Categorical and state-administrative aspects of the national security formation Текст научной статьи по специальности «СМИ (медиа) и массовые коммуникации»

UDC: 351

DOI: https://doi.org/10.32689/2617-2224-2019-5(20)-154-163

Murashko Vitaliy Serhiyovych,

Senior Lecturer, Department of Public Administration, Postgraduate Student, Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, 03039, Kyiv, Str. Frometivska, 2, tel.: 063 495 31 43, e-mail: murashko.vitalii1981@gmail. com

ORCID: 0000-0002-8668-2043

Мурашко Вталш Сергшович,

старший викладач кафедри публгчного адмШстрування, асшрант, Мiжрегiо-I vu hi vi Академия управлтня персоналом, 03039, м. Кшв, вул. Фрометiвська, 2, тел.: 063 495 31 43, e-mail: murashko.vitalii1981@ gmail.com

ORCID: 0000-0002-8668-2043

Мурашко Виталий Сергеевич,

старший преподаватель кафедры публичного администрирования, аспирант, Межрегиональная Академия управления персоналом, 03039, г. Киев, ул. Фрометовская, 2, тел.: 063 49531 43, e-mail: [email protected]

ORCID: 0000-0002-8668-2043

CATEGORiCAL AND STATE-ADMiNiSTRATiVE ASPECTS OF THE NATiONAL SECURiTY FORMATiON

Abstract. The publication is devoted to the problems of categorical and stateadministrative aspects of the national security formation. The term "security" is analyzed in the process of development of ideas of the discursive democracy, where it was considered as a value, a certain public interest, a good. However, this approach does not take into account that the concept of "security" can be interpreted more broadly as a category of philosophical and, therefore, a category of theory of public policy and public administration. However, it is noted that the growing interest in studying the essence of the concept of "security", in the context of its world-philosophical understanding, depends on many factors. These include, in particular, the complexity and inconsistency of the current processes of transformation of the geo-political and geo-economic fields, the awareness of the need to solve global security problems and fundamental socio-political and socioeconomic changes that have recently been traced in many countries of the world and have a decisive impact on the international and national security.

It is proved that the content of the national security is seen in the degree of protection of the national interests; the state of protection of the vital interests of the individual, the society and the state, environment in various spheres of life activity from internal and external threats; the state of protection of the national interests against all kinds of threats, which is achieved through the deliberate activity of the public authorities and civil society institutions in order to guarantee human rights and fundamental freedoms, their progressive development and stability of the constitutional order. At the same time, it is substantiated that the national security of the state consists not only in the protection of the national interests, but also in support of appropriate and necessary conditions of existence of both the state, society and individual citizens. Accordingly, the provision of such favourable conditions is a prerequisite for the realization of the national interests and goals.

Keywords: formation of categorical-conceptual apparatus of the national security, national security of the state, realization of the national interests and goals, defense capability of the state.

КАТЕГОРШШ ТА ДЕРЖАВНО-УПРАВЛ1НСЬК1 АСПЕКТИ ФОРМУВАННЯ ШАЩОШАЛЬШО'! БЕЗПЕКИ

Анотащя. Публшащя присвячена проблемам категоршних та держав-но-управлшських аспекпв формування нащонально!' безпеки. Аналiзуeться термш "безпека" у процей розвитку щей дискурсивно!' демократа, де вш роз-глядався як щншсть, певний сустльний штерес, благо. Однак, вщзначено, що такий шдхвд не враховуе, що поняття "безпека" можна штерпретувати ширше, як категорш фшософську, а вщтак — i категорш теоршдержавно-'^полггаки та державного управлшня. При цьому, зазначено, що зростаючий штерес до вивчення сутносп поняття "безпека", у контексп ïï св^оглядно-ф^ лософського розумiння, залежить вiд багатьох факторiв. Серед яких, зокре-ма, складшсть та неузгодженiсть сучасних процеав трансформацiï геопо-лiтичного та геоекономiчного полiв, усвiдомлення необхiдностi вирiшення глобальних проблем безпеки та фундаментальних сусшльно-пол^ичних та соцiально-економiчних змiн, що останшм часом простежуються у багатьох крашах свiту i мають вирiшальний вплив на мiжнародну та нацiональну без-пеки.

Доведено, що змiст нацiональноï безпеки бачиться у ступеш захищено-eri нацiональних iнтересiв; станi захисту життево важливих штереав осо-бистостi, сусшльства та держави, довкiлля у рiзних сферах життeдiяльностi вiд внутрiшнiх та зовшшшх загроз; станi захисту нащональних iнтересiв вiд рiзного роду загроз, який досягаеться завдяки щлеспрямованш дiяльностi органiв державно!' влади та шститупв громадянського суспiльства з метою гарантування прав людини та основних свобод, ix прогресивного розвитку та стабшьносп конституцiйного ладу. Разом iз тим, обгрунтовано, що нащо-нальна безпека держави полягае не тшьки у захисп нацiональниx iнтересiв, а й у шдтримщ вiдповiдниx i необхщних умов iснування як держави, так i су- 155

стльства та окремих громадян. Вщповщно, забезпечення таких сприятливих умов е необхщною умовою реа^заци нацiональних iнтересiв та щлей.

Ключовi слова: формування категорiально-понятiйного апарату нащо-нально! безпеки, нащональна безпека держави, реалiзацiя нацiональних ште-ресiв та цiлей, обороноздатнiсть держави.

КАТЕГОРИйНЫЕ И ГОСУДАРСТВЕННО-УПРАВЛЕНЧЕСКИЕ АСПЕКТЫ ФОРМИРОВАНИЯ НАЦИОНАЛЬНОЙ БЕЗОПАСНОСТИ

Аннотация. Публикация посвящена проблемам категорийных и государственно-управленческих аспектов формирования национальной безопасности. Анализируется термин "безопасность" в процессе развития идей дискурсивной демократии, где он рассматривался как ценность, определенный общественный интерес, благо. Однако, отмечено, что такой подход не учитывает, что понятие "безопасность" можно интерпретировать шире, как категорию философскую, а следовательно — и категорию теории государственной политики и государственного управления. При этом, отмечено, что растущий интерес к изучению сущности понятия "безопасность", в контексте его мировоззренчески-философского понимания, зависит от многих факторов. Среди них, в частности, сложность и несогласованность современных процессов трансформации геополитического и геоэкономического полей, осознание необходимости решения глобальных проблем безопасности и фундаментальных общественно-политических и социально-экономических изменений, которые в последнее время прослеживаются во многих странах мира и имеют решающее влияние на международную и национальную безопасности.

Доказано, что содержание национальной безопасности видится в степени защищенности национальных интересов; состоянии защиты жизненно важных интересов личности, общества и государства, окружающей среды в различных сферах жизнедеятельности от внутренних и внешних угроз; состоянии защиты национальных интересов от различного рода угроз, которое достигается благодаря целенаправленной деятельности органов государственной власти и институтов гражданского общества в целях обеспечения прав человека и основных свобод, их прогрессивного развития и стабильности конституционного строя. Вместе с тем, обосновано, что национальная безопасность государства заключается не только в защите национальных интересов, но и в поддержке соответствующих и необходимых условий существования как государства, так и общества и отдельных граждан. Соответственно, обеспечение таких благоприятных условий является необходимым условием реализации национальных интересов и целей.

Ключевые слова: формирование категориально-понятийного аппарата национальной безопасности, национальная безопасность государства, реализация национальных интересов и целей, обороноспособность государства.

Formulation of the problem. The

international and national security threats have increased over the last decade due to the likelihood of the emergence of new nuclear countries, the growing undetermined impact of the globalization processes on the development of international relations, especially because of fierce competition for the redistribution of spheres of influence to the global economy, which is also being felt in the energy sector, as well as, the use of forceful methods in the realization of the national interests. In most countries there is a steady increase in the cost of developing advanced weapons systems. As a result, the question of the existence of Ukraine as an integrated and sovereign state can be put on the agenda if the accumulated potential of threats to the national security is not realized without the use of appropriate mechanisms of development and implementation of the state policy aimed at protecting the interests of the state [1, p. 11].

In my opinion, the main mechanism for implementing such a policy is public administration in the field of national security. Public administration, as a way of being a social organization, is an integral part of it. The public administration that ensures the functioning and development of the society, as a whole, is carried out within the political system and includes the political aspect, as well as related forms of the state. In the modern scientific research the public administration is regarded as a phenomenon and a process that is carried out mainly within the executive branch of the government [2]. At the same time, in my opinion, the public administration is not limited to the ac-

tivity of the executive authorities due to interaction with other state-governmental structures, legislative and judicial branches of the government that significantly influences the economic and socio-political environment.

Analysis of the recent research and publications. In the field of national security the public administration is characterized by features that are significantly differentiated, for example, by specific means of governance, by a certain course of action, and by issues of the influence on certain processes. The work of H. Sytnyk [3], S. Kruk [4], O. Evsyukova [5], T. Stukalina [6], S. Larina [7], A. Pomaz-Ponomarenko [8], M. Orl [9] and others is devoted to the study of the processes of the public administration in the field of the national security of Ukraine. It is worth noting that the process of forming a categorical-conceptual apparatus of the national security becomes virtually impossible without the scientific perception of the basics of its legislative consolidation, the basic legislative norms that regulate the social relations in the process of ensuring the protection of important interests of the individual and the citizen, the society and the state from internal and external threats. So, in this context, it should be understood what security is as a whole.

The purpose of the article is to outline the categorical and state-administrative aspects of the national security formation.

Presentation of the main material. The scientists are exploring the concept of "security" as a complex social phenomenon, using different approaches and aspects to its interpretation, which,

in turn, leads to the lack of a single definition and vision of the content of the concepts of "security" and "national security". It should be noted that the concept of "security" is much broader than the concept of "national security"; it is generic for the concept of "national security". In the modern scientific literature security is interpreted differently, for example [10]:

• from the point of view of psychological knowledge it is the need to protect the vital interests of the people;

• from the point of view of philosophical and sociological knowledge it is the state and tendencies of the development of the state structures, institutions and moods of the population, rational balance of the freedom and means for its protection;

• from the point of view of legal knowledge it is a system of legal guarantees that provides a full guarantee of the human rights and freedoms defined by the laws for the protection of individuals, society and others.

The growing interest in the study of the essence of the concept of "security" in the context of its world-philosophical understanding depends on many factors. These include, in particular, the complexity and inconsistency of the current processes of transformation of the geo-political and geo-economic fields, the awareness of the need to solve global security problems and fundamental socio-political and socio-economic changes that have recently been traced in many countries of the world and have a decisive impact on the international and national security.

As a rule, when studying the essence of the term "security" the scientists focus on its three dimensions:

• conceptual (ontological and epis-temological bases of security);

• practical (security is considered in the context of reflecting the specific needs of the individual, society, state and international community);

• value (security philosophy, security culture, etc.).

In turn, many scientists combine the concept of "security" with the concept of "danger". This is mainly due to the instinct for self-preservation in the evolution of the wildlife. That is, the existence of any living creature depends on how it can identify and evaluate the factors (including environmental factors) that threaten its physical existence [11].

Thus, it should be noted that danger and security is a dialectical interaction that is dynamically integrated and characterizes the living conditions of the objects in nature. It is worth noting that there is no security without danger and vice versa. What is more, what is dangerous for one object, it is safe for another, and what is safe for one, it is dangerous for another. Let us take a closer look at some aspects of security, see table.

So, as the table shows, security is one of the most important human needs, along with the need for food, clothing, shelter, and more. This means that the need for security is a basic prerequisite for the emergence of people into the world, and its ensuring is the basis for the progressive development of the society. At the present stage, the domestic and foreign scientists view security as a state of protection against certain threats and dangers. Therefore, the Interpretive Dictionary of the Ukrainian language defines security as a

№ Security aspect characteristics of security aspects

1 ontological security exists in various forms (nature, human being, social and spiritual aspects of being an individual) in which the overall structure of its existence and dangers are minimized. This objective reality protects everything living, including the phenomena, processes and laws that operate in the world

2 Epistemological security aspects are directly related to the characteristics of its knowledge. In the course of the historical development sensory experience and rational knowledge of the basics of security are assimilated. the accumulated knowledge is transformed into practical experience and reliable information

3 Axiological the axiological aspect is that security has many universal values, such as good, truth and beauty, although its content and meanings are different in different periods. security creates the best conditions for maintaining a harmonious nature and sustainable development of the society. Information about security gives a person the freedom to make choices and shows his worth

state where nothing threatens anyone [12].

The term "security" in V. Dal's explanatory dictionary is defined as "lack of security; preservation, reliability.»" [13, p. 67], but in our view such a simplified view of the concept of "security" is insufficient, especially when interpreted in a purely linguistic context, since the absence of danger means that a person can achieve such an ideal situation when there are no difficulties and threats to the society. However, in real life threats have always existed, exist and will exist, moreover, they have different structures and scales to address the challenges of the human civilization.

It is worth mentioning that the research of V. Lypkan, who made a certain typology of the concept of "security", based on the analysis of normative legal acts, relevant doctrines and concepts, as well as encyclopedic and reference

literature, concluded that there is four approaches to interpreting the concept of "security" [14, p. 363-363]:

• statistical (security as a state of safety);

• apophatic (security as the absence of threats and dangers);

• active (security as a system of measures aimed at creating certain safe living conditions);

• passive (security as compliance with certain parameters and norms, on ensuring of which it depends directly).

I believe that such a versatile interpretation makes it possible to view security as a specific feature of dynamic social change and as a complex criterion for assessing its quality that characterizes the state of development of the modern governmental processes. V. Mohylevsky also emphasizes his attention considering security as "an indicator of the quality of any modern system as a whole" [15, p. 225].

According to A. Wolffers security objectively means no threats, and subjectively, no fear, that is, the feeling that no harm will be done to the public values [16]. In my opinion, considering security as a certain state of protection of the people from threats and dangers is a somewhat simplistic, utilitarian approach whereby certain values and interests are acquired, and if such values (interests) are threatened, then the danger is fixed.

In the process of developing ideas of the discursive democracy, security was seen as a value, a certain public interest, a good. However, this approach does not take into account that the concept of "security" can be interpreted more broadly as a category of philosophical and, therefore, a category of theory of the public policy and public administration. In particular, H. Sytnyk draws attention to this stating that the concept of "security" is a philosophical category and its essence has not been fully explored in scientific terms, especially when it comes to national security. The evidence of this is the constant debate around different approaches to defining the concept and ensuring the national security [17, p. 35].

It should be noted that when the concept of "national security" was included in the political lexicon in the West, it was used, first of all, as a synonym for the defense capability of the state and, until the mid-1980s, in the East and West of Europe this concept was understood as military and political security. The situation changed somewhat in the early 1990s when they began to consider the "national security" and the problems of its security from different sides and aspects, analyzing

them in theoretical studies, philosophical, sociological and political literature.

To date, both in the East and the West of Europe have developed a certain understanding of the main categories used in developing ways of overcoming the ensurance of the national security issues. In our view, this contributes to the gradual formation of a sufficiently structured, relatively clear conceptual framework for the main legislative documents for the implementation of the national security. However, until now, researchers have not come to an agreement on what can be understood by the very concept of "national security" — a state or a category that characterizes that state [18, p. 104].

It should be noted that studying the categorical and state-administrative aspects of the formation of the national security institute, in particular, its concept and content, it is investigated that the term "national security" was first defined after the Second World War. In view of this, it should be noted that the idea of national security is formulated at the legislative level in the United States — in the Law "On National Security" (1947). Although interesting for science is the fact that the term "national security" was first introduced into the US state-legal lexicon by the President T. Roosevelt in 1904 and practically until 1947 was used in the sense of defense, was considered as a process of certain integration of the state's foreign, domestic and military policies.

Conclusions. Summarizing the above, I would like to point out that the theoretical definition of the scientific concept of "national security" is a priority, since it should reveal the essence of

this state, social and legal phenomenon, find its content and emphasize the most important aspects, dependencies and elements. The analysis of the approaches to defining the scientific concept of "national security" shows that the classical vision of this social phenomenon is limited for some reason because:

• the perception of the national security arises mainly from the military interpretation of this category, which leads to a considerable limitation of its content;

• national security is associated with the notion of a state that guarantees its ensurance;

• the internal components of the national security are ignored;

• relativity and subjectivity of the perception of the nature of the concept of "national security", etc.

references -

1. Sytnyk H. P. (2012). Derzhavne up-ravlinnia u sferi natsionalnoi bezpeky (kontseptualni ta orhanizatsiino-pravo-vi zasady) [Public Administration in the field of national security (conceptual and organizational legal bases)]. Kyiv: NADU [in Ukrainian].

2. Kaliaiev A. (2018). Teoretychni pid-khody shchodo transformatsii su-chasnykh modelei derzhavnoho up-ravlinnia u sferi bezpeky ta oborony [Theoretical approaches to the transformation of modern models of public administration in the field of security and defense]. Efektyvnist derzhavnoho upravlinnia - Efficiency of public administration, 1 (54), 1, 13-19 [in Ukrainian].

3. Sytnyk H. P. (2017). Instytutsiino-tsyvilizatsiinoi paradyhma, yak osnova metodolohii derzhavnoho upravlinnia

u sferi natsionalnoi bezpeky [Institu-tional-civilizational paradigm as the basis of the methodology of public administration in the field of national security]. Naukovyi chasopys Akademii natsionalnoi bezpeky - Scientific journal of the National Security Academy, 1-2, 10-23 [in Ukrainian].

4. Kruk S. I. (2018). Orhanizatsiinyi me-khanizm derzhavnoho upravlinnia u sferi zabezpechennia natsionalnoi bezpeky Ukrainy [Organizational Mechanism of Public Administration in the Field of National Security of Ukraine]. Derzhava ta rehiony. Seriia: Derzhavne upravlinnia - State and Regions. Series: State Administration, 3(63), 105-108 [in Ukrainian].

5. Evsiukov O. P. (2017). Naukovo-teoretychni vyznachennia sutnosti ta zmistu bezpeky derzhavy [Scientific theoretical definitions of the essence and content of the state security]. Visnyk Natsionalnoho universytetu tsyvilnoho zakhystu Ukrainy. Seriia: Derzhavne upravlinnia - Bulletin of the National University of Civil Defense of Ukraine. Series: Public Administration, 2(7), 22-28 [in Ukrainian].

6. Stukalin T. A. (2016). Systema derzhavnoho upravlinnia u sferi oborony derzhavy ta osnovni napriamy yii roz-vytku v konteksti reformuvannia sek-tora bezpeky i oborony [The system of public administration in the field of state defense and the main directions of its development in the context of security and defense sector reform]. Teoriia ta praktyka derzhavnoho upravlinnia -Theory and Practice of Public Administration, 2(53), 213-220 [in Ukrainian].

7. Larin S. V. (2017). Aktyvizatsiia vzaiemodii derzhavy i suspilstva shchodo zakhystu natsionalnykh tsin-nostei u sferi natsionalnoi bezpeky [Activation of interaction between the state and society on the protection of national values in the field of national

security]. Derzhava ta rehiony. Seriia: Derzhavne upravlinnia - State and Regions. Series: Public administration, 3, 16-20 [in Ukrainian].

8. Pomaza-Ponomarenko A. L. (2015). Napriamy ta metodolohiia formuvan-nia natsionalnoi bezpeky v rehional-nykh umovakh [Directions and methodology of national security formation in regional conditions]. Publichne upravlinnia ta mytne administruvannia -Public Administration and Customs Administration, 2(13), 194-199 [in Ukrainian].

9. Orel M. H. (2018). Politychna bezpe-ka yak skladova natsionalnoi bezpeky: teoretychnyi aspekt [Political Security as a Component of National Security: A Theoretical Aspect]. Naukovyi cha-sopys Akademii natsionalnoi bezpeky -Scientific Journal of the National Security Academy, 1, 22-34 [in Ukrainian].

10. Skulysh S. D., Bohdanovych V. Yu., Svyda I. Yu. (2012). Teoretyko-metodolohichni osnovy zabezpechennia natsionalnoi bezpeky Ukrainy. T. 1: Teo-retychni osnovy, metody y tekhnolohii zabezpechennia natsionalnoi bezpeky Ukrainy [Theoretical and methodological foundations of national security of Ukraine. Vol. 1: Theoretical bases, methods and technologies of national security of Ukraine]. S. D. Skulysha (Eds.). Kyiv: Nauk.-vyd. viddil NA SB Ukrainy [in Ukrainian].

11. Sytnyk H. P. (2011). Derzhavne up-ravlinnia u sferi natsionalnoi bezpeky (kontseptualni ta orhanizatsiino-pra-vovi zasady) [Public Administration in National Security (Conceptual and Organizational-Legal Framework)]. Kyiv: NADU [in Ukrainian].

12. Slovnyk ukrainskoi movy [Dictionary of the Ukrainian language]. (1970). (Vols. 1). I. K. Bilodida (Eds.). Kyiv: Naukova dumka [in Ukrainian].

13. Dal V. I. (1978). Tolkovyy slovar zhivo-go velikorusskogo yazyka [Explanatory

Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language]. (Vols. 1). Moscow: Russkiy yazyk [in Russian].

14. Lipkan V. A. (2009). Teoriia natsionalnoi bezpeky [Theory of National Social Security]. Kyiv: KNT [in Ukrainian].

15. Mogilevskiy V. D. (2001). Vvedenie v teoriyu upravleniya bezopasnostyu sistem [Introduction to the theory of security management systems]. Prob-lemy bezopasnosti pri chrezvychaynykh situatsiyakh - Safety problems in emergency situations, 4, 215-235 [in Russian].

16. Wolfers A. (1962). Discord and Collaboration: Essays on International Politics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press [in English].

17. Sytnyk H. P. (2004). Derzhavne upravlinnia u sferi zabezpechennia natsionalnoi bezpeky Ukrainy: teoriia i praktyka [State Administration in the Sphere of Protection of the National Security of Ukraine: Theory and Practice]. Doctor's thesis. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].

18. Petrovskiy V. F. (1980). Doktrina "nat-sionalnoy bezopasnosti" v globalnoy strategii SShA [The Doctrine of "National Security" in the US Global Strategy]. Moscow: Mezhdunar. Otnosheni-ya [in Russian].

список використаних джерел -

1. Ситник Г. П. Державне управлшня у сферi нащонально! безпеки (кон-цептуальш та оргашзацшно-npaBOBÍ засади): шдручник К.: НАДУ, 2012. 544 с.

2. Каляев А. Теоретичш пщходи щодо трансформаци сучасних моделей державного управлшня у сферi безпеки та оборони // Ефектившсть державного управлшня. 2018. Вип. 1 (54). Ч. 1.

3. Ситник Г. П. 1нституцшно-цившза-цшно! парадигма, як основа методо-

логи державного управлшня у сферi нащонально! безпеки / Г. П. Ситник // Наук. часопис Академп нащонально! безпеки. 2017. № 1-2. 162 с.

4. Крук С. I. Оргашзацшний механiзм державного управлшня у сферi забезпечення нащонально! безпеки Укра!ни // Держава та репони. Серiя: Державне управлшня, 2018. № 3 (63).

5. Евсюков О. П. Науково-теоретичш визначення сутносп та змюту безпеки держави // Вкн. Нацiонального ун-ту цившьного захисту Укра!ни. Серiя: Державне управлшня. 2017. Вип. 2 (7).

6. Стукалт Т. А. Система державного управлшня у сферi оборони держави та основш напрями !! розвитку в контекст реформування сектора безпеки i оборони // Теорiя та практика державного управлшня 2(53)/2016, 221 с.

7. Ларт С. В. Активiзацiя взаемодп держави i сусшльства щодо захисту нацiональних цiнностей у сферi на-цiонально! безпеки / С. В. Ларш // Держава та репони. Серiя: Державне управлшня: наук.-вироб. журн. Вип. 3. Запорiжжя: КПУ. 2017.

8. Помаза-Пономаренко А. Л. Напрями та методолопя формування нащонально! безпеки в репональних умо-вах // Публiчне управлшня та мит-не адмшстрування, № 2 (13), 2015.

9. Орел М. Г. Полггична безпека як складова нащонально! безпеки: те-оретичний аспект // Наук. часо-пис Академп нащонально! безпеки. 2018. № 1. 95 с.

10. Скулиш С. Д. Теоретико-методоло-пчш основи забезпечення нащо-

нально! безпеки Украши: моногр.: у 7 т. Т. 1: Теоретичш основи, методи й технологи забезпечення нащонально! безпеки Укра!ни / В. Ю. Богданович, I. Ю. Свида, 6. Д. Скулиш ; за заг. ред. С. Д. Скулиша. К: Наук.-вид. вщдш НА СБ Укра!ни, 2012. 548 с.

11. Ситник Г. П. Державне управлшня у сферi нащонально! безпеки (кон-цептуальш та органiзацiйно-правовi засади): пщручник. К.: НАДУ, 2011. 730 с.

12. Словник укра!нсько! мови [Текст]: в 11 т. Т. 1 / за ред. I. К. Бшодща, АН УРСР. 1нститут мовознавства. К.: Наук. думка, 1970.

13. Даль В. И. Толковый словарь живого великорусского языка. Т. 1-4. Москва: Русский язык, 1978. Т. 1: А-З. 1978.

14. Лткан В. А. Теорiя нащонально! безпеки: пщручник / В. А. Лшкан. К.: КНТ, 2009. 576 с.

15. Могилевский В. Д. Введение в теорию управления безопасностью систем / В. Д. Могилевский // Проблемы безопасности при чрезвычайных ситуациях [Текст]. 2001. № 4.

16. Wolfers A. Diskort and Collaboration, Essays on International Politics ext] / A. Wolfers. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1962. P. 150.

17. Ситник Г. П. Державне управлшня у сферi забезпечення нащонально! безпеки Укра!ни: теорiя i практика: дис. д-ра наук з держ. управлшня / Г. П. Ситник. К., 2004. 417 с.

18. Петровский В. Ф. Доктрина "национальной безопасности" в глобальной стратегии США. Москва: Междунар. отношения, 1980.