Senior research assistant at the Dnipropetrovsk Branch of the National Institute of Strategic Studies * * * The year 2002 turned out to be critical for the Ukrainian-U. S. relations, with their drastic worsening being equally affected both by subjective factors related to actions of certain politicians and because of cardinal review by the United States government of the system of international relations. Unfortunately, Ukraine failed to respond timely to these changes. To understand the singularity of this new situation, the new imperatives and alternatives allows the analysis of the new National Security Strategy of the USA. Late by more that a year, on September 17, 2002, the Administration of George Bush Jr. presented to the Congress a document titled "The National Security Strategy of the United States of America". An accord with the Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986, composition of such a document annually is mandatory in the interests of maintaining coordination of various branches of power in the country. However, in practice, such reports, being actually compilations of declarations already made and positions adjusted, seldom attracted interest. In this respect the document dated September 17. 2002, radically differed from the previous ones. In the given instance the question at issue is, indeed, the great strategy that was widely and openly declared even before it was started to be realized. In was, in a sense, an American formal response. Along the twelve years after the cold war was ended, the U. S. national strategy was based on the weasel-worded notions of risks and uncertainties of the new time. The terrorist attack of September 11,2001, turned them into a completely definite threat. According to the new strategy "the gravest danger our Nation faces lies at the crossroads of radicalism and technology" 1 . Numerous collation of the new situation with the times of cold-war and even the WWII that the text of the new strategy contains lead to the conclus ... Читать далее