The politicization of security: Controversy, mobilization, arena shifting (European Review of International Studies) (original) (raw)

The Politicisation of Security: Controversy, Mobilisation, Arena Shifting

European Review of International Studies, 2019

While security has always been political, it has for the most part been considered a special kind of politics that closes down political activity and debate. This introduction reviews recent theoretical and empirical developments to argue that a research agenda that re-engages security through the prism of politicisation is better able to elucidate the growing range of actors, arenas and arguments visible in contemporary security governance. Based on recent literatures from Political Science and European Studies that – so far – have been largely ignored by Security Studies, it develops an analytical framework around three dimensions: controversy, mobilisation and arena-shifting. It showcases the relevance of this perspective through brief empirical illustrations on the post-Snowden controversy, public participation on security strategy-making, and the role of parliaments in security policy. The overall aim is to reopen conceptual questions on the relationship between security and po...

The_Politicisation_of_Security_ERIS_intro.pdf

The Politicisation of Security: Controversy, Mobilisation, Arena Shifting Introduction by the Guest Editors, 2018

While security has always been political, it has for the most part been considered a special kind of politics that closes down political activity and debate. This introduction reviews recent theoretical and empirical developments to argue that a research agenda that re-engages security through the prism of politicisation is better able to elucidate the growing range of actors, arenas and arguments visible in contemporary security governance. Based on recent literatures from Political Science and European Studies that – so far – have been largely ignored by Security Studies, it develops an analytical framework around three dimensions: controversy, mobilisation and arena-shifting. It showcases the relevance of this perspective through brief empirical illustrations on the post-Snowden controversy, public participation on security strategy-making, and the role of parliaments in security policy. The overall aim is to reopen conceptual questions on the relationship between security and politics, inspire innovative empirical work to study the diverse politics around security, and allow for more differentiated normative inquiries into the ambivalent consequences of politicisation.

Parliamentary Security Politics as Politicisation by Volume

European Review of International Studies, 2019

The assumption that the policy area of security has depoliticising effects has diverted attention from the diverse ways in which parliamentarians are increasingly active on security. This development represents a shift away from the traditional executive-dominated security state and a challenge to security theories that assume security to be characterised by depoliticisation in the form of democratic marginalisation. The security literature assumes parliaments to be at worst irrelevant and at best a variable affecting the decisions of states, governments, and leaders. Analysing the work of UK parliamentary committees from the 1980s to the present, this article presents an original understanding of politicisation that subverts this view. This is politicisation by volume – increased amounts of parliamentary activity – in contrast to the more usually understood qualitative forms of politicisation such as increased polarisation, controversy or contestation (although the different forms ...

Neal, Andrew_Parliamentary security politics as politicisation by volume_ERIS

ERIS – European Review of International Studies, 2018

The assumption that the policy area of security has depoliticising effects has diverted attention from the diverse ways in which parliamentarians are increasingly active on security. This development represents a shift away from the traditional executive-dominated security state and a challenge to security theories that assume security to be characterised by depoliticisation in the form of democratic marginalisation. The security literature assumes parliaments to be at worst irrelevant and at best a variable affecting the decisions of states, governments, and leaders. Analysing the work of UK parliamentary committees from the 1980s to the present, this article presents an original understanding of politicisation that subverts this view. This is politicisation by volume-increased amounts of parliamentary activity-in contrast to the more usually understood qualitative forms of politicisation such as increased polarisation, controversy or contestation (although the different forms of politicisation are not mutually exclusive). The article finds that parliamentary committee activity on security has increased from a base of almost nothing in the 1980s and before to regular and broad engagement in the present.

Security studies in International Political Sociology

Few would contest the claim that the study of security is prima facie inseparable from international matters, that it engages politics in one way or another and that it engages social issues. And yet the contentiousness of these three categories—the international, the political, and the social—, the assumptions on which they rest, the discourses that are mobilised in their names, the empirical fields that nourish them, the scholars, policy-makers and practitioners who make claims to legitimate oversight over their practices and jurisdiction over their practical implications, invite a critical pause in their increasingly rapid development. Security as a scholarly field, as a set of actors, institutions and practices, has evolved at a pace that has put its supporting concepts and practices under considerable pressure. This concerns both the way that the academic discipline of security studies, and those in close proximity to it, have evolved and the way that research-based (and non-research-based) security practices have themselves become producers and consumers of security knowledge. Security studies orchestrates in a unique and productive way the interaction of the international, the political and the sociological. It puts into play their conceptual and practical interaction, plays gatekeeper to neighbouring discourses seeking to link to the discourse of security studies, regulates the flow of meaning between the elements of security studies, manages practices and governs norms. Security studies encourages and resists, legitimates and discredits. Like any institutionalised academic discipline motivates and interdicts, generates credit and debt, mobilises faith and modulates disbelief.

The International Political Sociology of Security Studies

Routledge Handbook of International Political Sociology

When compared to traditional approaches to security studies, critical approaches to security studies are often presented in terms of a deepening and widening of the security studies’ agenda (Krause and Williams 1997). In that version of disciplinary history, traditional security studies scholars are represented as people focusing on state-centric approaches with a more solid ontology; with a clear understanding of key concepts such as national interest, national security, and so on, and their implications on international politics, as well as a less flexible epistemology. From that standpoint, critical approaches to security studies are seen as a disruption of that existing agenda. As part of the deepening/widening meta-narrative of critical approaches to security studies, the contributions of these approaches are represented in terms of the inclusion of different scales (human security, cosmopolitan security, urban security, etc.) as well as different issue areas (borders, environment, immigration, maritime security, etc.) into security studies’ agenda. Our chapter concentrates on introducing how international political sociology has helped developed the critical agenda in security studies; we move away from a deepening/ widening perspective that is common in such review chapters and instead present a review of some of the thematic contributions in an international political sociology to security studies, in the form of a discussion of such concepts as materialities, practices, relationalities, reflexivity and the micro-politics of the everyday (for a broader reflection about security, see Burgess in this volume).

On Backlash: Emotion and the Politicisation of Security

Special Issue: The Politicisation of Security: Controversy, Mobilisation, Arena Shifting

This article explores the role of emotion in the politicisation of security through the concept of backlash: the idea of visceral and reactionary episodes where security claims are adamantly rejected and the subject of ‘security’ becomes intensely controversial. Starting by examining the role of emotion in politicisation, I make the case for viewing emotions as playing a key role in the distribution of certainty in security discourse. Building on this epistemic view of emotion, I review how backlash is understood in other fields before tailoring a definition for security studies centered around four constitutive features: reaction, hostility, emotion, and contagion. The final section focuses on the politicising effects of backlash including the mobilisation of backlash movements, the intensification of controversy, and arena shifting. The discussion concludes by suggesting that the concept of backlash offers a promising research agenda for those inquiring into the politicisation of ...