This study analyzes the development of the United States security policy from the administrations of Bush to Obama. Its focus is directed towards significant continuities and changes in the context of political means, interests and approaches to international cooperation. The empirical data mainly consists of U.S. National Security Strategies issued in 2002, 2006 and 2010. Such strategies contain broad messages and, therefore, to help identify issues of special significance, a theoretical framework based on the perspectives of the international relations scholars John J. Mearsheimer and Joseph S. Nye is first developed.
The findings of the study show that the position of military power as the most prioritized political instrument in the U.S. remains stable. However, in an effort to promote the nation’s values, the new administration intends to make more use of soft power and less use of military power. Regarding its interests, defending the nation and handling military threats are still top priorities, and an important aspect is that the U.S. intends to maintain its global military superiority. Spreading democracy, respect for human rights and free trade in an open international economic system are also constant interests, but one notable development is that the national economy figures more prominently on the security agenda. Looking at the approaches for cooperation, it seems that unilateral military action is an option which is less likely to be used by the new administration. Furthermore, this administration places greater emphasis on the value of international institutions than the previous administration. Still, an important continuity is the intention of maintaining a clear leadership role and strongly advancing U.S. interests when cooperating internationally.
To summarize, the two administrations security strategies indicate that governing interests are unchanged, but the new administration is aiming for a better balance of the tools of American power, and is communicating a less unilateral profile. Still, the presence of significant stable aspects reduces the level of change, and contributes to the impression that the U.S. is not developing a new course, but rather adjusting the current one.