| Summary: | The author firstly points to the fact that within the overall comprehension of security a difference is made between the two terms - the notion and the concept of security. The notion of security is understood as an idea, as an apprehension of the system of security. He says that there are four schools of opinion about security: realistic, liberal-institutionalist alternative-critical and globalist ones. The realistic and globalist are two schools of opinion that are basically opposite to each other; the former takes the state as a focus of international security, while according to the latter one the state alone has for a long time been incapable of resolving the problems of security. The liberal-institutionalist and alternative-critical approaches consider that apart from the state, the individuals, socials groups and international organisations are also the factors of security. The contemporary concept of security is described as the concept of overall security and the concept of the co-operation security. Apart from the military or state security, the overall concept of security also includes the notion of societal, economic, ecological political and other kinds of security. The concept of the co-operation security is the symbiosis of the individual and collective security collective defence and promotion and expansion of stability. In the author's opinion the security culture is one of the substantial elements of the understanding of security. This idea has not been sufficiently elaborated or defined so far, although in every day speech it is very often used for some trivial and insignificant phenomena. The scientific circles neither devote sufficient attention to the security culture. The author endeavours to explain the security culture and to define its role, significance and position in the contemporary understanding of security. The security culture is the integral part of the overall culture pattern. It is the primary need of individuals. By applying the security culture individuals set them free from dependence and submission to the state, international organisation and institution, and so they become the factors of security independent in making decisions on their own fate. The security culture indicators are as follows: thinking or reflection on security, security behaviour that is the outward manifestation of the security as well as the relationship and approach to security which shows the willingness to respond to threats and challenges in the material and spiritual sense. We conceive the security culture as a value, as something people should possess, as an interest since the interest of every individual is to be secure as well as a need as the basic condition for one's own existence. It is manifested at the global regional, national and individual levels. The security culture is the most difficult to achieve at the global level because of a large number of individuals, and the most easily at the individual level or at the level of a minor group, since the coherence of a group is much greater there. The role of the security culture in the contemporary understanding of security lies in emancipation, in setting the individuals and groups free from any sort of pressures and violence. Its position is defined by a complete culture pattern, it being the primary part of the culture of need, and it can serve to achieve security by establishment of co-operation, by reaching of an agreement and by conducting of negotiations. The notions that are by its contents similar to the security culture are the non-violent conflicts culture, strategic culture and peace culture. The security culture in the contemporary understanding of security is such a pattern of thinking behaving and acting that includes all forms of security - individual military, ecological, economic and other ones. It, by its framework includes and carries out the ideas of the individual and collective security, collective defence and promotion and expansion of stability. It can be finally confirmed that the security culture is a variable category that changes under the impact of the alteration of the system and the concept of security. The objective of the security culture is to educate make up and achieve security of the individual and the mankind in order to make the society and the mankind survive. The author wonders if the security culture has shaped the existing system of security or the security culture has resulted from the system. In the last part of the paper, the author considers the contemporary system of security. There are opinions that it is manifested in two forms. The first one is the state-centred system with states that act as the main objects of security, the main preoccupation of the actors of the world politics is security, and great powers are in the focus of decision-making and the sensitivity to changes is comparatively low. Another system is multi-layered - it consists of individuals, various governmental and non-governmental organisations, transnational companies etc. Here, the commitment of the actors on the international scene is more autonomous, new actors are in the focus of decision-making and the sensitivity to changes is comparatively high.
|
|---|