Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics

Williams, Michael C.

doi:10.1046/j.0020-8833.2003.00277.x

Cited by 797 publications

(445 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

410

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the debate between the CS, so named in a response by McSweeney (1996McSweeney ( , 1998, subsequent replies (Buzan and Waever, 1997), and a provocative intervention by Williams (2003), a number of critiques of the model of securitization were raised. The CS was faulted by McSweeney for appearing to give an ontological pre-existence to the 'speaker' and 'audience' that is at odds with a more processual or constructivist perspective of identity (1996: 83).…”

Section: Securitizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Securitization and desecuritization: a dramaturgical analysis of the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Securitization theory has evolved over the past 10-15 years and has fuelled much exciting research, demonstrated through recent contributions by Balzacq, Stritzel, Taurek, and Floyd. Despite a growing number of case studies of successful securitization and desecuritization processes, scholars have retained the statist view of securitization: actors identify an existential threat that requires emergency executive powers, and, if the audience accepts the securitizing move, the issue is depoliticized and is considered a 'security' issue outside the rules of normal politics. This article demonstrates that there are multiple settings of securitizing moves and parses the audience within securitization theory, suggesting a model of at least four distinct types of audiences and speech contexts (popular, elite, technocratic, and scientific). The process of securitization is not a moment of binary decision but rather an iterative, political process between speaker and audience. We must not ask, 'was a securitizing move made' but 'how does a securitizing move mean?' Particularly if one adopts a more interventionist or activist notion of scholarship, a key question for experts must be: how are securitizing moves accepted or rejected? What are the politics of that successful process of (de)securitization? Using dramaturgical analysis, we suggest that securitizing moves take place within different sociological settings that operate with unique rules, norms, and practices. The example of the Canadian Air Transport Security Association is provided.

show abstract

Section: Securitizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Securitization and desecuritization: a dramaturgical analysis of the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This process is initiated by speech-acts that elevate non-politicized or politicized issues to the security realm (Williams 2003). What makes a speech-act 'a specifically "security" act, a "securitization," is its casting of an issue as an "existential threat" which calls for extraordinary measures beyond the routines and norms of everyday politics' (Williams 2003). In other words, securitization speechacts elevate referent objects to the realm of security by identifying threats, increasing the sense of urgency and raising the possibility to take actions beyond established norms.…”

Section: Theory and Organizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Power Politics and Securitization: The Emerging Indo-Japanese Nexus in Southeast Asia

Chand

García

2017

Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

China's ascent has led to its securitization by its neighbouring states, particularly given its precarious maritime claims in the highly strategic Indo-Pacific basin. Such a development in the region has allowed India and Japan to forge closer strategic partnerships in Southeast Asia. This article utilizes securitization theory to analyse the emerging Indo-Japanese nexus, wherein Japan's increasing desecuritization and India's non-securitization in Southeast Asia have allowed the region to emerge as a common strategic vantage point for Indo-Japanese interests to convene. The securitization of China, coupled with India and Japan's common interests in safeguarding the freedom of navigation and deterring unilateral changes to the status quo, contributes to the emergence of this nexus. Furthermore, the emerging nexus provides states of Southeast Asia a hedging option as China's increasing assertion of its territorial claims. Japan's Security Diamond policy and India's Act/Look East policy will also be analysed to showcase the emergence of the Indo-Japanese nexus.

show abstract

“…(Mulligan, 2011, pp. 638-639; see also Williams, 2003) Remarkably, Salter (2008a) argues that depoliticization, as part of the act of securitization, will be especially successful insofar as it happens by quantification of threats, as well as when protection against those threats is technologically mediated. 'The description of threats to aviation security in quantitative terms, especially when spoken by the expert panel, hides the expansion of the ambit of security in the policing, surveillance, and control of mobile populations' (Salter, 2008a, p. 262).…”

Section: Securitizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Security Technologies Versus Citizen Roles?

Valkenburg

2016

Science as Culture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The idea of securitization holds that perceived threats and the ensuing need for security measures are mobilized in speech acts to legitimate bypassing of normal practices of democratic politics and justification. Citizens, as members of the political community, are thus effectively deprived of their agency. Attempts at securitization gain clout from the severity of the mobilized threat: the more convincingly a threat is argued to cause disruptions in the functioning of society and ultimately the loss of human life, the more acceptable it will become to bypass democratic governance in order to prevent the threat. Accordingly, security technologies can be conceived of as those technologies that are constructed and mobilized in such attempts at securitization and depoliticization. However, security technologies can also be thought of as technologies that are mobilized in face of existential threats more generally, regardless of whether their mobilization has a depoliticizing effect or not. Yet, as case studies on airport security scanners and security in smart grids show, not all implementations of security, even against existential threats, show this tendency of depoliticization as essential in securitization and in technologies of security. This article further demonstrates that the agency of citizens in the governance of these technologies importantly depends on whether or not the threat is perceived as internal or external to the referent object of the security programme.

show abstract

Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics

Cited by 797 publications

References 50 publications

Securitization and desecuritization: a dramaturgical analysis of the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority

Securitization and desecuritization: a dramaturgical analysis of the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority

Power Politics and Securitization: The Emerging Indo-Japanese Nexus in Southeast Asia

Security Technologies Versus Citizen Roles?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About