Skip to main content

Defining the Enemy: EU and US Threat Perceptions After 9/11

  • Chapter
  • 71 Accesses

Abstract

What does it mean for a state to be secure? Threats are challenges to the security of a state and to its national interests. Threat perceptions are sets of beliefs about the nature of insecurity and what constitutes an ‘enemy’. To understand how states perceive security threats is to know something about how they define their security environment and what value priorities they project onto that environment. The way in which threat is defined is a major component of the security culture of a state.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. G. Marks, L. Hooghe and K. Blank, ‘European Integration from the 1980s: State-Centric v. Multi-Level Governance’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 34, 3 (1996) 341–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. C. Patten and R. Perle, ‘Patten vs. Perle: Is the U.S. a Unilateralist Hegemon?’ European Affairs (Winter 2003),

    Google Scholar 

  3. J. Solana, ‘The Voice of Europe on Security Matters’, Royal Institute for International Relations, 26 November 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  4. B. Buzan, People, States, and Fear: An Agenda for International Security Studies in the Post-Cold War Era (CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  5. G. Burghardt, EU Civilian Crisis Management Capabilities and the Emerging EU Security Strategy, Address (3–5 October 2003), http://www.eurunion.org/news/speeches/2003

    Google Scholar 

  6. S. Penksa and W. Mason, ‘EU Security Cooperation and the Transatlantic Relationship’, Cooperation and Conflict, 38, 3 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  7. C. Powell, ‘A Strategy of Partnerships’, Foreign Affairs (January/February 2004), 22.

    Google Scholar 

  8. R. Jervis, ‘Understanding the Bush Doctrine’, Political Science Quarterly, 118 (2003), 365.

    Google Scholar 

  9. J. Solana, ‘Three Ways for Europe to Prevail Against the Terrorists’, The Financial Times, 25 March 2004, p.19.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2005 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Penksa, S.E. (2005). Defining the Enemy: EU and US Threat Perceptions After 9/11. In: Gärtner, H., Cuthbertson, I.M. (eds) European Security and Transatlantic Relations after 9/11 and the Iraq War. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230502536_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics