Strategic stadies and International Relations

Document Sample
Strategic stadies and International Relations Powered By Docstoc
					 Security Studies and
International Relations
  Security for whom?


International Security in the Modern World
        Masaryk University in Brno
               1-2 July 2012
              Věra Stojarová
                Try to define

n   Security
n   Security policy
n   What do you perceive as the main security
    threats?
n   Make a scale from the most dangerous ones to
    least dangerous ones.
         Conceptualisation of
              security
nI. Conceptualisation based on the three traditions of
the INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS theories:
    A. realist
    B. rationalistic
    C. revolutionary
II. Conceptualisation based on the (non) acceptance
of the existence of the plurality of the referent objects
– 1990s.
         International Relations
               Traditions
n   A. REALIST
      Machiavelli, Hobbes. The international relations is the
    state of war of everyone against everyone. International
    relations is a zero sum game, they mean the conflicts
    among states, the interest of one state rules out the
    interest of another state. The state does not bear any
    responsibility for its actions. There is no international
    community, the international politics has anarchist
    character. Everything heads towards the securing of the
    own state security and strengthening of the own power.
    The only rules and principles which can limit the state
    acting are the rules of self-profit and sagacity.
    International community (norms, institutions and
    international law) reflect the power politics of the most
    powerful states.
         International Relations
               Traditions
n B. RATIONALISTIC
Grotius. Internationalistic tradition. Supports the existence
  of the international community. The constitutive
  elements of the international community are not
  individuals, but sovereign states. Their activity is not
  limited to the power and wars – they create institutions,
  norms, rules, diplomacy which transform the hostile
  relations between states and create the international
  community. The international politics is the sphere
  where conflict is mixed with cooperation, because there
  in international relations there is neither absolut conflict
  of all against all, nor the interest harmony among actors
  of the international relations.
         International Relations
               Traditions
n C. REVOLUTIONARY
Kant, universalistic. The substance of the international
  relations are social relations which connects the
  individuals, civilians and state. The main actors of the IR
  are not states, but individuals and human communities.
  Humankind shares the same interests which enables
  them to create from IR the game with not zero sum
  game. The state acts is limited by the moral imperatives.
  There is a presupposition of international anarchy but it
  is possible to overcome this anarchy. The rules in the
  international systems are deduced from the higher
  morality of the world civilian society.
          International Relations
            Traditions and the
       conceptualisations of security
n   REALISTIC TRADITION – basis for the state-centric
    concept of security, where security means the security of
    my state and all other states mean threat.
n   REVOLUTIONARY TRADITION – basis for the
    individual and global security – security of human being
    and security of world community.
n   RATIONALISTIC TRADITION – position in-between
    realistic and revolutionary tradition – security is the state
    responsibility and comes from the relations among state
    (relational security). States create framework of relations
    as the source of conflicts or source for the security
    cooperation and regimes.
           Security in the 1990s
n   Conceptualisation based on the (non)
    acceptance of the existence of the plurality of the
    referent objects.
n   Key analysis for this approach – David Baldwin
    analysis The concept of security published in
    1997 in Review of International Studies:
n   1. Whose security?
n   2. Security of which values?
n   3. Security from what?
             Security Studies??
n   Security studies as the subdiscipline of the IR.
n   Security studies as the study of threat, use and
    control of military power. (Walt 1991)
n   Security studies study insecurity and its sources
    more than security. (Krause- Williams 1997)
               Security Studies
n   Presupposed the conflict among states and
    communities and recently the conflicts in the
    community itself.
n   Security studies study even non-state actors and
    the security threats whose sources is difficult to
    determine – organized crime, international
    terrorism, lack of food, HIV, global warming, birds
    flue, poverty
Security studies vs. Strategic studies
 vs. Military science vs. Peace and
  Conflict Research (Betts 1997)
              Military science – technologies,
              organization, tactics for the victory in the war.

              Strategic studies – analyze the interactive effects of the political aims
              and military means in the context of social, economical and other limitations.

              Security studies examine everything what deals with security of the community
              And its political system.


                  Peace and Conflict Research Studies is the subdiscipline of
                  security studies – the aim is to contribute to the international
                  peace, reveal the hindrances for the peace and finding of the way
                  how to remove them. Transformations of the conflict etc.
      Periodization of the development
             of Security Studies

n   I. Inter-war period
n   II. 1950s
n   III. 1955-1965
n   IV. 1965-1980
n   V. 1980-1989/1990
n   VI. After 1990
               I. Inter-war period

n   The American peace movement active in the end
    of the 19. century had impact on the international
    law and international organizations. War as the
    mean used by rational man if having no other
    choice.
n   After the WWI. Two streams in the Anglo-Saxon
    world: idealistic and realistic.
               I. Inter-war period

n   Realists prefer state security and the best way
    how to secure it is the American isolationism and
    the strengthening of the American military power.
n   Idealists believe that the spread of democracy,
    choice for national self-determination,
    demilitarization and system of collective security
    will secure the US security as well as security of
    other states. The instruments for the security
    provision shall be the international organizations
    and international law.
                 I. Inter-war period

n   Impact of the rise of Nazism in Germany
n   State security as the main research topic, security of the
    state before the military and political threats
n   American policy is the power policy and the power policy
    is the synonym for the world policy. Discussion in the
    beginning of the WWII : Where is the American foreign
    policy heading to?
n   1st research Security studies centres (Council on
    Foreign Relations 1921, The Brookings Institution 1927)
                    1950s
n WWII changed not only the world politics but
  the IR as discipline as well.
n 1948 Hans Morgenthau published in the USA
  Politics among nations. The struggle for Power
  and Peace. This book became the fundamental
  security textbook.
n The realists dominate the Security studies. The
  security as the main aim of every state. The
  state security shall be ensured by all means.
n 1st Departments of the Security studies in US
n 1st security journals (World Politics)
     1955-1965 – Golden Age of
        the Security Studies
n   the development of security studies because of
    the growing tensions between USSR and US
n   Nuclear weapon – relativisation of the territorial
    dimension of IR
n   The security studies determined by the
    nuclearisation of the US foreign policy
     1955-1965 – Golden Age of
        the Security Studies
n   The main topics – use of power, threat, controll of
    military power
n   Can we use the nuclear weapon as the diplomatic mean
    (deterrance theory)
n   Henry Kissinger, Thomas Schelling, Glenn Snyder
n   Start of the research of security in Europe due to the
    nuclear weapon
     1965-1980 – decline of the
         Security Studies
n   4 Reasons according to Stephen Walt:
n   1.The results of the Caribbean crisis. Mutually
    assured destruction – MAD.
n   2.The failures of US army in Vietnam war and the
    resistance towards war in the American society
n   3.Détente and the demilitarization agreements
    between US and USSR degraded the study of
    war
n   4.Decline of the American economy – the
    economy security aims become relevant
      1965-1980 – decline of the
          Security Studies
n   Armament control as a topic
n   Decline of Security Studies means the bloom of the
    Peace studies in northern Europe
n   Journal of Peace Studies in Oslo 1964
n   Europeans deviate from the traditional american security
    concepts
n   Peace studies research the human security and the
    ethnical questions in security, not-euroatlantic space,
    relations between non-state actors and security – these
    topics became relevant for Security Studies only in
    1990s.
                 1980-1989/1990
         Renaissance of the security studies
n   Soviet invasion in Afghanistan
n   Ronald Reagan in function
n   Launch of Strategic Defence Initiative
n   Cooling of American-Soviet relations
n   New journal International Security
n   Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) – Yearbook
    of world armaments and disarmaments
n   University in Heidelberg – Konfliktbarometer
n   Oslo – PRIO – International Peace Research Institute Oslo
n   2nd half of 80s – Barry Buzan – criticism of security conceptualisation
n   Criticism of ethnocentrism of security studies (most of researchers
    Americans )– change Amitav Acharya, Mohammed Ayoob
                    After 1990

n   Seemed the security studies will loose the
    research topic
n   However, disintegration of Yugoslavia, war in
    BiH, Croatia….
n   The core is the discussion about the security
    concept
        Concept of security in 1990s

n   I. Group against the change of agenda and
    conceptualisation of security (neorealist, state remains
    the main referent objects, John Mearsheimer, Stephen
    Walt), we can not research security of all and
    everything…
n   II. Group supporting partial or moderate reform (Richard
    Schultz, Peter Katzenstein, Roy Greenwood, in the
    beginning of 90s Copenhagen scholl, national security
    remains the main issue, widening of the concept –
    economical, environmental, societal security
n   II. Group supporting radical reform of the security
    studies (Richard Ullman, Charles Kegley, Edward
    Kolodziej, not only national security but international and
    human security)
         Seminar – Security Policy

n   Security – Condition or means of protection or
    assurance
n   Security – something with a priority claim on your
    budget
n   Policy- a broad course of action or statements of
    guidance adopted by relevant authorities in
    pursuit of objectives
         Seminar – Security Policy


n   You are expert on MoD on imaginary state and
    you are about to draw security policy. What are
    the threshold questions??
        Seminar – Security Policy –
           threshold questions

n   Who is us?
n   Who are the other major actors?
n   What are our and others´motivations and capabilities?
n   What are the key developments and trends in the
    underlying environment?
n   What threats and opportunities follow from the above?
n   How can we best meet the threats and seize the
    opportunities?
       Seminar – Security Policy

n   Sketch security policy of Venezuela, USA,
    Russia, China.

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:0
posted:9/10/2013
language:English
pages:27