VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 27 POSTED ON: 9/10/2013
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.
Pages to are hidden for
"Strategic stadies and International Relations"Please download to view full document