Deconstruction and Double Reading of the South Asian Security Order

Reconceptualizing regional security in South Asia: A critical security approach

“…Though substantially less influential than the human security approach, a second set of contributions to security studies in South Asia encompasses a more fundamental critique of the dominant theoretical orthodoxies in the region. These correspond to approaches in the ‘broad church’ of critical security studies, as have been developed in Europe and beyond, and draw on critical theory, constructivism, feminism, postcolonial studies, postmodernism and securitization theory (see, for instance, Barthwal-Datta, 2012; Chatterjee, 2011; Das, 2012; Dasgupta, 2004; Islam, 2015). The contributions position themselves in response, either or both, to traditional approaches used in the South Asian security studies and critical approaches – developed in the West – that are not necessarily sensitive to the regional context.…”

“…In his ‘double reading’ of the South Asian security order, Chatterjee (2011) contrasts the mainstream approaches that are ‘ silent over borders, peoples, rights, ethnic identity, communities, and flows’ with a representative duo of ‘subversive’ scholars (Das, 2003; Samaddar, 1998) whose exploration of ‘otherness’ is marked by features such as ‘the utopia of a sojourn to original anarchy’ and ‘the tendency to collapse critique into freedom’ (Chatterjee, 2011: 340). Further, he writes that ‘the readings on the South Asian security will remain confined to the double-bind unless there is a fundamental epistemological breakthrough that successfully bridges the mainstream and its other’ (2011: 340). The framework presented here may well be such a possibility as it draws inspiration from post-structuralism to question the status quo, but – with its focus on an emancipatory ‘redefinition’ of security – seeks to engage with the ‘reality’, and indeed value, of actors such as the state in the South Asian context towards transformative politics.…”