(De)securitisation dilemmas: Theorising the simultaneous enaction of securitisation and desecuritisation

Abstract

This article theorises the simultaneous enaction of securitising and desecuritising moves. It argues that the frequent simultaneity of these two processes, which are normally considered mutually exclusive within Securitisation Theory (ST), has previously gone unnoticed given a set of methodological, temporal, and ontological biases that have developed within ST. Demonstrating how these biases can be overcome – and even reconciled with the seminal texts of ST – by drawing on work from within social theory and elsewhere, we argue that the frequent simultaneity of (de)securitising moves most urgently requires us to reconsider the normative status of desecuritisation within ST. Although desecuritisation has traditionally been viewed as normatively positive, we argue that its temporally immanent enaction alongside securitising moves might introduce more violence into security politics and, in fact, exacerbate protracted conflicts. Ultimately, we make the normative ambitions of some within ST more opaque. Desecuritisation is not a shortcut to the ethical-political good within ST.

An ‘existential threat’ or a ‘past pariah’: Securitisation of Iran and disagreements among American press

“…Some authors believed that the radical (fundamentalist) ruling sect of the state, including the supreme leader and the revolutionary guards, was against the United States and the moderates like the foreign minister (Javad Zarif) or even the president (Hassan Rouhani) had good intentions towards the US. Austin and Beaulieu-Brossard (2018), in reporting their study on simultaneous enaction of securitisation and desecuritisation, point to a similar case in President Obama’s speech on the nuclear deal. They show how Obama desecuritised one sector of Iranians (the people) and kept the rest (the state) securitised.…”

Quantum technology hype and national security

“…Second, as with threat inflation, cyclical expectations about technology are difficult to square with securitization theory. There is considerable normative, theoretical, and empirical debate around desecuritization (see, for example, Hansen, 2012), including its timing and sequence (Austin and Beaulieu-Brossard, 2018; Floyd, 2019). Temporality is undertheorized (Patomäki, 2015).…”

La (de)seguritización del Gobierno Regional del Kurdistán. El movimiento kurdo en Iraq desde 1991

“…Como se mencionó antes, las narrativas polarizadoras son estrategias discursivas que buscan dividir artificialmente la realidad social entre segmentos moderados y radicales o asuntos negociables y líneas rojas (Austin and Beaulieu-Brossard, 2018). La apertura de condiciones para la deseguritización del tema kurdo generó una retórica de segmentación regional que dividió discursivamente a los kurdos entre amigas o enemigos.…”