Can securitization theory be saved from itself? A decolonial and feminist intervention

2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 78-87
Author(s):  
Mariana Selister Gomes ◽  
Renata Rodrigues Marques
2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gwen Bouvier ◽  
Zhonghua Wu

Abstract The past few decades have seen a plethora of interest in heritage studies in international law, as the legitimization of cultural heritage is a significant aspect of protecting the legacy of humanity’s collective memory, which is fully reflected in a series of international instruments on culture. This paper examines the meaning-making process of UNESCO legal documents on cultural heritage from a sociosemiotic perspective. The data for the corpus-based study were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively by applying the securitization theory to heritage studies. Research findings reveal three significant shifts in cultural heritage, i.e., from property to heritage, from tangible to intangible, and from material-centered to human-centered, which embodies the harmonious coexistence of humanity and nature, a philosophical idea embedded in traditional Chinese culture. As noted, terms targeting cultural heritage in UNESCO international instruments are the sign vehicle, generally mediated and shaped by social values, cultural beliefs, and conventional wisdom, etc. as a part of the interpretant, making different categories of heritage meaningful and interpretable. Characterized by temporality and spatiality, cultural heritage is subject to multiple interpretations. The meaning-making of international instruments for consideration is a sociosemiotic operation that can be construed through contextual factors and a process of social negotiation. This paper argues that a sociosemiotic approach to heritage studies is conducive to explicating the construction and deconstruction of heritage as discursive practices while offering some implications for future research.


Author(s):  
Lubna Sunawar

Following the 9/11 attacks, the national security policies — notably of the Western nations — have taken a fundamental shift towards viewing vulnerable and unstable states, such as Afghanistan, as security threats. The strategic interference of the United States and its allies, for state-building in Afghanistan, not only failed in achieving its intended outcomes but also brought untold suffering and severe repercussions to the Afghan people. The major powers involved in the post-9/11 war against terror in Afghanistan — particularly the United States — had to bear heavy costs in terms of capital, materials, and lives. Being a neighbor of Afghanistan and a responsible state committed to peace in the region, Pakistan has made genuine and consistent efforts to promote a peace process that is Afghan-owned and Afghan-led, in order to bring sustainable peace and stability to Afghanistan. Using the post 9/11 U.S. mission as an example, this article analyzes how the securitization of development has affected the peace process in Afghanistan. The securitization theory of the Copenhagen School is used as a basis to explain the dynamics of the peace process (led by the United States) with the Taliban.


2021 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-55
Author(s):  
Miira Kuvaja ◽  
Pia Olsson

Stadi Derby is a local football match played in Helsinki, Finland appreciated for its atmosphere and excitement. Simultaneously, the negative characteristics connected to the international football fan culture have become familiar also to those living in the capital area and especially in the surroundings of the stadium. The threat of violence is visible e.g. in the media coverage reporting about the derby. All this has also effect on the way the city dwellers experience the urban public space. In our article, we ask what kind of discourses can be found concerning the relationship between Stadi Derby and the right to public space and what kind of consequences i.e. reactions these discourses create among those city dwellers not involved in the football culture. In order to understand the ways these events and the media coverage over them have effect on urban dwellers we apply securitization theory. We look for speech acts from the media coverage and analyse the ways people respond to these speech acts through material produced via Facebook and a focus group interview. The division between insiders and outsiders to the football culture is clear: The outsiders feel distress, even fear, in consequence of media materials.


2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Antony Lee

This paper aims to explain how and why the representations of transit forced migrants in Indonesian major print media were vastly different within two time spans: (1) during the arrivals of the Indochinese refugees in 1975-1996 and (2) in the period of the new generations of refugees from Middle Eastern and South Asian countries in 1997-2013. Employing media content analysis of 216 news articles from three major print media in Indonesia, this study found out that the Indochinese refugees were portrayed with positive labels and thus, mainly discussed in connection with the non-security theme. In contrast, the new generations of forced migrants were portrayed with negative labels such as ‘illegal immigrants’ and were framed as security threats. Grounded within Securitization Theory, this paper thus argues that the changing representations were caused by the securitizing move made by specialized agencies in Indonesia.  


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rajwant Deo

This study examines the representation of asylum seekers in Canadian political discourse published between 2009 and 2012. During this time period, Tamil asylum seekers arrived in Vancouver on the Ocean Lady and MV Sun Sea. Also in 2010 and in 2012 Bill C-11 and Bill C- 31 were introduced, which resulted in harsh changes to Canada’s asylum system. This study used securitization theory to understand how asylum seekers were presented as threats and the exceptional measures which were implemented to deal with them. It was found that asylum seekers were depicted in a very negative manner where they were accused of abusing the system, burdening the economy, and conspiring with migrant smugglers. This justified number of policies including the designated country of origin policy, mandatory detention for irregular arrivals, and cuts to refugee health care. These new policies were found to be inconsistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.


Politik ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Jacobsen ◽  
Jeppe Strandsbjerg

By signing the Ilulissat Declaration of May 2008, the five littoral states of the Arctic Ocean pre-emptively desecuritized potential geopolitical controversies in the Arctic Ocean by confirming that international law and geo-science are the defining factors underlying the future delimitation. This happened in response to a rising securitization discourse fueled by commentators and the media in the wake of the 2007 Russian flag planting on the geographical North Pole seabed, which also triggered harder interstate rhetoric and dramatic headlines. This case, however, challenges some established conventions within securitization theory. It was state elites that initiated desecuritization and they did so by shifting issues in danger of being securitized from security to other techniques of government. Contrary to the democratic ethos of the theory, these shifts do not necessarily represent more democratic procedures. Instead, each of these techniques are populated by their own experts and technocrats operating according to logics of right (law) and accuracy (science). While shifting techniques of government might diminish the danger of securitized relations between states, the shift generates a displacement of controversy. Within international law we have seen controversy over its ontological foundations and within science we have seen controversy over standards of science. Each of these are amplified and take a particularly political significance when an issue is securitized via relocation to another technique. While the Ilulissat Declaration has been successful in minimizing the horizontal conflict potential between states it has simultaneously given way for vertical disputes between the signatory states on the one hand and the Indigenous peoples of the Arctic on the other.


2011 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 929-951 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark B. Salter ◽  
Geneviève Piché

Abstract. In this paper, the authors analyze the empirical process of securitization of the US–Canada border and then reflect on the model proposed by the Copenhagen School. We argue that securitization theory oversimplifies the political process of securitizing moves and audience acceptance. Rather than attributing securitization to a singular speaker addressing a specific audience, we present overlapping and ongoing language security games performed by varying relevant actors during the key period between the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (IRTPA) in December 2004 and the signing of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) in June 2005, showing how multiple speakers participate in the continuing construction of a context in which this issue is increasingly treated as a matter of security. We also explore the language adopted by participants in the field, focusing on an expert panel convened by the Homeland Security Institute. We conclude that in the securitization of the US–Canada border there are inconsistencies between truth and discourse, as well as significant distinctions between official and bureaucratic discourses, further emphasizing the importance of a comprehensive model of securitization.Résumé. Dans cet article, les auteurs font l'analyse du processus empirique de la sécurisation de la frontière Canado-Américaine à travers la réflexion sur le modèle proposé par l'École de Copenhague. Nous soutenons que cette théorie de sécurisation simplifie trop le processus politique de son initiation et de l'acceptation de l'auditeur. Au lieu d'attribuer la sécurisation à un orateur, s'adressant à un public particulier, nous présentons les jeux de langage continuels effectués par plusieurs acteurs pendant la période suivant la Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (IRTPA) en décembre 2004, jusqu'à l'approbation de la Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) en juin 2005. Nous maintenons que plusieurs orateurs participent dans la construction continuelle du contexte dans lequel l'affaire est de plus en plus comprise dans le cadre de sécurité. Nous explorons aussi le langage employé par les participants dans le champ, observant surtout un groupe d'experts convoqué au Homeland Security Institute. Nous concluons que dans le cas de la sécurisation de la frontière Canado-Américaine il existe des incohérences entre le discours et le réel, ainsi que des distinctions significatives entre les discours officiels et bureaucratiques, mettant l'accent sur l'importance d'un modèle compréhensif de sécurisation.


Author(s):  
Cathrine Witnes Karlson ◽  
Claudia Morsut ◽  
Ole Andreas Hegland Engen

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document