Chapter 6: Critical Security Studies

Introduction

The main reason of defining them as ‘critical’ is connected to their critiques to traditional security conception’s main assumptions on the meaning of security and subsequent practices of it. With the contributions of post-positivist approaches, epistemological and ontological assumptions of traditional security conception are subject to intensive critiques. In general terms, critical security studies represent the aggregate amount of different critical perspectives on security. There are similarities and differences among these critical perspectives in the context of meaning of security, referent object of security amd methodology of it. Therefore, critical security studies such as Feminism, Post-Colonialism, Constructivism, and Post Structuralism can not be identified as a homogenous field (Columba and Vaughan-Williams, 2015: 1; Mutimer, 2010).

Development Process Of Aberystwyth School

During the last years of the Cold War, security studies was not only questioned in terms of the reasons, but also in terms of results, and subsequently critical security studies emerged (Birdişli, 2014: 234). Critical security studies are inspired from the Peace Studies that has started to focus on “positive peace” concept in addition to “negative peace” since the 1980s. Positive peace thinking directs the peace studies to address new issues such as health, education, socio-economic welfare and environment, and in this respect affects the development process of critical security studies (Columba and Vaughan-Williams, 2015: 18).

Furthermore, security conception of critical security studies is also affected by Marxist theory, Antonio Gramsci’s hegemony conception , critical social theory Frankfurt School, critical theory of International Relations discipline developed by Robert Cox and post-positivist perspectives in international relations theories (Mutimer, 2010: 93-105). Therefore, one of the most important contributions of Aberystwyth School is to bring together the security concept and critical theory. In this respect, by inspiring the critical theory, Aberystwyth School analyses the traditional security conception and seeks to examine the involvement of current structures and practices in continuation of repression, inequality and injustice in world politics. The term of critical security studies is occasionally used to describe all perspectives which criticizes the traditional security conception.

The most important characteristics of Aberystwyth School can be summarized as follows:

1. Addressing the security as derivative concept,
2. Claim for necessity of widening of security agenda,
3. Privileging of individual as the referent object of security,
4. Regarding security problematique in the context of emancipation concept,
5. Considering the threats in a socially constructed manner,
6. Examining the relationships between self and other (Weaver, 2004; Sheenan, 2005: 157; Krause and Williams, 1997: 48).

Aberystwyth School and Critical Theory

Critical theory has an argument for significant potential of humanity in the direction of alternation (Sheenan, 2005: 154). Consequently critical theory calls into question the legitimacy of existing social and political institutions and attempts to examine their transformation process. Aberystwyth School itself emerged within the critical theory tradition that originated from Marxism as well. According to Pınar Bilgin, when the other critical security approaches are considered, one of the most important distinguishing features of Aberystwyth School is the adoption of thoughts of critical theory to security concept and practice (Bilgin, Booth and Jones, 1998). These theories aim to develop a political theory that targets to provide a social transformation through revealing and, if it is possible, eliminating all obstacles for the emancipation of human beings.

While classical Marxism argues that life determines mind, not vice versa, Frankfurt School claims that there is a mutual relationship between mind, thoughts, ideals and economic infrastructure. According to Frankfurt School, contemporary economic and political realms are increasingly integrated. In this sense, Frankfurt School has focused on issues such as culture, bureaucracy, nature of authoritarianism and social structure instead of analysis of economic base of society. Hence, thinkers of Frankfurt School are intensively inspired from Antonio Gramsci’s thoughts and his concept of hegemony for which class domination in the society is not a result of economy and power relations, but emanate from ideas of bourgeoisie that create hierarchy and authority in the society (Heywood, 2011: 69).

Critical security studies emerged as a reaction to the problem-solving theories in Security Studies subfield. This approach is influenced by the distinction between critical and problem-solving theories introduced by critical theory’s influential scholar, Robert Cox. A problemsolving theory takes the nature of international politics into consideration as given. According to this view, there are specific actors and issues that should be focused on. In Security Studies, this actor is the state and the main problem that should be solved is the inter-state war (Columba and Voughan-Williams, 2015: 18- 19).

Security As A Derivative Concept

Security can be achieved through elimination of threats, and the contexts that produce them (Booth, 1991). Therefore, for Aberystwyth School, priority is not about how security will be ensured, but the sources of security issues. Hence, it is not sufficient to undertake security as a negative security situation. Positive security that comprises social, economic and cultural structures should have a priority. Thus, as long as the concept of security is about the improvement of human welfare, it will have a positive meaning for Aberystwyth School (Columba and Voughan-Williams, 2015: 18).

According to Aberystwyth School which makes effort to reveal the limitations of traditional security conception, security is a derivative concept based on a priori political understanding (Booth, 2005). While traditional security conception defines the Security Studies in terms of the study of the threat, use, and control of military force (Walt, 1991), critical approaches to security focus on the normative choices and their political implications. Therefore, Aberystwyth School addresses the question of what security does politically (Browning and McDonald, 2013).

For Aberystwyth School, this way of security conception was derived from neorealist thinking and the nature of anarchic international system. Therefore, different worldviews lead to come out different security conceptions. In that case, knowledge of security has a constitutive effect on political realm (Booth, 1997: 104119). As a result, Aberystwyth School addresses security theory as a political activity and brings the politics back to security studies by seeking to display the connection between security theory and political order.

A Broadening Securıty Agenda

Aberystwyth School states that dominant security rhetoric does not deal with the essence of security. Because, narrow security agenda of traditional conception does not analyse the security problems of social groups and individuals. Therefore, it points to the necessity of broadening of security agenda and questions the statecentric and military-based conception of traditional perspective. Aberystwyth School seeks a reconceptualization of security concept in a holistic sense. In this respect, considering security with a widening agenda represents the search for extending beyond the artificial limitations of realist security conception. Aberystwyth School emphasizes the need for analysis of different dimensions of security by bringing up the matter “why some issues such as human rights and socioeconomic problems are excluded from security agenda”.

For scholars of critical security studies, states should not be given central position in security analyses since they have different characteristics, and they are a part of security problems rather than of their solutions. That is why, security can be in the best way ensured through human emancipation that is described as elimination of social, physical, economic, political and other sorts of limitations for the realization of potential of individuals and social groups (Baylis, 2008: 81). In the following sections, critique of Aberystwyth School about the state as a referent object of security, its emphasis on security of individual and emancipation concept will be examined respectively.

Individual As The Referent Object Of Security

While one of the two main debates in Security Studies during 1990s is about the broadening of security agenda by including the non-military threats, the other one is about determining the proper referent object of security (Williams, 2003: 513). In this respect, it is stated that individuals, collective groups, nations, and as a whole global community are defined as potential referent objects of security apart from the state. Conceptually, the referent object concept describes “whose security” will be ensured. In this connection, security is necessarily a subject of referent object. When the referent object of security is clarified, the quality, nature and means of security can clearly display themselves.

The security concept is defined in a broadened way in terms of both referent objects of security and its context. Therefore, although state preserves its central position in security studies, its previous privileged position as a referent object of security is contested. This is because, broadening of security agenda is necessarily required to analyse various referent objects of security apart from the state actor. In this point, scholars of critical security studies have intensified their discussions on the appropriateness of the state as a referent object of security and its role as security provider.

Consequently, while states give attention to threats against their survival, they tend to neglect the threats to individuals. However, in parallel with focusing on the security of individuals, Aberystwyth School claims that a theory should be there for the ‘voiceless, the unrepresented and the powerless’ (Jones, 1999: 159). In this context, Aberystwyth School states that it should be focused on the needs and interests of most ‘vulnerable’ ones instead of concerns of state security.

The Concept Of Human Security

Given the growing importance of individual security in Securiy Studies sub-field, it is worth to examine the human security concept. It can be claimed that intellectual underpinnings of human security can be rooted in the Enlightenment era. For instance, Emile Durkheim argues that the state becomes stronger and more active as the individual becomes freer. However, compared to its theoretical background the human security concept is a new phenomenon (Ağır, 2015: 366). The debates on human security in the Security Studies sub-field have not emerged as a new theoretical attempt, but as an emphasis on humanitarian values and needs within the process of determining of a new political agenda about security in the post-Cold War era. In a broadest sense, the concept of human security aims to consider individuals or human beings in a collective manner as the referent object of security.

The concept of human security is mainly defined accorging to two different conceptions; freedom from fear and freedom from want. Freedom from want conception evaluates human security in a wider perspective by regarding poverty, disease, economy, health and environmental problems. On the other hand, freedom from fear conception of human security with a narrow perspective focuses on physical violence and threats (Floyd, 2007: 39).

The concept of human security has managed to be a part of security agendas of various international commissions, international and supra-national organizations and individual states. For instance, International Commission of Global Governance 1995 made a call for enlargement of security conception from state security to security of individuals and the planet (Rothschild, 1995: 55). Through European Security Strategy of 2003 , the EU has launched an initiative to integrate the human security concept with the Union’s foreign and security policy. Moreover, some states such as Canada, Norway and Japan have become the leading countries for promotion of growing importance of human security conception for world security. The signing of Ottowa Treaty (1997) that prohibits the use of anti-personnel mines, attempts for solving of issue of child soldiers and institution of the International Criminal Court are the practical results of critical security approach (Hynek and Chandler, 2013: 51). As it can be seen, the concept of human security have effects on real security problems and institutional policies.

Emancipatory Goal

According to Aberystwyth School, emancipation should be at the center of security thinking. Ken Booth explains the importance of emancipation concept for security studies in following ways: “Security and emancipation are two sides of the same coin. Emancipation, not power or order, produces true security. Emancipation, theoretically, is security” (Booth, 1991: 319). In respect of question how ‘true’ security will be provided, Aberystwyth School claims that there can be an alternative reality, and that is why, security should be understood as emancipation. The concept of emancipation distinguishes Aberystwyth School from other critical perspectives on security (Sheenan, 2005: 158-59).

According to Aberystwyth School, emancipation should be comprehended not as a final end, but as a process. In other words, emancipation is not a constant idea or destination, but a direction for a better world order. That is why, emancipation means to resist to oppression, and struggle for a society based on fundamental freedoms, equality, justice, human development and progress (Booth, 2007: 111; Browning and McDonald, 2013).

There is no universal definition of the meaning of emancipation, and emancipation can be abused for the legitimization of illiberal practices. For instance, according to Mohammed Ayoob, the concept of emancipation is not proper for non-western societies. In these societies, ethnic groups’ searches for emancipation in the framework of self-determination right can be a cause of disorder and anarchy (Columba and VaughanWilliams, 2015: 30; Ayoob, 1997: 127). However, for Aberystwyth School, emancipation is not synonymous with Westernization. In other words, emancipation does not mean the same thing for all individuals and cultures. Therefore, emancipation as an objective should know no national, racial, sexual or other frontiers (Sheenan, 1999).

Identity, Self/Other And Othering

Aberystwyth School makes analyses on identity issues and “othering” that cause marginalisation of social groups especially in the post-Cold War era (Krause and Williams, 1997: 48). Whilst Aberystwyth School examines the issue of othering, it gives attention to distinction between subject and object. Accordingly, by determining a framework of observation in accordance with her/his own conditions, observer limits observed object and thus avoids objectivity. Therefore, theories developed as a result of unilateral observation are for specific cases and actors. When the current international security issues are analysed or sought solutions for them, the Western world gives itself a central position and makes non-Western world “others” (Birdişli, 2014: 245).

Aberystwyth School analyzes the concept of hegemony by giving attention to unequal and hierarchic structure of international system as the sources of insecurity. According to Antonio Gramsci, the hegemony that is created not only by power, but also consent on dominant group’s ethical, political and cultural values within the society and acception by other groups or classes. Thus, the ideology of dominant social class becomes a “common conception” of the society. Some institutions such as media, education system and civil society play an important role in production process of this common conception (Hobden and Jones, 2001: 210).

As a result, Aberystwyth School states that dramatic power asymmetry between developed countries and developing and underdeveloped countries contributes to global insecurity, and even analyzes the causes of 11 September terrorist attacks in this context (Birdişli, 2014: 249). In contrast to othering process based on identity that has gained a global characteristic after 11 September, Aberystwyth School draws attention to existence of identity-based oppresive structures that lead to construction of dominative relationships. Therefore, it advocates emancipatory communities based around an inclusionary and egalitarian notions of identity. In this context, it is stated that human emancipation - both that of individual humans and humanity in general - provides the guide both for relations within communities and between them (Columba and Vaughan-Williams, 2015: 26).

Conclusion

Aberystwyth School revisits the traditional security conception, through a critical manner. The basic characteristics of the school can be summarized as;

1. addressing the security as a derivative concept,
2. arguing for widening of security agenda beyond narrow conception of traditional security agenda,
3. privileging of individual as the referent object of security instead of the state,
4. regarding security problematique in the context of emancipation concept,
5. considering the threats in a socially constructed manner,
6. examining the relationships between self and other.