Dmytro Lakishyk, Ph.D. in History, Senior Research Fellow of the State Institution “Institute of World History of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine”


This article examines the origins, evolution and characteristics of multilateral security strategy of “engagement and enlargement” of Clinton administration. The analysis of its approach to strategic goals and national interests shows that the main factor of the inclusion of certain provisions in US security strategy was, has been and will remain dimension measurement of real threats to the vital interests of America. To a large extent this factor determines the US attempt to secure and perpetuate the dominance of the state in the international arena.

The three central components of Clinton’s “engagement and expansion” strategy were: US security enhancement efforts by maintaining high defensive capabilities and the use of effective diplomacy to promote common security measures; the opening of foreign markets and the promotion of global economic growth; promotion of democracy abroad.

The main strategic objective of the United States was proclaimed the preservation of American domination in all areas, but particular attention was paid to economic factors. Developers of the doctrine believed that in the future, global leadership will be determined not so much by military force, but by economic ability and ability to compete successfully in the world markets. The latter, however, did not mean refusing to use the force component in solving international security problems. In addition, it was precisely during Clinton’s presidency that the United States recognized the right to take unilateral action, without taking into account the position of the United Nations and even its NATO allies.


US foreign policy, Clinton, National Security Strategy, the Strategy of “Engagement and Enlargement”.

Full text



1. KISSINDZER, G. (2002) Nuzhna li Amerike vneshnyaya politika? Moscow: Ladomir.
2. POSEN, B.R., ROSS, A.L. (1996-1997) Competing Visions for U.S. Grand Strategy. International Security, 21(3), P.4-20.
3. KAMINSʹKYY, Ye.Ye. (2008) Svit peremozhtsiv i peremozhenykh. Mizhnarodni vidnosyny i ukrayinsʹka perspektyva na pochatku XXI stolittya. Kyiv: Tsentr vilʹnoyi presy.
4. DREW, E. (1994) On the Edge. The Clinton Presidency. New York: Simon & Schuster.
5. JEWETT, A.W., TURETZKY, M.D. (1998) Stability and Change in President Clinton’s Foreign Policy Beliefs, 1993-1996. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 28(3). [Online] Available from: [Accessed 23 August 2017].
6. CRONIN, P.M. (ed.) (1993) From Globalism to regionalism: New Perspectives on U.S. Foreign and Defense Policies. Washington, D.C.: National Defense University Press.
7. CLINTON, B. (2004) My Life. New York: Knopf.
8. RODMAN, P. (2000) Uneasy Giant. The Challenges to American Predominance. Washington: The Nixon Center.
9. The White House (1998) A National Security Strategy for a New Century. [Online] Available from: [Accessed 23 August 2017].
10. The White House (1995) A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement. [Online] Available from: [Accessed 23 August 2017].
11. KARTER, E., PERRI, U. (2003) Preventivnaya oborona: novaya strategiya bezopasnosti SSHA: Monografiya. Moscow: Nauka.
12. Politicheskiye instituty SSHA: Istoriya i sovremennost’. (1999). Moscow: Nauka.

DOI: 29