Since the end of the Cold War the debate over security has been lively and controversial. A militarized and state-centric view has been challenged by an attempt to widen the security agenda. The role played by cultural, economic and environmental issues has enhanced their importance in the literature. As a result, policymakers have begun to interpret international security as something more than the defense of national borders. A traditional view such as the neorealist approach, which continues to focus on states and their territorial integrity, does not seem adequate to explain changes underway in the international environment. But while the relevance of non-military threats has increased and an enlarged group of actors (i.e. NGOs or private military companies) play crucial role in regional crises, states are still often viewed as the main threat to the security of citizens (i.e. North Korea). In fact, however, the defense of borders with military instruments has become an “old concept” of security because it is still related to nation-states rather than to people. What distinguishes the concept of “security” in the domain of International Relations (IR) is the tradition of “power politics,” which also informs its “distinctive agenda.” More specifi cally, the concept of security traditionally refers to the state, and implies a threat to “sovereignty.” In this sense, security is about “survival.” This also motivates the argument about necessity, previously described as the concept of raison d’êtat, i.e. the “classical argument, which holds that in extreme cases the government can use all means necessary”7 for security’s sake. Already from these first definitions, how a sustainable practical application of such a concept is problematic is evident. How to establish the extreme conditions under which exceptional measures are admitted and can be considered as right and necessary? Things become even more complicated when one broadens the security agenda beyond the borders of the state, as occurred during the 1980s.
Coticchia F., Ferrari F. (2009). Security, Old Issues, New Frames: Securitization and Human Security. MILANO : Vita e Pensiero.
Security, Old Issues, New Frames: Securitization and Human Security
COTICCHIA, FABRIZIO;FERRARI, FEDERICA
2009
Abstract
Since the end of the Cold War the debate over security has been lively and controversial. A militarized and state-centric view has been challenged by an attempt to widen the security agenda. The role played by cultural, economic and environmental issues has enhanced their importance in the literature. As a result, policymakers have begun to interpret international security as something more than the defense of national borders. A traditional view such as the neorealist approach, which continues to focus on states and their territorial integrity, does not seem adequate to explain changes underway in the international environment. But while the relevance of non-military threats has increased and an enlarged group of actors (i.e. NGOs or private military companies) play crucial role in regional crises, states are still often viewed as the main threat to the security of citizens (i.e. North Korea). In fact, however, the defense of borders with military instruments has become an “old concept” of security because it is still related to nation-states rather than to people. What distinguishes the concept of “security” in the domain of International Relations (IR) is the tradition of “power politics,” which also informs its “distinctive agenda.” More specifi cally, the concept of security traditionally refers to the state, and implies a threat to “sovereignty.” In this sense, security is about “survival.” This also motivates the argument about necessity, previously described as the concept of raison d’êtat, i.e. the “classical argument, which holds that in extreme cases the government can use all means necessary”7 for security’s sake. Already from these first definitions, how a sustainable practical application of such a concept is problematic is evident. How to establish the extreme conditions under which exceptional measures are admitted and can be considered as right and necessary? Things become even more complicated when one broadens the security agenda beyond the borders of the state, as occurred during the 1980s.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
