lec1 - intro Flashcards
(why is the topic important)
security matters, it is impossible to make sense of world politics without reference to it. everyday , people somewhere in the world are killed, starved, tortured, raped, impoverished, displaced or denied education and health care in the name of security
where does the subject come from?
- international or global security generally studied as a subset of IR
- IR did not exist prior to C20 (after WW2)
- international security begins to gain real traction in the cold war
- use of the term global instead of international is post-cold war SYMBOLIC change rather than substantial change
- despite discursive emphasis on ‘security’ we are really talking INSECURITY
definition of security
the state or condition of being or feeling secure
- freedom from care, anxiety or apprehension
- absence of worry or anxiety
- confidence in one’s safety or well-being
security studies
- subfield of IR focused on the threat or use of violence
- focus on questions about wars and armed conflicts (causes, consequences, frequency, trends)
- traditional emphasis on states and the international system
- increasing (but slowing) emphasis on non-state actors and ‘human security’ (environment, AI)
- where and when we study affects how we study and what we study (now focus on great power conflict, interstate wars rather than e.g. terrorism (20y ago))
- focus on what is a security issue, how to evaluate security issues, how to manage security crises
(manage or mitigate security challenges
ideally not create more
it IS NOT about SOLVING security challenges
the international security field does not solve the challenges, it manages them
don’t get your hopes up, you’re not gonna solve anything)
defense budgets
nothing more concrete than money and budgets, guns and butter
how much do countries spend on security that they could also spend on e.g. helath care, education?
key policy questions:
- is the allocation correct?
- should more or less money be spend?
- can the money be spent more efficiently?
- even if it is fine for now, what about the future?
it can change, e.g. US stark increase after 9/11
how to manage/mitigate security challenges?
- IOs
- regional organizations
- alliances/coalitions
- military
- non-military
- intelligence/security services/border guards/interior ministry/police/cyber
ignore one or more of the above?
who decides? who should decide?
is change possible?
tricky issue: how to prevent the cure being worse than the disease?
- legitimate security concerns breed security bureaucracies that take on a life on their own
- military-industrial complex
- government abuses
- military coups
thus, not merely a matter of managing security threats but also managing the means of managing security threats
oversight of military forces is important (esp. parliamentary oversight)
- start substance -
4 S’s: cold war paradigm
- states: most important agents and referents of security in international politics
- strategy: core intellectual and practical concerns revolved around devising the best means of employing the threat and use of military force
- science: analysts adopt scientific methods to create reliable base of knowledge on which policies can be based
- status quo: preventing radical and revolutionary change / preventing global catastrophe
one of the most controversial aspects
1983: the year that changed everything
publication Barry Buzan’s people, states, and fear
security not just about states, but about human collective (nuclear weapons not just problem for 2 states)
security should not be confined to focus on military force
security comprises 5 elements according to Buzan:
- military: traditional strategic studies
- political: organizational stability states, systems of gov, and ideologies that give them legitimacy
- economic: acces to resources, finance and markets necessary to sustain acceptable levels of welfare and state power
- societal: sustainability and evolution of traditional patterns…….
- environmental: maintenance local and planetary biosphere …..
later also attention to gender
after 1991 military focus declines (end cold war)
after 2001 military focus revives (9/11)
after 2022 attention tied between climate change and nuclear war (military focus certainly revived)
whose security matters?
ideally everybody’s, but not practical, so inevitably inequality
traditionally: focus on big players in world politics: whose security interests have the biggest impact on world politics
- big states vs little states
- IOs/states rather than individuals
- wealthy states vs poor states
- military powerful vs military weak states
availability of scholars an overlooked factor
what you see on the news is not representative of what is happening out there
how to prioritize what we study?
2004: UN A more Secure world report with 6 key security challenges
- eco and social threats
- infectious diseases + environmental degradation
- interstate conflict
- internal conflict
- WMD use
- terrorism/transnational organized crime
priorities vary with time
- after 1990: envt
- after 9/11: focus on terrorism
- after 2014: great power conflict
- after 2022: not much emphasis on terrorism
what are some of the biggest security challenges in 2025?
- PPS polls hundreds of foreign policy experts to assess 30 ongoing or potential violent conflicts
- this year could be the most dangerous in the PP’s 17y history: wars in Gaza and Ukraine, confrontations in the West Bank and the US-Mexico Border, and hostilities between Iran and Israel = of greatest concern
- deteriorating security conditions in the Middle East top this year’s list, followed by threats to the American homeland (domestic political violence, cyberattacks, and a security crisis at the southern border), Russian aggression in Ukraine and Eastern Europe, and Chinese provocation in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea
- severe humanitarian crises in Haiti, Sudan, Somalia, and elsewhere rose in the rankings of this year’s survey relative to previous years
- violent conflict
- aggresive
- crisis
- terrorist violence
- governance crisis
level of anxiety 2025 never been greater
crisis Haiti, Chinese actions in the South China Sea, ongoing conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia….
limitations PPS
they ask american foreign policy exports
-> focused specifically to the effect of crises on US foreign policy interests
+ not designed to evaluate risks by broad trends as global warming, demographic change etc.
the guardian article (Simon Tisdall)
(not the article we read i think)
- Congo-Rwanda
- Myanmar
- Haiti
- Ethiopia-Somalia
- Iran
- Syria-Turkey
- Sudan
- Afghanistan-Pakistan
- Yemen
- Mexico-US
places they’re afraid are not in sight bc conflicts in e.g. Ukraine
International Institute for Security Studies Armed Conflict Survey
“global outlook for peace remains bleak”
unprecendented nr of conflicts
appear increasingly INTRACTABLE (no sense of what to do about it, less hope that e.g. peacekeeping actually means something)(no hope to end it)
conflicts in Gaza, Sudan and Ukraine = arguably the most consequential of 2023-24 due to their geopolitical significance and human impact
own notes:
(1973 peace accords end the Vietnam war, but actually most deadly year was 1974: conflict had not ended)
conflicts keep coming back
IIS armed conflict survey - where we are at regionally
Americas
- homicides rates 3x global average
- organized crime / narco-trafficking
- Mexican cartels/political assassinations
- surge in violence in Ecuador, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile
- Humanitarian catastrophe in Haiti
Europe/Eurasia
- war in Ukraine (could go nuclear -> deserves attention)
*nuclear field in Security Studies most depressing - Nagorno-Karabakh
- Balkans
- Islamist terrorism
Middle East/North Africa
- Israel-Gaza-West Bank-Lebanon-Iran
- Yemen
- Syria
Sub-Saharan Africa
- most conflict affected region
- ongoing conflicts in 14/49 countries
- civil war in Sudan
- Sahel/Niger
- DRC/Rwanda
- Ethopia-Somalia
Asia
- Myanmar internal conflict
- significant risk of interstate war between US-China (nuclear powers), India-China, India-Pakistan
- terrorism
