Chapter 1: An Introduction to Security Studies

Introduction

Since the end of the Cold War, we have witnessed not only drastic changes in the security environment but an endeavor in the academia to explain contemporary security issues in a global context.

Up until the post-Cold War era, the traditional focus on security has been state security and the maximization of the state’s power in the international system. However, the transformation of international structure calls for a broader understanding of order and security.

Globalization and interdependence are the two central components that have changed the nature of power as well as our understanding of security in four major ways. First, the dynamics of international security have changed the power distribution across the board. Second, the increase in the volume of global trade, international communication and travel as well as the emergence of the Industry 4.0 have created an integrated global economy and made it necessary to take into account some new actors, means, and perspectives for sustaining and promoting international security. Third, globalization and interdependence may lead to a butterfly effect in that local problems may turn into major international threats and challenges that would affect regional and global security. Finally, because there is no one institution that would act as a global government and create a just global system, globalization, in fact, functions in a way to increase international anarchy and complexity.

International Security and Security Studies in the 21 ^st Century

During the Westphalian system (the 17th century) the nation-state and state security have emerged to bring order and stability to the international system and to stop the interstate violence. Once the nation-states have consolidated their dominance as powerful actors in the European security system in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, they have acted as a monopoly on security issues. The world has been obsessed with the issue of security during the 20th century because of the two world wars and the proxy wars of the Cold War.

International security studies (ISS) is a sub-field of International Relations (IR). It has evolved from the disciplines of War Studies, Military History, and Geopolitics after the Second World War.

ISS is defined as “the study of the threat, use, and control of military force.” It investigates how conditions make the use of force more likely and how the use of force affects individuals, states, and societies. It addresses the specific policies that states embrace in order to prepare for, prevent, or engage in war. The nation-state is the referent object of security. It is possible to classify ISS under two main approaches: Traditionalist and Critical .

Buzan distinguished five models of security due to newly emerging diversity of perceived threats:

1. Military security
2. Political security
3. Economic security
4. Societal security
5. Environmental security

Technology, innovations and new inventions based on information technologies, precision-guided weapons, and stealth technology have opened new and unconventional forms of warfare:

1. irregular warfare,
2. asymmetrical warfare,
3. psychological and information warfare,
4. cyber warfare,
5. hybrid warfare,
6. Nano-warfare.

The Concept of International Security

All humans strive for survival. They are also born frightened. In order to balance survival and fear, states and other actors are formed to keep fear under control. Security means “the absence of a threat to the stability of the international system and international actors, namely nation-states, multi-national corporations (MNCs), international governmental organizations (IGOs), international non-governmental organizations (INGOs), and armed non-state actors (ANSAs).

There is a close link between the concept of security and the concept of insecurity. The states remain fundamental to provide security or insecurity for some and not for others at home or abroad. Insecurity derives from the aggression of states as well as the lack of cooperation among states.

The present “New World Order” is a cause of insecurity rather than security. Today, individual humans are the ultimate referent for security. The interstate war is far less threatening and real than environmental security, food security, and economic security. Thus security dilemma emerged. The main problem in the security dilemma is that although all actors in the international system aspire for security, the interaction of their efforts creates general insecurity. Collective security is one of the paradigms associated with coercion.

Collective security is rested on Alexandre Dumas’ d’Artagnan and his fellow Musketeers motto: “One for all, and all for one!” The Musketeers motto has following rules in collective security:

1. All actors in international system should become a member in a collective security organization (CSO).
2. All threats and challenges to peace must have a common attention from everyone.
3. If international peace and stability is threatened, international community via the CSO act timely with appropriate acts including public condemnation, economic boycott, sanctions, and the use of force.
4. Members of the CSO should commit to use peaceful means to solve international conflicts.

It is possible to explain, analyze and understand the international security in six levels:

1. Individual level: Security for the individual.
2. Societal level: Security for the social group, i.e. ethnic, national, religious, linguistic, or community groups.
3. National level: Security for the state or nation.
4. Regional level: Security for the region, that is, a coherent security region.
5. International level: Security for the international society, the society of nations, and most states in the world.
6. Global level: Security for the planet Earth and space.

For the comparison of collective and human security see Table 1.1(Page 11).

Peace Studies and Conflict resolution

Peace matters. It is almost impossible to make sense of international security without referencing peace and conflict resolution. Although both peace and conflict studies are the relatively new focus of study in international security, they are both broad and fastgrowing interdisciplinary academic fields where theory and practice intertwine with real-world events.

Peace can be defined in two ways. Negative peace focuses on reducing, eliminating, and ending all physical violence as well as war. It is the absence of direct violence. Positive peace means negative peace plus the absence of structural and cultural violence. Violence is traditionally understood as the infliction of bodily harm with the intent to hurt.

1. Direct violence involves intentionally hurting or killing people and directed against a specific group or person. It also incorporates verbal violence.
2. Structural violence occurs when people can be killed, psychologically harmed, deprived or maldeveloped because of violent political or socioeconomic structures.
3. Cultural violence is the use of nationalism, racism, sexism, Islamophobia, xenophobia, and other forms of discrimination in the media, the arts, education, literature, films, street names, monuments, celebrating special national days and heroes, etc. to intellectually justify direct and structural violence.

Instead of defining conflict, sometimes it is better to list its features:

1. conflict is normal, inevitable and everywhere.
2. a conflict exists at the center of all human societies and is occasionally useful.
3. it is almost impossible to eliminate the conflict in its entirety but it is possible to manage the violent side of the conflict.
4. in some specific instances, threat and coercion can be applicable to de-escalate the conflict

The basic human need approach differentiates the symptoms and causes of conflict. Hostage taking, terrorism, gang warfare, public protest movements, and illegal strikes are symptoms. The causes of conflict cannot be seen in public eyes because they are under the iceberg. The international dispute on the other hand, is a situation where the parties perceive incompatible interests and values/ideologies.

Conflict Analysis and Conflict Mapping

Conflict analysis is a tool of the complex dynamics of interactive processes to explain and / or understand (Hollis, 1994) why and how people use violence. As a research method, it sheds light on linking ideas (theory) and evidence (data) by breaking conflict into its basic structural parts and different key dynamic elements and by presenting the whole conflict in drone-like snapshot view. The most used conflict analysis tool is conflict mapping.

By mapping of a conflict, a person can present a road-map or a visual flip chart/blackboard for conflict analysts, practitioners and policy-makers. The basic conflict mapping includes conflict parties, conflict issues, conflict relations, and so on. The systemic conflict mapping aims to analyze the complex, deep-rooted and protracted conflicts not only for academic purpose but also for conflict resolution practitioners, aid and development workers, and politicians.

We can use a “burning house” metaphor to demonstrate how diplomats, military and third-party interveners respond to actual conflict. The interveners have the following options:

1. Preventive diplomacy:
2. Conflict management or peacekeeping:
3. Peacemaking
4. Peacebuilding or conflict transformation

Conflict dynamic is related to the phasing of conflict, paradigmatic changes, and different phases in the course of violence/warfare:

1. Different periods of a conflict: Violence escalates and de-escalates and is sometimes interrupted by a period of peace.
2. Changes of intensity: The route of violence, strategies, and availability of weapons can be changed.
3. 3. Paradigmatic changes: Objectives may change. New alliances, fall of the regime, and political shifts can happen.
4. Cross-cultural and inter-cultural component: Conflict handling can be affected by high-context and low-context cultural environment

Peace and Conflict Theories

The democratic peace theory has a very simple proposition that democracies do not fight each other. It highlights a causal relationship between an independent variable (democratic structure) and the dependent variable (the absence of war between democratic states).

The main international conflict theory, Burton’s conflict and conflict resolution theory all assume the origin of conflict is the basic human needs, namely security, identity and participation. Human beings follow those needs regardless of the consequences to themselves and to an international system.

Conflict Intervention

The world has changed; the major conflicts threatening world peace and security have changed, the parties involved in the conflicts have changed, the international environment has changed, and the relationship between international organizations and the conflicting parties has changed. The new specific challenge for the world and European leaders is how to respond to emerging ethnonational conflicts in this new international environment.

Conflict intervention methods consist of the following:

1. Conflict prevention,
2. Conflict management,
3. Conflict settlement,
4. Conflict resolution,
5. Conflict transformation,
6. conflict provention

Current and Future Global Threats and Challenges

Since the end of the Cold War, the world has changed radically. Politics, business, economy, society, culture, and technology – all these changes have made old global threats and challenges irrelevant.

Security threats emanated from global environmental problems present four future political dilemmas:

1. Environmental threats are usually less-clear-cut and direct than other security threats. They are like threats without enemies.
2. Threats such as global warming and ozone depletion are mostly perceived as longer-term emergencies rather than imminent attacks and disasters.
3. Environmental threats are often accompanied by significant economic, social and political costs. Unsolved, they may lead to the creation of environmental refugees in the future.
4. They are only confronted by a globally coordinated holistic approach with political, economic, social, and educational actions