporizhzhya: Prosvita. 252 pp.

10. Goncharenko, A. / Jangujin, R. / Lisitsyn, E. (2002). Civilian Control and National Security System // Zerkalo Nedeli. – 14 September. P. 12.

11. Danylian, O.G. / Dzioban, O.P. / Panov, M.I. (2002). National Security of Ukraine: Structure and Implementation: Manual. Kharkiv: Folio. 285 pp.

12. Emelianov, V.P. (2002). Notion of Crime Target in Criminal Law Science // Pravo i Politica. No 4.

13. Emelianov, V.P. (2002). Terrorism and Terrorization Offences: Criminal Legal Investigation. Saint Petersburg: “Press” Legal Center Publishing House. 291 pp.

14. Zozulya, I.V. (2002). Security and Modern Age: Legal Issues // Pravo i Politica. No 4.

15. History of Political and Legal Studies: Manual. Ed. by Leist, O.E. Moscow: Zertsalo-M IKD. (2001).

16. Kaluzhny, R.A. / Tsymbaliuk, V.S. (1993). Informatization of State Governance and National Security of Ukraine // Rozbudova Derzhavy. No 8.

17. Kartunov, O. / Marukhovsky, O. (1996). Ethnopolitical (Dogmatic) Mindset // Small Encyclopedia of Ethnic State Studies / NASU: Koretsky Institute of State and Law. Kyiv: Dovira; Geneza. P. 493, 494, 499.

18. Kosevtsov, V.O. / Binko, I.F. (1996). National Security of Ukraine: Problems and Ways of Realizing Priority National Interests. Kyiv: National Institute for Strategic Research. 1st ed. 54 pp.

19. Kostenko, G.F. (2002) Theoretical Aspects of National Security. Manual. Kyiv: CJSC Demid Publishing House. 144 pp.

20. Levytska, M.B. (2002). Theoretical Legal Aspects of Ensuring National Security by Internal Affairs Bodies of Ukraine: LLM thesis: 12.00.01 / National Academy of Internal Affairs of Ukraine. Kyiv. 206 pp.

21. Lipkan, Volodymyr (2000). Terrorism and National Security of Ukraine. Kyiv: Znannya. 184 pp.

22. Lipkan, Volodymyr (2003). Security Studies: Manual. Kyiv: Publishing House at European University. 208 pp.

23. Lipkan, Volodymyr (2002). Information Fats Food – Bon Appetite // Biznes i Bezopasnost. No 5.

24. Lipkan, Volodymyr (2003). General Theory of National Security Paradigm // Pravo Ukrainy. No 2.

25. Lipkan, Volodymyr (2002). National Security of Ukraine through Self-organizing Theory // Derzhava i Pravo. No 16. P. 142-148.

26. Lipkan, Volodymyr (2002). Neoparadigm of National Security // Pravo Ukrainy. No 11. P. 19 – 21.

27. Lipkan, Volodymyr (2002). Object, Subject and Structure of General Theory of National Security // Pravo i Bezpeka. No 4.

28. Lipkan, Volodymyr (2003). Organization of Private Security System: Master’s thesis. Kyiv: Publishing House at European University. 110 pp.

29. Lipkan, Volodymyr (2002). On the Other Side of Good and Evil // Militsiya Ukrainy. No 10.

30. Lipkan, Volodymyr (2003). General Theory of National Security Subject // Derzhava i Pravo. No 19.

31. Lipkan, Volodymyr (2002). Systemic Approach to Benchmarking of National Security System // Bulletin of National Academy of Internal Affairs of Ukraine. No 2.

32. Lipkan, Volodymyr (2002). US Internal Security Service // Militsiya Ukrainy. No 1.

33. Lipkan, Volodymyr (2003). Modern Security Renaissance // Derzhava i Pravo. No 20. P. 216-219.

34. Lipkan, Volodymyr (2003). Theoretical Foundations and Elements of National Security of Ukraine: Monograph. Kyiv: Tekst. 600 pp.

35. Lipkan, V.A. / Nikiforchuk, D.Y. / Rudenko, M.M. (2002). Anti-terrorism. Kyiv: Znannya. 254 pp.

36. Lopatin, V.N. (2000). Information Security of Russia: Individual. Society. State. Saint Petersburg: Universum Fund. 428 pp.

37. International Police Encyclopedia (10 vol.) Ed. by Yu.I. Rymarenko / Ya.Yu. Kondratyev / V.Ya. Tatsiy / Yu.S. Shemshuchenko. Kyiv: “In Ure” Publishing House Concern. P. 41-57, 404 – 415, 441 – 450, 1007 – 1037.

38. Medvedchuk, V.V. (1997). Modern Ukrainian National Idea and Topical Issues of State-building: LLD thesis: 12.00.01., 12.00.02 / National Academy of Internal Affairs of Ukraine. Kyiv. P. 165.

39. Muntiyan, V.I. (1999). Economic Security of Ukraine. Kyiv. 467 pp.

40. National Security of Ukraine in 1994-1996: Scientific report Ed. by O.F. Belov / I.F. Binko / S.І. Pirozhkov / М.L. Rubanets / О.P. Yanishevsky. Kyiv: National Institute for Strategic Research. (1997). 198 pp.

41. Private Entrepreneurship Security System as Ukraine’s National Security Agent: Materials of scientific conferences.
- 16-17 May 2001. - Kyiv: Publishing House at European University (2001). 480 pp.

42. Nyzhnyk, N.R. / Sytnyk, G.P. / Bilous, V.T. (2000). National Security of Ukraine (Methodological Aspects, Condition and Development Trends): Manual for higher education institutions. Irpin. 304 pp.

43. Operative Searching Activity: Manual Ed. by К.К. Goriyanov / V.S. Ovchinsky / А.Yu. Shumilov. Moscow: Infra-М (2001).

44. Parakhonsky, B.O. (1993). National Interests of Ukraine (Intellectual Aspects): Monograph. Naukovi Dopovidi. 6th ed. Kyiv. 43 pp.

45. Pocheptsov, G.G. (1996). National Security of Transition Countries: Manual for International Relations and International Information Departments / Kyiv National Taras Shevchenko University. Institute of International Relations. Kyiv. 136 pp.

46. Prigozhin, I. (2002) From Existing to Emerging: Time and Complexity in Physical Sciences / Transl. from English / Ed. by Yu.L. Klimontovich. 2nd ed. Moscow: Editorial URSS. 288 pp.

47. Sachkov, Yu.V. (2003). Scientific Approach: Questions and Development. Moscow: Editorial URSS.

48. Synergetic Paradigm. Non-linear Thinking in Science and Arts. Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya (2002). 496 pp.

49. Social Risks and Social Security in Man-caused and Natural Emergencies and Disasters / Ed. by V.V. Dyrdynets / Yu.І. Saenko / Yu.О. Privalov. Kyiv: Stilos (2001). 497 pp.

50. Surmin, Yu.P. (2003). Systems Theory and Systemic Analysis: Manual. Kyiv: MAUP. 368 pp.

51. Tymoshenko, I.I. / Laptyev, S.G. / Lipkan, V.A. / Onyschenko, G. The Law of Ukraine On Private Security of Individuals and Entrepreneurs in Ukraine // Private Entrepreneurship Security System as Ukraine’s National Security Agent. Kyiv: Publishing House at European University (2001). P. 466-477.

52. Utenvsky, B.S. (1948). General Studies on Office Abuse. Moscow: Publishing House of USSR Justice Ministry. 440 pp.

53. Chernavsky, D.S. (2001). Synergetics and Information. Moscow: Nauka. 244 pp.

54. Cheshkov, M. (1998). Global Vision and New Science. Moscow: IMEIMO.

55. Shevchenko, V. / Kostenko, G. (1996). Concept of National Security: Methodological Aspect // Holos Ukrainy. - 11 January.

56. Shlemk, V.T. / Binko, I.F. Economic Security of Ukraine: Nature and Realization. Kyiv: National Institute for Strategic Research (1997).

57. Legal Encyclopedia (6 vol.) / Ed. by Yu.S. Shemshuchenko et al. Kyiv: Bazhan Ukrainian Encyclopedia (1998).

Internet Resources

www.niss.gov.ua

www.niisp.gov.ua

www.nbu.gov.ua

Abstract

The general theory of national security represents an essential element of intellectual cultures of the mankind and embraces extensive political and legal experience of prior generations reflecting main trends, milestones and outcomes of previous research into the problems of ensuring security of an individual, nation and state. This cognitive expertise, ideas and breakthroughs have now a tangible influence on the current concept of formation and operation of the national security system, its legal vision and development prospects.

The extending experience and the increasing knowledge about national security contribute to the growing importance of national security studies – the general theory of national security. After analysing numerous research papers, the author suggests that, alternatively, the general theory of national security should be labeled as natiosecuritology from the Latin ‘natio’ – a tribe, people; and ‘logos’ – a science, study, movement. Preference is hereinafter given to the title “general theory of national security”.



* Doctor of Science, Consultant Committee on National Security and Defence of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, Chairman of the Board of Global Organization of Allied Leadership, Academic of the Academy of Science of High Education, Expert on Security Studies and Global Leadership, Ukraine