pol349 21jan09 context&contestation

8/2/2019 POL349 21Jan09 Context&Contestation

1/24

18 September 2008POL 349: Critical Security StudiesDr. Benjamin J. Muller


2/24


3/24

Context Relationship between liberty & security

(Hobbes et al.; the political) Historical Context: Realism & the Cold WarThe Contested Concept of Security 6 Schools of Thought

Questions for discussion


4/24

Monroe Doctrine (1823) Truman and use of

atomic bomb on Japan

Truman Doctrine: containment

Spheres of influence inEurope and beyond

Military-industrialcomplex in US

Realist assumptions


5/24

Mutually Assured Destruction(MAD)

Nuclear Proliferation

US-USSR Relations Bipolar World Cuban Missile Crisis (1962) Realist Assumptions

RAND - Rational Choicetheory - Game Theory


6/24

Dtente Non-proliferation regime 1st, 2nd, 3rd World

Non-aligned Movement Vietnam War (???-1975) Proxy Wars

Kashmir

Iran-Iraq

Soviet invasion ofAfghanistan


7/24

Ockhams Razor (14thcentury)

raison detat

Machiavellis Prince Cruel to be kind

Ends justify means

City-state;polis Hobbes Leviathan Treaty of Westphalia (1648)


8/24

Universal/particular

Moral community inside thestate

the good life

Dual moral standard

Political community

Problem of Inside/outside

Are all realists idealists?


9/24

Statism

Self-help

Survival Anarchy

Balance of power

Security dilemma


10/24

Human nature = statenature

Primordial power Sovereignty Territoriality International order

anarchy/human nature


11/24

Structural anarchy oranarchical system

Distribution of poweramong great powers

Great power competition K. Waltz


12/24

Structural anarchy States lack of

international society Narrow agenda for IR World politics is

precisely not politics in

the world Richard Ashley

orrery of errors


13/24

9 Fallacies of Realism (Ken Booth)

1. realism is not realistic: inadequate at describing how the worldworks effective during the Cold War because it had a hand in constructingthat world

2. realism is a misnomer: ideology has appropriated the cloak ofobjectivity and practicality [positivism]

3. realism is static theory: lacks a conception of the future nucleardeterrence for example, has no conception of the future.

4. realisms methodology is unsophisticated: crude positivism common sense unproblematic relationship between fact and value, theobserver and the observed, theory and practice

5.

realism fails the test of practice: high levels of insecurity in theworld are only contributed to further by leaving political, economic, and socialpower where it is (hence the emancipatory aspect of CSS) as a politicalpractice, political realism has helped to construct and perpetuate a worldpolitics that fails to provide security for the vast majority of people in theworld


14/24

6. realisms unspoken assumptions are regressive:prioritization of the victims of politics over the victims oeconomics (consider the asylum/refugee debate well

founded fear) where are the poor? Women? Voiceless

(refugees for example are rendered speechless)

7. realisms agenda is narrow: power maximizing stateinterests and the protection of the statist order problem

solving theory rather than critical theory [R. Cox]

8. realist ethics are hostile to the human interest: thepower politics of place promoted by realism are no longerin the interests of humanity

9. realism is intellectually rigid: intellectual pluralism isunacceptable to realists; George W. Bush with us oragainst us war on terror logic


15/24

Neutral notion of

security is not possible

Political and normativecommitments are

embedded

Steve Smith splits thecontested concept of

security into 6 schools

of thought


16/24

Copenhagen School & Security Constructivist Security Studies

Critical Security Studies Feminist Security Studies Poststructuralist Security Studies Human Security


17/24

Barry Buzan, Ole Wver, etc. Additional sectors of security: ecological;

societal; economic; political Societal security focus on identity rather

than sovereignty Securitization discourse; speech acts

Regional Security Complex Theory (RSCT)


18/24

A. Wendt anarchy is what states make of it Intersubjective understanding/meaning

Interaction between culture and strategyCritique: State centric; rationalism; causal rather than

constitutive


19/24

Wider interpretation of security is needed Rethink the political in security studies

Extended security (S. Dalby) Rejection of realism state is also the threat

to security or the site of (in)security Emancipation (critique: normative)


20/24

C. Enloe; V. S. Peterson; A. Tickner Masculine IR/Security; Gender Trouble

Material issues: civilian casualties; rape;refugees; domestic violence Where are women? Personal is Political


21/24

Discourse of Strategic studies answer tohow states organize violence (B. Klein)

Writing Security(D. Campbell) US ForeignPolicy constructs US identity National Deconstruction (D. Campbell)

ethics, subjectivity, sovereignty, violence


22/24

People centered, not state centered (referentobject)

7 areas: economic; food; health;environmental; personal; community;political

Identifies 6 specific threats based on referent

of individual (e.g. Border security) Human needs approach (L. Axworthy) Freedom from want & freedom from fear


23/24

Security as contested concept also

contest: state; community; emancipation;relations between economics & politics;public/private; domestic/international;inside /outside; action/resistance

Extended agenda Securitization and desecuritization


24/24

How does the pursuit of particular sectors of extendedsecurity (economic, environmental, societal, etc.) alterthe subject of security and/or reproduce insecurities?

It has been suggested that the post-11 September 2001world is characterized by a supposedly new form ofasymmetric warfare. To what extent do these critical

approaches deal with this problem of asymmetry? Towhat extent has the war on terror been treated in asimilar fashion to the sectors of extended securitydiscussed by Dalby?

pol349 21jan09 context&contestation

Documents