2
National Security in the Post-Cold War Era
The end of the Cold War was largely seen as when the world would revert to normalcy.
It was expected that nations, states, territories, and regions would continue to coexist within
either one feeling threatened by the other. However, after a brief moment of world peace and
global optimism, a new threat presented in the form of international terrorism. Al Qaeda
emerged as a notorious international terror group whose earliest activities can be traced back
to the twin bombings of U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Perhaps the worst attack was the 9/11 attack in which the same terror group, under the
leadership of Osama Bin Laden, launched a series of four coordinated suicide terror attacks
against the U.S., claiming a total of 2,996 lives (Hoffman & Reinares, 2016). Aside from the
terror attacks, the homeland faces threats both from international and domestic actors. Such
threats have prompted the U.S. to develop a robust National Defense strategy aimed at
keeping the homeland safe both from external and internal enemies.
Modern-Day Enemies of the U.S.: Rogue and Revisionist Powers
During the Cold War era, the U.S. had one main enemy that presented itself as the
Soviet Union. It was easier for the U.S. to focus its attention on fighting this one enemy.
Similar to the current security threats the homeland faces, the U.S. still faces threats from
internal and external aggressors. Externally, the U.S. had the Soviets to contend with, while
internally, they had to deal with the spies that the communists had planted within the U.S.
government (Haynes & Klehr, 2006). Although modern-day enemies also embed their spies
within governments, the biggest threat comes from rogue regimes and revolutionist powers.
According to Mattis (2018), rogue regimes are states ruled by totalitarian or authoritarian
governments that sponsor terrorism, restrict human rights and seek to proliferate weapons of
mass destruction (WMD). Examples of rogue states include Afghanistan, Syria, North Korea,
Iran, and Cuba. On the other hand, revisionist powers are defined as states dissatisfied with
3
the current distribution of power among the superpowers. Examples of revisionist powers
include Russia and China.
Both the revisionist and rogue states present a challenge to U.S. national security.
Today, the homeland is not just concerned about the states that would challenge it militarily
and attack its critical infrastructure; the concern goes past that and looks into other concerns,
including border security, economic security, cyber security, and environmental security
(Mattis, 2018). Revolutionist states such as China and Russia are keen on reshaping the
balance of powers in the world by applying their authoritarian model. A country like Russia is
keen on gaining its veto authority over other nation-states' diplomatic, economic, and security
decisions. The current Russian invasion of Ukraine is a classic example of Russia trying to
gain veto power over Ukraine. Ukraine has been considering joining North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO), a decision Russia considers a threat to its national security. Therefore,
Russia used this as an excuse to invade Ukraine.
The emergence of long-term strategic competition between the U.S. and the revisionist
states can be likened to the arms race that the U.S. and the Soviet Union were engaged in
during the post-World War period. Today, the prosperity and security of the U.S. are
threatened by revisionist powers. For instance, China is leveraging predatory economics,
influence operations, and military modernization to coerce its neighbours to rethink the indo-
pacific relations to its advantage and the disadvantage of the U.S. According to Friedberg
(2005), U.S. security policymakers are uncomfortable with China's continued military and
economic ascendance. It is feared that if Beijing continues in its current trajectory, it might
the U.S. and gain global pre-eminence in the future.
Similarly, Russia's pursuit of veto authority over its neighbours aims to shatter NATO
and change both the Middle East and European economic and security structures in its favour
(Mattis, 2018). Russia has been using emerging technology to discredit democratically
4
elected governments in Crimea, Georgia, and Ukraine. However, the greatest concern is that
Russia continues to modernize and expand its nuclear arsenal and weapons of mass
destruction.
On the other, the U.S. is greatly concerned by the threat posed by rogue states. Rogue
states are known to sponsor terrorism. They allow terrorists to thrive in their countries and
operate with a free hand, and they also allow these groups to attack other nations and hide
back in their countries. Afghanistan is one of the rogue states where Al Qaeda was based.
After 9/11, the declaration of war on terror by President George W. Bush saw the U.S. deploy
its joint forces to the country to accomplish two key tasks- remove the rogue Taliban
government from power and dismantle Al Qaeda (Ralph, 2013). The military campaign was a
great success. By the time the Afghanistan war ended on 30th August 2021, the U.S. had
successfully eliminated most of the figureheads of the terrorist organization, including the
notorious Osama Bin Laden. The success registered in Afghanistan saw the use expand its
global war on terror to Iraq with three main objectives- to end Saddam Hussein's reign,
identify and neutralize terrorists operating in the country, and eliminate the country's weapons
of mass destruction (Badie, 2010). The U.S. has managed to deal with some of its greatest
national security threats.
Threats from Changes in Character of War
The rapidly changing character of war coupled with rapid technological advancements
has caused the U.S. to rethink its national defence strategy to stay ahead of the revisionist and
rogue powers. The commercialization of security is perhaps the greatest challenge facing the
U.S. since it now means that any nation-state can acquire some of the latest weaponry,
thereby giving them a clear advantage over their adversaries. The high value and big margins
that weapon manufacturers make have inspired them to get busy with research into how to
make never-seen-before weapons. Some of these manufacturers' new technologies include
5
advanced computing, big data analytics, robotics, artificial intelligence, biotechnology,
directed energy, and hypersonic (Mattis, 2018). These are the kind of technologies expected
to win the wars that will be fought in the future. Commercializing modern weaponry means
transnational criminals, cyber hackers, terrorists, and other malicious non-state actors are
likely to become more lethal, especially if they get their hands on these new lethal weapons.
Intelligence Use in National Security
The U.S. Intelligence Community is presently tasked with ensuring that the U.S. is kept
safe. This intelligence community brings together members from a total of 18 organizations
from the department of defefnse (DOD), Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Department of
Homeland Security (DHS), Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), Department of Energy
(DOE) and Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA). These members collect intelligence to inform
policymakers on the best national security decisions. According to the former CIA director
Mike Pompeo, the President of the United States is the biggest consumer of Intelligence as he
gets intelligence from different sources (Pompeo, 2018). The President is the top policymaker
in the U.S., and the responsibility to deal with threats against the homeland is within his
powers as the commander in chief. In this capacity, President Bush declared war on terror and
ordered the invasion of Afghanistan. Based on the intelligence concerning the proliferation of
WMD in Iraq, President Bush ordered the takedown of Saddam Hussein's government.
Sørensen (2018) argues that it is in the best interest of all peace-loving inhabitants of this
planet for rogue leaders to be toppled and replaced with democratic and peace-loving leaders.
Weapons of mass destruction are deadly and should not be placed in the hands of rogue
leaders who are notorious for sponsoring terrorists.
Application of Christian Worldview to National Security
Applying the Christian worldview to the issue of National Security is interesting
because, at its core, the Christian Worldview seeks to answer four key questions- who are
6
we? Where did we come from? What has gone wrong with the world? And is there any
solution on how best to fix it? (Smith, 2015). Perhaps in this context, two questions are most
important- what has gone wrong with the world and how to fix it. Well, going back to the
Bible, the men of old fought wars for various reasons. So, arguing that wars are a creation of
the modern man is mistaken. In Genesis 14:1-17, a story is told about how the first war was
fought on earth. This pitted four kings against five kings. The four kings defeated the five
kings, seized all their goods, and took their people captive. Among those who were taken was
Lot, Abram's nephew. This was a big mistake for the four kings because when Abram got
wind of what had happened, he marshalled his forces, pursued the four kings and defeated
them, and freed his nephew alongside others taken captive. This account shows that wars
were fought in the ancient times, and kingdoms went to war over many different issues,
Many other wars were fought in the Bible. Kingdoms went to war when they felt that
their sovereignty was under threat. The principle of just war took pre-eminence in most of the
wars fought in the Bible times. According to Lazar (2017), just war theory explains how and
why countries go to war against each other. The five principles of a just war include: having a
just cause, declared by a proper authority, being the last resort, having a reasonable chance of
success, possessing the right intentions, and the end being proportional to the means used.
Merging the Christian worldview with the tenets of just war, it can be seen that Christianity
champions peace and allows for war only when all the other avenues have been exhausted.
Christians believe that God is the God of Peace or Jehovah Shalom (Judges 6:24). However,
in the Bible, God is portrayed as the God of War, or the God of War or Jehovah Sabaoth
(Exodus 7:4; 12:41-42). In the Bible, God fought wars for His people, including fighting the
Egyptians and drowning them in the Red Sea (Exodus 14:26-28), helping the Israelites to
defeat the Amalekites (Exodus 17:8-16) and the fall of Jericho to the Israelites (Joshua 6:1-
7
27). These wars show that God allows His people to fight wars and goes ahead and fights
with and for them.
The Christian worldview envisions a world engulfed in peace where nations coexist
with each other. However, with many rogue and revisionist actors in play, the peaceful co-
existence, which is considered ideal, might not be realized. This is why it is important for the
principles of just was to be applied in any conflict pitting a country or countries against
another or others. The Bible has already warned Christians of wars, and rumours of wars will
come to pass, but they should be of good courage. In Matthew 24:6, the Bible encourages
Christians not to be troubled when there are wars and rumours of war. This is comforting,
particularly when the verse ends with "but the end is not yet." One of the greatest fears that
people have is the proliferation of WMD. With Russia possessing the largest stockpile of
nuclear warheads globally, the world powers are concerned that if Russia decides to launch a
nuclear attack, this might bring an end to the world. However, there is one Great War
prophesied in Revelations 16:16 called the war of Armageddon. Although there have been
many wars in the past and many more wars are likely to be fought in the future, the Christian
worldview still holds that nation-states in conflict must first try and find peaceful ways to
resolve their conflicts before resorting to full-blown war.
Conclusion
The changing nature of modern warfare coupled with the increased proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction has continued to threaten the U.S. national security and the
entire world's security. Rogue states are a big hindrance to the fight against terror as they
continue to harbour and sponsor terrorists. Therefore, the U.S. and its allies need to continue
with the fight against terror and take the fight to the enemies' doorsteps. If the U.S. and its
allies renege on the war against terror, terrorist groups will continue to thrive, and their
anarchy will sweep across the face of the world. Worse still, allowing these terrorist groups to
8
thrive and reign in rogue countries that have in their possession WMD is a dangerous thing to
do. However, as the U.S. and its allies continue in their campaigns against international
terrorists, they must be guided by the tenets of just war. Lucky for the U.S., the country has
an extensive and robust intelligence community that collects and collates intelligence which
informs policymakers on the appropriate course of action to take in response to any threat to
National Security.
9
References
Badie, D. (2010). Groupthink, Iraq, and the war on terror: Explaining U.S. policy shift toward
Iraq. Foreign Policy Analysis, 6(4), 277-296.
Friedberg, A. L. (2005). The future of US-China relations: Is conflict inevitable?.
International Security, 30(2), 7-45
Hoffman, B., & Reinares, F. (Eds.). (2014). The evolution of the global terrorist threat: From
9/11 to Osama bin Laden's death. Columbia University Press.
Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV® Copyright ©1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by
Biblical, Inc.® Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.
Lazar, S. (2017). Just war theory: Revisionists versus traditionalists. Annual Review of
Political Science, 20, 37-54.
Mattis, J. (2018). Summary of the 2018 national defense strategy of the United States of
America: Sharpening the American military's competitive edge. United States:
Department of Defense of the United States of America. Retrieve from:
https://dod.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/2018-National-Defense-Strategy-
Summary.pdf
Owens, et al, (2014). U.S. foreign policy and defense strategy: The evolution of an incidental
superpower. United States: Georgetown University Press.
Pompeo, M. (2018, 28th January). Intelligences beyond 2018. America Enterprise Institute.
Retrieve from: https://youtu.be/_3VgDFyGpvI
Ralph, J. (2013). America's War on Terror: The State of the 9/11 Exception from Bush to
Obama. Oxford University Press
Sørensen, G. (2018). Democracy and democratization: Processes and prospects in a
changing world. Routledge
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
