al democratic states, who together make up the liberal security community, or LSC, and punish those who are not associated with the LSC. (Chafetz 1995, 745) For example, according to Chafetz:The LSC has consistently ignored evidence of Israeli violations while it imposes an economic boycott, threatened and used military force, and began the most obtrusive weapons inspections in history in response to Iraqs breach of nonproliferation obligations. (Chafetz 1999, 745)This does not discredit the NPT, it just shows that better control and leadership should take control over those who govern its authority.A second option for an alternative method of self-defense is to continue its at-tempt to envelop the world within the US sphere of influence. As President Clinton stated in 1993:In a new era of peril and opportunity, our overriding purpose must be to expand and strengthen the worldscommunity of market-based democracies. During the Cold War, we sought to contain a threat to survival of free institutions. Now we seek to enlarge the circle of nations that live under those free institutions, for our dream is of a day when the opinions and energies of every person in the world will be given full expression in a world of thriving democracies that cooperate within each other and live in peace. (Kissinger 1994, 805)It is true that this is quite an idealistic way of thinking. However, it is also very true. If a majority of the world were to be allied with each other, then no non-aligned state would dare to attack one of these democracies. This theory does, however, have its fallacies, according to Henry Kissinger. If there is an absence of both an overriding ideological or strategic threat, then individual states are allowed to pursue foreign policy based increasingly on their own immediate national interest. (Kissinger 1994, 805) If all of these democratic states work towards foreign policy that is only in their own self-interest, then once again th...
