‘Selling’ national security: Saab, YouTube, and the militarized neutrality of Swedish citizen identity

Abstract

Producers of large conventional weapons systems are significant actors in politics and their presence in everyday life is a potential site of militarization, yet they remain remarkably understudied in International Relations (IR) research. Though the public cannot purchase their products, 88 of the top 100 arms producers use official corporate YouTube channels to reach the public. Their YouTube videos are political artefacts that these companies use to 'sell' national security as military security, framing the military as a 'good, natural, and necessary' part of society. Examining these videos reveals how this messaging can be conceptualized as a type of militarization because of the relation 'good, natural, and necessary' has to national security constructions. I use an intersectional lens and a multi-modal audio-visual approach to understand how images, sounds, and texts work together to tell a version of Sweden's national security story as constructed in Saab's official corporate YouTube videos. These videos illuminate a view that Sweden does (and should) have militarized national security that seems counter to images of a peacekeeping nation. This national security is centred on a citizen identity that consists of masculinized, heteronormative, and nationally hierarchical constructions of militarized national security. ARTICLE HISTORY

Militarization, stigma, and resistance: negotiating military reservist identity in the civilian workplace

“…A wealth of recent scholarship seeking to define and explain the causes and consequences of militarism and militarization has burgeoned across disciplines as diverse as international relations (Stavrianakis and Selby 2012), human geography (Woodward 2005;Rech et al 2015), feminist studies (Enloe 2000;Stern and Zalewski 2009;Mohanty 2011;Åhäll 2016;Wibben 2018) criminology (Kraska 2007;Salter 2014;Evans 2017), sociology (Shaw 1991;Martino 2012;McSorley 2012) and, of most relevance to the current article, CMS (Enloe 2015;Agathangelou 2017;Massé, Lunstrum, and Holterman 2017). Broadening and deepening formulations of militarism derived from earlier literatures (Liebknecht and Sirnis 1972), allied work has identified the spatially and temporally diffuse character of militarization (Hyde 2016) that can play out at the level of everyday commodities (Turse 2008;Jackson 2017) and assume both subtle and hidden forms (Giroux 2004;Kallender and Hughes 2018). While militarism has typically been used to invoke the means by which societies may glorify or celebrate war (Vagts 1959;Shaw 1991), militarization focuses on the translation of these ideologies into material, discursive, and processual practices (Enloe 2002;Flusty et al 2008).…”

Risking Sustainability: Political Risk Culture as Inhibiting Ecology-Centered Sustainability

“…This element is important because frequency can be a good indicator for the salience of particular representations (Hermann 2009), here representations of whether companies that analyze political risk include sustainability in these analyses (e.g., see Hasim et al 2017). As an iterative process, this approach is highly useful for this type of study because it allows me to move back and forth in the data from frequency patterns to context analysis (Jackson 2019).…”

Remixing war: An analysis of the reimagination of the Russian–Ukraine war on TikTok

“…This aestheticizing focus is also common in employer-branding campaigns of armed forces and is used in the best interests of the arms industry. In her paper on arms producers' YouTube content, Jackson (2019) notes that arms producers construct a discourse of militarized national security that promotes certain normative citizen ideals and aims at prohibiting citizens' questioning of militarized national security (p. 271).…”