Weapons prohibitions through immanent critique: NGOs as emancipatory and (de)securitising actors in security governance

Abstract

The article examines the roles of NGOs in banning cluster munitions that resulted in the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions and the campaign against landmines in the 1990s. It argues that NGOs have managed to move questions about the use of force from the closed decision-making sphere of military commanders and arms control diplomats into open public debate. Thus NGOs have simultaneously desecuritised the use of force by states, securitised certain weapons technologies, and made human beings the referent object of security. This has marked a shift from state security and strategic disarmament to human security and humanitarian disarmament, without fundamentally challenging the laws of war. However, in contrast to realist views that only militarily useless weapons ever get banned and radical critical perspectives that see new legal regimes as legitimating war and US hegemony, I argue that NGOs have engaged in immanent critique of military arguments and practices based on prevailing principles of international humanitarian law. The resulting weapon ban treaties have both restrained US policy and undermined its legitimacy. The article explores the discursive choices that underpinned the remaking of the security agenda by NGOs and their role as de/securitising actors and emancipatory agents of change.

Hierarchy, revisionism, and subordinate actors: The TPNW and the subversion of the nuclear order

“…Moreover, these kinds of projects may produce political and institutional infrastructure that facilitates future subversive revisionist challenges. This might include civil society organizations that foster the development of alternative discourses and ideas; formal or informal institutions or transnational networks that promote connections between likeminded state and nonstate actors; or other venues, organizations, and relationships that give subordinate actors the space and capacity to produce and circulate ideas and narratives that challenge the discursive foundations of a system’s stratification (Finnemore and Sikkink, 1998; Petrova, 2018).…”

Norm emergence as agenda diffusion: Failure and success in the regulation of cluster munitions

“…They also attempted to break down the category of CM by distinguishing between ‘smart’, that is, presumably reliable munitions equipped with self-destruct mechanisms, and ‘dumb’, that is, inaccurate and unreliable munitions that posed a threat to civilians (Petrova, 2016: 393). Moreover, they advanced re-legitimising counter-frames that depicted CM as crucial to force protection (Petrova, 2018: 636–637). When these arguments did not take hold, the norm antipreneurs complained about their side not being listened to and accused the norm supporters of ‘moral blackmailing’ (Petrova, 2016: 394).…”

How (not) to stop the killer robots: A comparative analysis of humanitarian disarmament campaign strategies

“…Second, International Relations (IR) scholarship on weapons prohibitions demonstrates the influence of humanitarian advocacy campaigns and their potential to shift preferences and reach agreements, even against the interests of militarily advanced powers (Bower, 2015;Petrova, 2016). Moreover, scholars have identified a broad spectrum of strategies that make such successes more (or less) likely (Petrova, 2018;Price, 1998). Following this line of reasoning, strategic choices guiding the campaigns have a major impact on their outcomes.…”