Logo: to the web site of the Swedish Defence University

Researchers seem to disagree to which extent the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 led to a change in the United States' view of the legitimate use of military force. Therefore, this interpretive case study aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of the American strategic culture at the national level and whether the war on terror indicates a fundamental change or a fine-tuning of their strategic culture. Based on the first generation of research, which emphasizes the importance of context, I first identified through previous research which norms that can be considered to be the foundational elements in the U.S. strategic culture in a previous context: War is understood as a crusade against evil, American values are considered to be universal, victory in war must be quickly attainable and U.S. casualties should be minimal. These norms were later analyzed in various national strategies published both before and after the terrorist attacks to identify changes and continuity in the collective identity. The result shows that the war on terror points towards a fine-tuning in the strategic culture that took place primarily in synchronization. Even as the measures presented in the strategies - such as a stronger emphasis on preemptive, unilateral actions and an innovation of the military forces - indicated a change in the strategic culture, and as the fourth norm could not be identified as well in two of the strategies published during the war on terror, none of the identified norms were replaced with new ones. Instead, through revised security policy standpoints that can be seen through these observable changes in the strategies, the norms seem to have been adapted and received different values to suit the new external environment.