Introduction. A multitude of types and threats to national security objectively exist, yet in the practice of public administration a subjective approach to determining their priority prevails, one based on current political circumstances and expert judgment, which frequently leads to a misallocation of resources and diminished overall security. In national security theory there is still no unified approach to their classification, which exacerbates the problem. This determined the aim of the article – a theoretical definition of the system of types and threats to national security grounded in objective criteria. Methods. The methodological foundation of the study comprised the philosophical principles of dialectics, which allowed national security to be examined in its development and interconnections, the systems approach within the framework of systems theory, and general scientific logical methods (analysis, synthesis, classification) together with theoretical modelling. Applying the systems approach made it possible to represent national security as a property of the social system of the nation, while the dialectical method enabled the identification of contradictions between external and internal threats. Results. It is argued that all types and threats to national security should expediently be defined in relation to the social system of the nation as an integral entity uniting people, territory, and economic, political, and cultural relations. It is substantiated that the principal objective criteria for a systemic classification are spatial position (external/internal) and the structure of the system’s elements. On the basis of the spatial criterion, external and internal types of territorial security (threats to sovereignty and territorial integrity) and ecological security (transboundary and internal environmental threats) are identified. In accordance with the structural criterion, three interrelated types of security are defined that reflect the subsystems of society: basic socio-economic security (threats to the economic base and social stability), superstructural socio-political security (threats to the political system and governance), and mediating socio-cultural security (threats to identity and values). Such a systematisation encompasses all key spheres of the nation’s life and takes into account both spatial and structural dimensions of threats. Discussion. The proposed approach makes it possible to move away from the subjectivism inherent in the will-based ranking of threats and to link into a unified system the objective indicators necessary for a comprehensive assessment of the state of national security and its components. The theoretically grounded classification creates a foundation for developing formalised methods of monitoring, strategic planning, and managerial decision-making, ensuring that heterogeneous indicators are coordinated into an integral system for evaluating the nation’s security.
