Documenting the origins, remit and practices of the European external borders agency FRONTEX, this article argues that FRONTEX is not the product of 'securitizing' links between terrorism, security, migration and borders made by EU institutions in response to 9/11, but rather of their failure. In so doing, the article critiques securization theory in comparison to the alternative modality of risk. Copyright (c) 2009 The Author(s). Journal compilation (c) 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

No abstract

This article offers a critique of the discourse that has emerged around the problem of 'the exception'. 'The exception' is shorthand for the problem of certain events and situations, such as 9/11, being designated as 'exceptional' in order to legitimate exceptional policies, practices, executive measures and laws. The article terms this discourse and practice 'exceptionalism'. It begins by identifying problems in the treatment of the exception and exceptionalism in the work of Carl Schmitt, Giorgio Agamben and securitization theorist Ole Waever. A different theoretical approach to the problem of the exception is then offered, drawing upon Michel Foucault's early work, The Archaeology of Knowledge. The narrative focuses on the detail of Foucault's 'archaeological' methodology, relating it to specific problems in the political-theoretical discourse of exceptionalism. The reasons for an emphasis on 'archaeology' rather than Foucault's later 'genealogical' slant are explained. The article concludes by arguing that 'archaeology' -conceived as a neo-Kantian mode of critique that is discursive and historicist -is a more appropriate and less problematic method for engaging with the problem of the exception.

This article analyzes counterterrorist lawmaking as an instance of security politics. It does so through archival parliamentary analysis of British counterterrorism legislation at three different times: in the wake of a perceived security emergency (2001); when the impact of an emergency is fading (2008); and when there is no emergency (2000). The findings show that over time, legislative exceptions and emergencies become normalized. By taking a parliamentary, legislative, and historical perspective, the article also challenges some of the assumptions of the exceptionalism debate.