Abstract
Classical or realist security studies failed to foresee the end of the Cold War and to address new challenges. In the aftermath of the Cold War there was a widening of the narrow meta-theoretical assumptions of traditional security studies. The wide range of approaches in this field is often subsumed under Critical Security Studies. This field of study stresses the claim that threats are a product of the politics of representation. Only through the actions of security agencies is a potential threat transformed into a matter of security. By reifying the initially constructed security threat, it is understood as a given fact and seen to exist externally of the agencies that produced it. Critical Security Studies tries to dismantle the implicit assumptions by which threats to security are defined.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Interestingly “macro-securitization” is also possible. This means that a relevant audience can be united by the feature of a commonly perceived security threat. “Macro-securitization” is most likely at a civilizational level (Buzan et al. 2009, p. 254).
- 2.
The idea of identity solely based on difference has been doubted. Ole Wæver points to modern-day Europe and the European Union as an example demonstrating the opposite (Wæver and Ole 1996, p. 122).
- 3.
‘Knowledge’ is defined as: “all sorts of meanings, with the help of which humans allocate meaning to their surrounding environment and constantly reshape their environment” (Jäger and Siegfried 2006, p. 84).
- 4.
In this work discourse is understood in a Foucauldian way, as: “an entity of sequences of signs in that they are enouncements” (Foucault and Michel 2002, p. 141). An enouncement is an abstract matter that enables signs to assign specific repeatable relations to objects, subjects, and other enouncements (Foucault and Michel 2002, p. 140).
- 5.
“The view that community might embrace all of humankind neglects the fact […] that communities just are particularistic. In seeing myself as a member of a community, I see myself as participating in a particular way of life marked off from other communities by its distinctive characteristics” (Miller and David 1989, pp. 67–68).
- 6.
A possible connection between discourse and dispositive is described by the ‘activity theory’ of Alexei Leontjew. In activity theory the active subject is the connection between discourse and empirical reality. With the help of this theory, the actions of a community (‘activities’) or of a group or an individual (‘actions’), and the routine works of an individual (‘operations’) can be explained. A motive is derived from a particular need and as a consequence a particular aim is seen to be relevant, and to reach this goal actions and operations are the material to achieve it (Wodak and Meyer 2005, p. 25). Actors engage and interact with their environment, and through this tools are produced which are external forms of mental processes; these do not have to be material but may also include techniques. Leontjew points out that individuals engage in ‘actions’ that do not necessarily satisfy a need, but contribute towards the eventual satisfaction of this need in the future. These ‘actions’ make sense only in a social context. In ‘activity theory’ three levels are distinguished: ‘operations’ (routine works by an individual), upon which ‘actions’ are based (conducted by a group or by an individual actor), and ‘activities’ (conducted by communities), which draw upon ‘actions’. Corresponding to ‘operations’, ‘actions’, and ‘activities’ are ‘motives’, ‘aims’, and ‘instrumental conditions’ (Blunden and Andy 2010, pp. 226–230; Leontjew 1978).
- 7.
Cultural stereotypes which are collectively passed from generation to generation (Jäger et al. 2009, p 36).
- 8.
A collective understanding of the future is also possible, as can be seen in messianic movements and their discourses.
- 9.
Military generals as members of the securitizing elites are not included in this work. This flaw is due to the difficulty of access to reliable sources. As this work aims at the possibilities of expression and not at the exact reproduction of a discourse, this flaw is seen as not having a major influence on the general findings.
- 10.
The human security pillar of “freedom of future generations to inherit a healthy environment” (Annan and Kofi 2000a, p. 1) is not integrated into this work. After all, “states approach security as aggregate security, not as five different fields” (Buzan et al. 1998, p. 170). In that regard the integration of a specific environmental component confuses the results concerning the securitization of water between the two states of Jordan and Israel. Accentuating the environmental component leads to an under-representation of the other dimensions (economic, societal, military, and political), which are all linked by the mediatory medium water.
- 11.
A number of publications in Arabic were used for research, while no Hebrew sources were used. Because of the large number of Israeli scientists publishing in English, this flaw can be regarded as having a minor impact on the results.
- 12.
The term ‘Palestinian-friendly’ is important as 50.56 per cent of the Jordanian population considers itself Palestinian (PCBS (Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics) 2009). This high ratio has often led to tensions in the past and resulted in violent conflicts between militant Palestinian organizations and the Hashemite monarchy. September 1970 is known as Black September. Former King Hussein of Jordan destroyed militant Palestinian organizations and restored the monarchy’s rule over the country. The armed conflict lasted until July 1971 and resulted in the expulsion of the PLO and of thousands of Palestinian fighters to Lebanon (Shlaim and Avi 2007, pp. 301–302).
- 13.
The distinction between Islamist and moderate Muslims has not been integrated into this work, as it is argued that no research institution covers Islamist views in Jordan and therefore no investigation can be conducted.
- 14.
Only using freely accessible documents is a flaw which cannot be circumvented. Nevertheless, the research aims at “fields of possible articulation” and it is argued that these fields also become visible in publicly accessible documents.
References
Abizadeh, Arash, 2005: “Does Collective Identity Presuppose an Other? On the Alleged Incoherence of Global Solidarity”, in: American Political Science Review, 99,1 (February): 45−60.
Annan, Kofi, 2000a: Millenium Report: We the Peoples. The Role of the United Nations in the 21st century; at: <http://www.un.org/millenium/sg/report> (30 November 2011).
Assmann, Jan, 1995: “Collective Memory and Cultural Identity”, in: New German Critique, 65: 125−133.
Austin, John Langshaw, 2005: How to Do Things With Words (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press).
Baki, Aminuddin, 2009: Conceptualization of collective identity. Global Institute for Asian Regional Integration (GIARI) (Tokyo: Waseda University); at: <http://www.waseda-giari.jp/sysimg/imgs/200908_si_st_06baki_paper_v2.pdf (25 November 2011).
Balzacq, Thierry; Burgess, J. Peter, 2010: Securitization Theory: How Security Problems Emerge and Dissolve (New York: Routledge Chapman & Hall).
Blunden, Andy, 2010: An Interdisciplinary Theory of Activity. Studies in Critical Social Sciences (Leiden: Brill Academic Publishing).
Booth, Ken, 2005: Critical Security Studies and World Politics (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers).
Brauch, Hans-Günter, 2006. Impact of Global Environmental Change on National, Environmental and Human Security in the Mediterranean Region by 2020 and 2050.Presentation at: NATO Collaborative Linkage Grant “Combating Desertification with Traditional Knowledge – A Contribution to Euro-Mediterranean Security”.
Brown, Spencer, 1969: Laws of Form (London: Allen&Unwin).
Buzan, Barry; Wæver, Ole; de Wilde, Jaap, 1997: Security: A New Framework for Analysis (Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers).
Buzan, Barry; Wæver, Ole; de Wilde, Jaap, 1998: Security: A New Framework for Analysis (Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers).
Buzan, Barry, 2004: From International to World Society?: English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalisation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Buzan, Barry; Wæver, Ole, 2009: “Macrosecuritisation and security constellations: reconsidering scale in securitisation theory”, in: Review of International Studies, 35,2: 253−276.
Chourou, Bechir, 2005: Promoting Human Security: Ethical, Normative and Educational Frame-works in the Arab States. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organi-zation (Paris: UNESCO); at: <http://www.unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001405/140513e.pdf> (3 November 2011).
Ciută, Felix, 2004: Security from Concept to Context to Policy. (Standing Group on International Relations: Brussels).
Fairclough, Norman; Holes, Clive, 1999: Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. 2nd edition. (London: Longman).
Foucault, Michel, 2002: Archäologie des Wissens (Frankfurt a/M.: Suhrkamp Verlag).
Fuchs, Peter, 2004: Niklas Luhmann – beobachtet (Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften).
Gee, James Paul, 2005: An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method (London: Routledge).
Goff, Patricia M.; Dunn, Kevin C., 2004: Identity and Global Politics: Theoretical and Empirical Elaborations (New York – Houndsmill – Basingstoke – Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan).
Hansen, Lene, 2006: Security as Practice: Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War (London: Taylor & Francis).
Hintermeier, Stefan, 2005: “Reconceptualisation of External Security in the European Union after 1990”, first draft, to be published in: Brauch, Hans Günter; Grin, John; Mesjasz, Czeslaw; Dunay, Pal; Behera, Navnita; Chourou, Béchir; Oswald Spring, Ursula; Liotta, P. H. ; Kameri-Mbote, Patricia (Eds.), 2006: Globalisation and Environmental Challenges: Reconceptualising Security in the 21st Century (Berlin–Heidelberg–New York–Hong Kong–London–Milan–Paris–Tokyo. Springer–Verlag).
Jäger, Siegfried, 2006: “Diskurs und Wissen. Theoretische und methodische Aspekte einer kritischen Diskurs- und Dispositivanalyse”, in: Keller, Reiner; Hirselnad, Andreas; Schneider, Werner; Vierhöver, Willy (Eds.): Handbuch Sozialwissenschaftliche Diskursanalyse. Theorien und Methoden (Wiesba-den: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften): 83−114.
Jäger, Siegfried; Maier, Florentine, 2009: “Theoretical and methodological aspects of Foucauldian discourse analysis and dispositive analysis”, in: Wodak, Ruth; Meyer, Michael (Eds.): Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. (Introducing Qualitative Methods) (London: Sage): 34−62.
Jenkins, Richard, 2008: Social Identity: Key Ideas (New York: Routledge – Chapman & Hall).
Katz, Steven T., 1993: Historicism, the Holocaust, and Zionism: Critical Studies in Modern Jewish Thought and History: Critical Studies in Contemporary Jewish History and Thought (New York: New York University Press).
King, Gary; Murray, Christopher J.L., 2002: “Rethinking Human Security”, in: Political Science. Quarterly, 116,4 (Winter): 585−610.
Lapid, Yosef; Kratochwil, Friedrich, 1996: The Return of Culture and Identity in IR Theory (Boulder CO: Lynne Rienner).
Leontjew, A. N., 1978: Activity, Consciousness and Personality (Upper Saddle River- Prentice Hall).
Miller, David, 1989: “In what Sense Must Socialism Be Communitarian?”, in: Social Philosophy & Policy, 6,2 (Spring): 51−73.
Neumann, I. B., 1998: “Identity and the Outbreak of War: or Why the Copenhagen School of Security Studies Should Include the Idea of ‘Violization’ in its Framework of Analysis”, in: International Journal of Peace Studies, 3,1 (January): 1−10.
Owen, Taylor, 2004: “Human security – conflict, critique and consensus: Colloquium remarks and a proposal for a threshold-based definition”, in: Security Dialogue, 35,3 (September): 373−387.
PCBS [Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics], 2009: “Press Release on the Palestinians in the World”; at: <http://www.aidajerusalem.org/uploadss/30_12_091402739699.doc> (3 December 2011).
Sa’Di, Ahmad H.; Abu-Lughod, Lila, 2007: Nakba: Palestine, 1948, and the Claims of Memory (New York: Columbia University Press).
Shapiro, Michael J., 2005: “Every Move You Make: Bodies, Surveillance, and Media”, in: Social Text, 23,2 (Summer): 21−34.
Shlaim, Avi, 2007: Lion of Jordan; The Life of King Hussein in War and Peace (London: Allen Lane).
Stryker, Sheldon; Owens, Timothy J.; White, Robert, 2000: Self, Identity, and Social Movements (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
UNDP, 2002: Arab Human Development Report 2002: Creating Opportunities for Future Generations (New York: United Nations Publications).
Wæver, Ole, 1995: “Securitization and Desecuritization”, in: Lipschutz, Ronnie D. (Ed.): On Security (New York: Columbia University Press): 46−86.
Wæver, Ole, 1996: “European Security Identities”, in: Journal of Common Market Studies, 34,1 (March): 103–32.
Wæver, Ole, 2000. European Security Identities 2000. European Security Identities: Contested Understandings of EU and NATO. (PRIO: Oslo).
Wæver, Ole, 2006. Critical approaches to security in Europe: A networked manifesto. In:Security Dialogue, 37, pp. 443–487.
Wæver, Ole, 2007: “Peace and Security: Two Evolving Concepts and Their Changing Relationship”. In: Brauch, Hans Günter; Oswald Spring, Ursula; Mesjasz, Czeslaw; Grin, John; Dunay, Pal; Behera, Navnita Chadha; Chourou, Béchir; Kameri-Mbote, Patricia; Liotta, P.H. (Eds.): Globalization and Environmental Challenges: Reconceptualizing Security in the 21st Century. Hexagon Series on Human and Environmental Security and Peace (Berlin–Heidelberg–New York: Springer): 99–111.
Warner, Jeroen F., 2000: “Plugging the GAP - Working with Buzan: the Ilisu Dam as a Security Issue”; at: <http://www.soas.ac.uk/waterissues/papers/file38410.pdf> (18 November 2011).
Wendt, Alexander, 1992: “Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics”, in: International Organization, 46,2 (Spring): 391−425.
Williams, Michael C., 2003: “Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics”, in: International Studies Quarterly, 47,4 (December): 511−531.
Wodak, Ruth; Meyer, Michael, 2009: Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. Introducing Qualitative Methods. (London: Sage).
Zeitoun, Mark, 2006: Palestinian-Israeli water: secure or violated? Securitization, Opportunization and Violation along the Jordan River (Jerusalem: Israel; Palestine Centre for Research and Information); at: <http://www.ipcri.org/watconf/papers/mark.pdf> (7 December 2011).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schäfer, P.J. (2013). Securitization and Discourse. In: Human and Water Security in Israel and Jordan. SpringerBriefs in Environment, Security, Development and Peace, vol 3. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29299-6_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29299-6_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-29298-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-29299-6
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)