• 100 likes • 175 Views
Approaches to Security and Reality of the North Caucasus or How Theories of Security can explain Caucasian conflicts? . Main approaches …. The realist perspective The liberalist perspective Peace studies Critical security studies Human security Securitization ???.
E N D
Approaches to Security and Reality of the North CaucasusorHow Theories of Securitycan explain Caucasian conflicts?
Main approaches … • The realist perspective • The liberalist perspective • Peace studies • Critical security studies • Human security • Securitization • ???
The Realist approach(analysts from Ancient times to Hobbes, Machiavelli, Rousseau) • States preoccupied with physical safety. • State preoccupation with autonomy. • National development mainly as a means, helping sustain and strengthen state autonomy and safety. • Rule is primary important instrumentally (foreign challenges meet to the state’s autonomy and safety).
The liberalist perspective(since Enlightenment) • States are not unitary actors. • Cooperation and interdependence between states and societies. • The behaviour oа sates in international politics is shaped by the character of states, their political system, and their society. • More optimistic about security than the realists
Peace studies(after the Second World War) • Provide a non-state centric and more global view of major issues of conflict. • Idea of underlying causes of conflict. • Interest in conflict prevention, conflict resolution and peacekeeping. • Multi-level analysis from the individual to the international.
Critical security studies(since the end of 20th century) • Idea of referent object of security (human beings are both secured and rendered insecure in different ways). • Five sectors of Security: military, environmental, economic, societal, and political (Barry Buzan, 1980s) • Security is more than military security (how security to be archived , both for the state and for any other referent objects). • Constructivist approach (society and security as social constructs)
Human security • Human-centric tradition that emphasize on wide variety of threats to people’s security. • Ignores external military threats (argues that 95% deaths are caused by internal conflicts). • Human insecurity as political violence and as underdevelopment (poor governance, poor state capacity, corruption, social cleavages).
Securitization(Copenhagen School) • ‘Is the move that takes politics beyond the established rules of the game and frames the issue either as a special kindofpolitics or as above politics’ (Buzan). • ‘SPEECH ACT’ - Usage of a language of security (from language to meaning)
Thanks for discussion