Conflict Resolution and Ontological Security

Connecting ontological (in)securities and generation through the everyday and emotional geopolitics of Falkland Islanders

“…This paper, nevertheless, seeks to problematise simplistic theorisations of ontological security that have tended to extrapolate its psychological dimensions in relation to individuals (see Giddens, 1991;Philo, 2014), to debates about the security of states and their citizenry (e.g. Mitzen, 2006;Innes & Steele, 2014;Kinnvall, 2002;Rumelili, 2015a;Skey, 2010). The conceptual origins of ontological security have been ascribed to the psychoanalytical work of Laing (1960, p. 39) who suggested that an 'ontologically secure person will encounter all the hazards of life…from a centrally firm sense of his [sic] own and other people's reality and identity'.…”

“…The perspectives of youth, when compared with those of older generations of Falklands Islanders, reveal markedly different responses and emotions in relation to their respective experiences of (in)security. For older Islanders who could remember the 1960s and 70s when Argentina and the UK entered into sovereignty negotiations against their expressed wishes (see González, 2013), more conflictual relations with Argentina have provided a sense of certainty and ontological security (Innes & Steele, 2014;Kinnvall, 2002;Mitzen, 2006;Rumelili, 2015a). The 1982 war, its aftermath and more recent diplomatic tensions have seen the UK firmly committed to defending the Falklands and the Islanders' wish to remain as a British OT (Dodds & Pinkerton, 2013).…”

‘Not a heap of stones’: material environments and ontological security in international relations

“…Ever since Alexander Wendt made a distinction between physical security, or 'differentiation from other actors', and ontological security, which has to do with the freedom from anxiety resulting from a predictable relationship with the world (Wendt 1994, 385), the literature on ontological security in world politics has grown exponentially (Huysmans 1998;McSweeney 1999;Mitzen 2006;Steele 2007;Kinnvall 2004Kinnvall , 2006Krolikowski 2008;Delehanty and Steele 2009;Zarakol 2010;Lupovici 2012;Youde 2014;Subotić 2016;Rumelili 2014Rumelili , 2015.…”

Critical situations, fundamental questions and ontological insecurity in world politics

“…Although originally developed in social psychology and later sociology to refer to individuals, OST in IR has from the very outset been applied to states. Drawing on the state-as-actor argument in IR more generally (Wendt 2004), Mitzen, Steele, Zarakol and others have anthropomorphised collective actors such as states and have treated them as the unit of analysis within OST (Mitzen 2006b;2006a;Steele 2007a;2008a;Zarakol 2010, Rumelili 2015b. This approach, which I also adopt in a case study on Kosovo secession presented below, has been critiqued by a number of authors (Krolikowski 2008;Roe 2008;Abulof 2009Abulof , 2015Croft 2012b).…”

“…I begin by briefly reviewing the literature on ontological security in IR with the aim of shedding the light on an important lacuna related to the analytical treatment of critical situations. In the second section, I draw on the work of Anthony Giddens to develop the concept of critical situations through translation of 2010 ;Croft 2012a;Kay 2012;Lupovici 2012;Alexandra Innes and Steele 2013;Chacko 2014;Gustafsson 2014;Rumelili 2015aRumelili , 2015bSubotić 2015). The limited scope of this paper cannot do justice to all discussions informed by OST.…”