Begrepp frn Security studiesPolarityIntroduction

Polarity: Distribution of capabilities determines behaviour of actors: power politics basic propositions: power as the or one of the key driving forces in IR states as most powerful actors history of IR has been dominated by a small number of great power states great powers control resources -> their activities, ideas, identities dominate international systems similarity between systems with 4 or more great powers: multipolar; sharp differences between systems with less greater powers: tripolar, bipolar, unipolar big simplifying idea: reduce international politics to relations among the great powers

Conclusion

Polarity defines the system primarily in terms of states, and the dynamics of international relations primarily in terms of conflict. It assumes that the driving logic behind state behaviour is the need to accrue power in order to ensure survival in a Darwinian system whose basic rule is survival of the fittest. but: powerful non-state actors are neglected, state-centrism: military-political interpretation while not implementing world economy and international society interpretations Polarity is essentially a material view of the system. It assumes that the drive for power to preserve security always trumps other, more potentially collaborative, motives, such as the desire to increase wealth, welfare and knowledge. And it discounts the effects of homogenization among states, such as the convergence in domestic values and structures that underlies the democratic peace polarity points us towards a basic feature of the international power structure. So long as humankind remains divided up into political entities claiming the ultimate right of self-government (states), and so long as relations among those states are sufficiently competitive in character to carry a risk of war, the distribution of power among them is going to matter.

Security studies- kap. 13

War-

InledningKrig r i pratiken mycket mer n en sammandrabbning utav militra styrkor.Det involverar alla aspekter av mnskligt liv. Det r ett fullt spektrum av socialt fenomen.Det har anvnds som en motor fr sociala, politiska, ekonomiska och tekniska frndringar.Krig ligger till grund fr lagar, seder, och instutitutioner.Det finns mnga anledningar att studera krig. En del av dessa kan vara rent strategiska. Andra kan handla om sociologiska aspekter som vill frst krigets verkan.

Detta kapitlet vill underska olika stt att frst krigets roll och plats i politiken, och vilka centrala funktioner krig har haft och vilka trender som kan urskiljas efter andra vrldskrigets slut.

Tre krigsfilosofier1. Politiska2. Eskatologiska3. Kataklysm

1. Strategiskt. Clausewitz ser krigsfring som en vldshandling som r mnad att f vr motstndare att gra som vi vill. r idag frgastatt (Kaldor)

Den politiska utmaningen fr krigsfring ligger i hitta rationalitet i relationen mellan folkat, staten, och militren som ska bygga p deras specifika karaktristik, passion resonlighet och teknisk respketabilitet. Kriget ska upplevas som en rationell handling.

2. Mission, katastrofbetonat drama. Bygger p en id om en att kriget kullminerar i ngon en storslagen modell som syftar p gudomlig, naturlig eller mnsklig.Finns i tv former:

-messianic; syfta till att bringa rttvisa och fred fr all framtid och frhindra nya krig. Sammanfra och frena vrlden.

- global; syftar till att ett slutgiltigt krig kommer frambringa en ny vrldsordning som inte lngre ska ge upphov till nya krig.

3. Eld, epidemi. Menar att krig r en katastrof som drabbar hela mnskligheten. Kriget r orsakat av mnniskans natur, eller av gud, eller av ett anarkistiskt internationellt system.

Finns i tv former:

etnocentrisk;krig drabbar oss, ngot som andra gr mot oss. Det enda vi kan gra frebygga den vrsta katastrofen el. att att reducera effekterna

global; krig drabbar mnniskan som grupp, inte enskilda grupper. Finns ingen ansvarig och ingen kan vinna p det. Fokus p frebyggande av krig.

Krigets funktion

Ml med krigen frutom att vinna-

Begrnsat vld, att undvika risker med ddlig utgng. Att f omedelbar vinst (immediate gain) kan rra ekonomiska, skerhetsmssiga och psykologiska frdelar/vinster. Att frsvara politiska oppositionella, behver inte endast fienden, utan de som ev. kan tnkas vara p dennes sida.

Trender in bevpnade konflikter i efterkrigstid

Efter 70-talets minskade antalet interstate/inhemska konfilkter. Avskaffandet av kolonier har gjort att stridigeter minsat Slutet p kalla kriget, ett avsteg frn att fr indirekta krig i tredje vrlden. kad populritet fr globala normer som frbjuder anvndandet av militrmakt i mnskliga relationer. Minskat antal ddade in strid. kad frekomst av icke-statliga konflikter (frmst i Afrika) Frndringar av var (geografiskt) sett i var krigen utspelar sig. Vem kmpar mot vem? Vem dr?

Frutom stater finns ven internationella organisationer som NATO, UN, EU etc. Barnsoldater, har kat. kat antal civila ddas. Det strsta antalet som ddas nutida konflikter r indirekta ddsoffer. Dessa offer r svrast att finna dokumentation fr. kat antal bistndsarbetare ddas.

Frndras krigsfringens natur?

Diskussion finns kring om globaliseringen har gett upphov till nya sorters krigsfring, ochom de industrialiserade demokratiska lnder i vst utkmpar en ny sorts kring n de gjort tidigare.

Idn om totala krig.

Nr ett krig vl startar eskalerar det, och blir svrt om inte omjligt att kontrollera.Totala kring r nstintill omjliga att utfra i praktiken, begrnsningar r verkligheten. Andra vrldskriget och Vietnamkriget r enda exempel.Ekonomiska frutsttningar att bedriva kriget bli avgrande.

Debatten om nya krig

Nya krig

Organiserad brottslighet: Vld frn privata aktrer/frsamlingar, ofta i syfte att fr finansiella vinster. Storskaligt vld p mnskliga rttigheter: Vld frn stat el. privata grupper mot individer/civila.

Gamla krig Traditionellt krig: Vld mellan stat och organiserad politiska grupper el. politisk rrelse

Enligt M. Kaldor har grnserna mellan dessa tre typer av vld/krig blivit mer otydlig. De skiljers sig frn gamla krig genom sina ml, metoder och stt som de finansieras p. De bryter ner det statliga monopolet p vld. Mlet med striderna kan frklaras med att man sker territorell vinning genom att utplna en etnisk grupp men annan identitet, eller som hyllar kosmopolitiska politiska ider. De bygger p ingjuta rdsla och hat snarare n heart and mind. De finansieras genom en global krigsekonomi som r decentraliserad. r svra att f slut p.

Kaldors slutsatsLsning p nya krig r att- legitimisera politiska kosmopolitiska samfund, (typ FN) som kan- inbringa frtroende fr de statliga organisationerna,- terupprtta deras monopol p det organiserade vldet och- teruppta the rule of law.

Kaldor hnfr sig allts till en kosmopolitisk lag som utomstende parter ska tillmpa i fredsoperationer utomlands som mste innefatta ingripande p tre plan: miltra, polisira, och civila.

Nutida krig

Nutida krig bygger p:- inga globala underliggande konflikter.- vstlndsk definition av fiende- handlar inte lngre om en rivaliserande stat och dess befolkning, utan om en srskild regim el. ledare.- civila ses inte som legitima ml, istllet vill man minimera indirekt skada.

Finns en sikt om att The golbal war on terror har ersatt det tidigare Kalla kriget som en global konflikt som frstrker och inblandar lokala konflikter.Acceptans av ddsoffer i stridFinns en trend i minskad acceptans av frluster av soldatliv i strid, detta kan bero p att mnga krig p senaste tiden har varit frivilliga krig dr motivet har varit att hjlp till att infra liberala frhllande i landet. Dr det handlar om att krnan i nationella skerhets intressen str p spel r acceptansen fr mnskliga frluster mycket hgre. gender differentiated understandings and impacts of security on women and men security is constituted in part through gender gender permeates all aspects of international peace and security feminists are not agreed on one theoretical perspective, rather feminist thinking approaches political questions using a variety of theoretical lenses

Feminist approaches in international security kap. 8

Liberal feminists focus on equality womens representation within the public sphere Radical Feminists focus less on notions of equality focus more on notions of difference women and men are different men are less able to express emotion, are more aggressive, more competitive women are more nurturing, more holistic, less abstract power of men over women and their bodies supported by structure of society (patriarchy) privilege of masculine norms other approaches Feminist critical theory examines prevailing assumptions about both women and men What is to be a man or woman? norm can have an enormous impact on men Postcolonial feminist theorists imperialism constitutes one of the crucial moments, or processes, through which modern identities in all of their guises become established gender is not only about individual identity or what a society teaches us a man or woman, boy or girl should be like. Gender is also a way of structuring relations of power Hence it is the meanings and characteristics culturally associated with masculinity that make it appear natural and just for men to have the power to govern their families and their societies.

Women, gender and security: The impacts of armed conflict

differential impact of armed conflict on women and girls as compared to men and boys they are assumed to be impacted only directly by war women do not merely take up the invisible jobs associated with supporting fighting forces; they are regularly and directly impacted by the violence of armed conflict itself sexual violence during wartime as a systematic weapon of war also killed and maimed can also be sexually and physically exploited by those sent to protect them most formal acknowledgements of womens experiences during wartime tend to reproduce very stereotypical assumptions about women affected by economic impact struggle for continued access to health care sexual violence is also used against men and boys

Women, gender and security: Action and activism

women also regularly take up arms and commit acts of violence in war usually not seen as combatants -> greater freedom in organizing informal peace campaigns they are usually ignored when formal peace processes begin men are presumed to have held power and decision making authority the assumption of men as combatants - or at the very least able to take care of themselves - has resulted in their exposure to greater dangers and levels of violence during armed conflict The assumption of mens activity in conflict is what may impact their insecurity when conflict is ongoing, but is also what ensures a place at the table when the formal efforts to bring a conflict to an end are underway women and men can both be active in wars the prevailing understanding and assumptions about women and men in conflict - whatever their actual experience - can significantly shape and limit those experiences in both profoundly positive and negative ways.Women, gender and security: Talking and making weapons and war

the language used by defence planners can draw attention away from the real implications (e.g. collateral damage) or sexualizing weapons makes them appear more controllable by symbolically equating them with womens bodies When linked to notions of manliness, the decision to choose nuclear weapons is characterized as natural. Are any of the key actors motivated by a desire to appear manly in the eyes of their own principal allies or adversaries? The expectation that the terrorist attack on the US demanded a swift and manly response was simultaneously linked to a sudden concern for the plight of Afghan women. we will dehumanize them, depicting the women of Afghanistan as uncivilized and in need of saving At the heart of all fundamentalist agenda is the control of womens minds and bodies combats are only the tip of the iceberg Militarism is a continuum that involves not only the moments in which acts of violence or conflict erupt, but also the large machineries of war that function in a constant state of readiness through periods ostensibly described as peaceful. the preparedness for war usually goes much deeper in any given society and involves also the ways in which militarized activities or practices become normalized in everyday life preparing a society for war is both highly gendered and is as central a part of war making and conflict as is the production of weapons and amassing armies.

Security is conceived as a process of (in)securitization driven by competition among multiple actors to police the line between security and insecurity -> creation of obedience among population -> legitimize practices of coercion, surveillance information gathering and the drawing of personal profiles simultanously constructivist and empiricist

An international political sociology of security

The right question is not what security means, but what security does Security = process of (in)securitization actors claim that their practices provide security -> acceptance permanent struggle among actors: refusal to accept these claims competition to determine what security is and what insecurity and what fate If security is meant to be about reassurance, protection and giving certainty about the future, the process at work shows that this is never the case. Rather, security creates unease, uncertainty, and new struggles, at whatever scale the security claim is launched.

Uncertainty kap. 10Introduction:

Security dilemma: governments can never be 100% sure about those able to harm them= situation of unresolvable uncertainty ambiguous symbolism of weapons: difficulty to distinguish between offensive and defensive weapons defensive weapons combined with offensive weapons become offensive Security dilemma First level predicament: dilemma of interpretation about the motives, intentions and capabilities of others(Is their military defensive or offensive?) Second level predicament: dilemma of response about the most rational way of responding(How to react to seemingly offensive military?) => security paradox: response creates spiral of mutual hostility, when neither wanted it the Other Minds Problem (Butterfield): inability of decision-makers to get fully into the minds of their counterparts-> unresolvable uncertainty The interaction of the ambiguous symbolism of weaponry and the Other Minds Problem helps ensure that politics among states takes place under the shadow of the certainty of uncertainty.The quintessential dilemmaSecurity dilemma:If uncertainty and and fear logically exist at the best of times in relations between states - when all the parties hold weapons only for self-protection, but cannot effectively signal this to others - then can there ever be any hope that humans can live together in a more peaceful world?-> politics as war system=> quintessential dilemma in international politics

Three logicsabout the security dilemma

1. Fatalist logic: Security competition can never be escaped- human nature to search for security, primordial- international anarchy: mistrust -> relations between states competitive, violent, insecure -> maximize (military) power, states as rational egoists- security against others(-> offensive realism: great powers strive for hegemony -> to be secure, act aggressive)

1. Mitigator logic: Security competition can be dampened but never eliminated- anarchy does not have to lead to conflict- security with others2. Transcender logic: human society is self-constitutive, not determined-> Security competition can be overcome-> A global community of peace and trust is in principle possible- successful politics of trust building- e.g. concept of security community (as in Europe): integration, expectation of peaceful change, war has become unthinkable

Security dilemma sensibility: perceive and respond to complex military intentions of others understand the role of fear understand that own actions might provoke fear

The security dilemma in the twenty-first century

1. The danger of a new cold war with China:a. instabilities posed by power transitions between rising and falling powersb. mistrust concerning missile defences and the weaponization of spacec. Consequently, under fatalist logic, there is no prospect of Sino-US cooperation in preventing space from becoming weaponized.2. The danger of new arms races3. The danger of a world of many nuclear powers4. The danger of terrorism

War kap. 13Three philosophies of war

1. political philosophy of war war as an act of violence intended to compel our opponent to fulfil our will (Clausewitz) war as a rational, national and instrumental activity2. eschatological philosophy of war teleological view of history -> final war -> grand design (new, peaceful world order)(e.g. Crusaders, Communism, Christianity)3. cataclysmic philosophy of war war as a catastrophy that befalls some portion of humanity or the entire human race (Rapoport) punishment of God, human nature, anarchic international system

New wars: Is Clausewitz political philosophy still relevant? new concept of battlefield: western cities (9/11) war on terror (the long war)-> world wide battlefield in future: militarization of space urban areas adoption of eschatological philosophies to justify war (war on terror) thread of nuclear weapons: a mutual suicide pact between the states involved terrorist spectaculars without specific demands military forces are often indistinguishable from the local population -> can not easily be eliminated

The functions of war

limit violence immediate gain (economic, improved safety, psychological) weakening political opposition

Defining war

cultural: war is always an expression of culture, often a determinant of cultural forms, in some societies the culture itself (Keegan) legal: the legal condition which equally permits two or more hostile groups to carry on a conflict by armed forces (Wright) parties can be legally in a state of war without overt violence occuring between them political: Clausewitz: a particular type of political activity involving violence Hedley Bull: violence is not war unless it is carried out in the name of a political unit violence carried out in the name of a political unit is not war unless it is directed against another political unit sociological: warfare consumes and reworks social and political orders a full spectrum social phenomenon

Trends in armed conflicts since 1945

1. decline of interstate armed conflicts, increase of intrastate conflicts2. decline of the number of intrastate armed conflicts since 1992 end of colonialism end of Cold War increased level of international activism (UN) increased popularity of global norms that proscribe the use of military force in human relationships3. decline in battle deaths4. trend towards non-state armed conflicts5. shifting regional spread of armed conflicts (the combat areas have changed)

Armed Conflicts (Box 13.3)

1. State-based armed conflicts are those in which a government is one of the warring parties. There are four variants: Interstate armed conflict occurs between two or more states. Intrastate armed conflict occurs between the government of a state and internal opposition groups. These conflicts are further sub-divided into: civil wars, which are fought for control of an existing government; state-formation/secessionist conflicts, which are fought between a government and a territorially-focused opposition group that is seeking to redraw the borders of the existing state. Internationalized intrastate armed conflict occurs between the government of a state and internal opposition groups but with additional intervention from other states in the form of troops. Extrastate armed conflict occurs between a state and a non-state group outside that state's territory.

2. Non-state armed conflicts are those where organized, collective armed violence occurs but where a recognized government is not one of the parties. Examples might include violent intercommunal conflicts or fighting between warlords and clans.

The new wars debate13.4 COMMON HYPOTHESES IN THE NEW WARS LITERATURE Hypothesis 1: An essential characteristic of 'new wars' is the progressive erosion of the state's monopoly on the use of force. Consequently, traditional distinctions between combatants and civilians become increasingly blurred.

Hypothesis 2: New wars' are driven by economic aspirations with political or ideological motivations playing only a minor role. This political economy of 'new wars' reinforces and perpetuates the violence.

Hypothesis 3: 'New wars' are characterized by asymmetry involving the constellation of (a) actors, (b) military capabilities, (c) the methods of warfare and (d) the politics of war.

Hypothesis 4: 'New wars' are driven by exclusive conceptions of identity, which are instrumentalized for the purpose of seizing political power. These forms of 'identity politics' are unfolding in the context of the erosion of state structures and the insecurities of globalization.

Hypothesis 5: The new forms of international terrorism represent a modern variant of guerrilla warfare but unlike traditional guerrilla warfare, this new kind of terrorism poses a strategic challenge to Western societies.The contemporary Western way of war

wars waged by Western states are restricted to a particular place in conduct and impact no global conflict definitions of the enemy have changed from the opposing state and its citizens to a particular regime or leader civilians are no longer seen as a legitimate target -> minimize collateral damage debate: global war on terror has replaced the Cold War as a global conflict into which local conflicts are increasingly connected western wars dont involve high levels of social participation -> professional representatives relatively small number of casualties low tolerance of casualties wars of choice rather than wars of survival spectator-sport wars: expeditionary enemy is the leadership/regime rather than the whole society minimize collateral damage force protection as priority (out of political and economic interests) importance of airpower

Security studies kap. 14

Coercion

Introduktionr ett evigt nrvarande fenomen i sociala och politiska sammanhang. I det hr kapitlet behandlas tvng /coercion som ett stt att f den andra att gra ngot mot sin vilja eller att avst frn att gra ngot som den avser gra.

ConclusionStudier om tvng tar fsta p hotens roll i internationell politik. Det utmrkande draget r att objektet alltid anses ha ett val, men mste vga valet med kostnaderna fr att samarbeta och att inte samarbeta. Det r en frhandlingssituation som kan leda till att objektet fr mjlighet att hota den frtryckande aktren.

Frhandlingen kommer allts att handla om vad som r acceptabelt samarbete och till vilket pris tvng ska utvas, eller till vilket pris objektet ska motsttas frtryckarens vilja.

Bde inhemska och internationella politiska sammanhan kommer att pverka strategin fr de frtryckande/tvingande och vilken fljder.

Alla tvngshandlingar bygger p ngon typ av antagande och frntningar p den andres beteende. Detta i sig r grunden i alla relationer inom internationell politk.

En viktig aspekt av tvng r ocks hur staters strategiska uppfattning formas av miljn och hur mottagliga de r fr manipulation frn andra tvngsstrategier.

StrategiStrategi r det kreativa elementet fr att kunna utva makt. Strategi bygger p vetskapen och fljderna av sina val, och andras val och hur deras val kan begrnsa el. bidra till ens egna val och intressen.

Consensual strategi- att f igenom sin vilja genom samtycke som inte bygger p tvng. Controlling strategi- att anvnda tvng fr att begrnsa den andres strategiska val. Coersice strategi (strategis coercion)- medvetet och ndamlsenlig anvndning av hot fr att pverka den andres strategiska val.

Avskrckande/deterrence och tvingande/uppmanande (compellence)

Deterrence- att tydligra sina krav/hot och sedan invnta att objektet tar det frbjudna steget. Hotet kan freligga under obegrnsat tid. Vill bevara den rdande situationen.

Compellence- att ta initiativ som endast blir skadligt om objektet svarar p det, att gra intrng tills det att objektet svarar och frst d agera tvngsmssigt. Mste finnas en dead-line eftersom hotet annars blir irrelevant. Vaga krav.

Skillnaden mellan dessa r inte vattentt och det kan skifta frn det ena till det andra.

Genocide ka.p 17Lemkin:a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. [...]

the total physical extermination is not primary

Genocide ConventionArticle II. In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:(a) Killing members of the group;(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

a right to genocide was observed in the domestic practice of states. The guiding understanding of security was the security of states and their leaders - not that of the security of the civilian populations whose putative guardians were often their worst persecutors.

Crimes against humanity

broader than genocide, open ended

BOX 17.1 CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY AS DEFINED BYTHE ROME STATUTE OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURTFor the purpose of this Statute, 'crime against humanity' means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack: (a) Murder; (b) Extermination; (c) Enslavement; (d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population; (e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law; (f) Torture; (g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity; (h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law; (i) Forced disappearance of persons; (j) The crime of apartheid; (k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.

Kap 18. Etniska konflikter

Ethnic groups: distinguish in language, religion, race Differences are not natural but socially constructed Violence most likely when weak government myth symbol complexes lead to hostility fear for survival of their group

Examples: civil wars in Sudan, Pakistan / Bangladesh, Rwanda, Bosnia, Nigeria

What is ethnic conflict?

ethnic group as defined by Anthony Smith: common name believed common descent shared culture (most often language, religion) common historical memories attachment to particular territory Three views of ethnicity: primordial / natural: ancient hatred -> impossible to eradicate and nearly impossible to manage ethnic conflict instrumental: not primordial but used by selfish rulers and followed by people when it is in their interest (or when they are mislead) most people have multiple identities identities can change socially constructed: not natural but just a matter of custom, invented traditions: myth symbol complex: mythicize real history to fit a group -> defines who is a member and who is not, identifies heroes and enemies and glorifies symbols of identity A conflict is ethnic only if the sides involved are distinguished primarily on the basis of ethnicity.Causes of violent ethnic conflict

Three main factors for deadly ethnic riots (psychological) hostile ongoing relationship authoritative social support: assured by public statements by community leaders stimulus that provokes fear, rage, or hatred or with focus on social organization: institutionalized riot systems community activists and extremist organizations benefit from keeping tensions high politicians benefit from occasional violence criminals and thugs can profit from it Ethnic civil wars: social psychology approaches symbolic politics theory: myth symbol complex -> hostility Politicians are able to appeal to these symbols and raise emotions against the enemy if the group is convinced of being in danger, they can be persuaded to back extreme measures that are justified as self-defence social mobilization approaches leadership roles social organization through already existing networks peoples social networks tend to be mostly within their ethnic group instrumentalist approaches opportunity for rebels to act through weak governments, large populations and inaccessible terrain extremist leaders stir up ethnic disagreements and provoke violence extremist media -> presenting news in terms of us against them and promote and validate claims to unite against the enemyInternational security dimensions of ethnic conflicts

ethnic conflicts transcend national boundaries with diaspora groups creation of refugees focus of international diplomacy when diplomacy is not enough, international actors sometimes resort to sending peacekeepers violent intervention, either directly or indirectlyResolution of ethnic civil wars

One view compromise settlement power-sharing regional autonomy for minority groups Another view ethnic civil wars end only when one side wins either repressed by military or own separate state by partitioning the country compromise deal (but often collapses later) conflict ripe for resolution? -> negotiations best succeed when the conflict reaches a hurting stalemate: neither side seems likely to win but both sides are suffering Power-sharing solution

Kap. 19

Three conceptions of human security:1. natural rights / rule of law view basic individual rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness international obligation to protect and promote these rights2. humanitarian view deepen and strengthen international law need to restore basic human rights and dignity3. broader view include economic, environmental, social and other forms of harm to the overall livelihood and wellbeing of individuals critique: making everything a priority renders nothing a priority (Khong)

Definition of human security: negatively: the absence of threats to various core human values, including the most basic human value, the physical safety of the individual positive: to protect the vital core of all human freedoms and human fulfilment (Commission on Human Security) King and Murray: the number of years of future life spent outside the state of generalized poverty

Deabtes: relationship between globalization and human security - or insecurity raises world incomes and contributes to spread of wealth widens income inequalities between the worlds richest and poorest countries new dangers to human security (public health)

Human security and failed states: new threats include organized crime and trafficking, civil unrest due to global economic shocks and terrorism

The dilemmas of humanitarian intervention: Should force be used in support of particular human security objectives? What is the proper hierarchy of humanitarian goals and international norms of state sovereignty and non-intervention? Can it be right to do violence against civilians and if so, when? What are tolerable degrees of collateral damage? What constitutes a just was? Challenge to traditional notions of democratization, civil society development and peacebuilding: liberal democracy and economic liberalization by themselves will not suffice to ensure human security

Human security risk assessment: Three explanations for organized violence: group-based inequalities as a source of conflict, based on creed private gains, conflicts are driven by greed failed social contract thesis, conflicts are about needs not absolute, but relative poverty matters most -> development strategies must also address inequalities that divide societies (e.g. through redistribution)

Towards a theory of human security: IR inhospitable to human security approaches Constructivism shares fundamental assumptions, e.g. that threats are constructed, not inevitable and that they can be altered or mitigated some feminist approaches explicitly call for political action and focus on familiar human security issues

Kap 23 Alliance advancing states interests enhancing state security external and sometimes internal means to achieving the ends of states: internal and external efforts important determinant in the outbreak, spread and result of militarized conflicts

What is an alliance?

variety of definitions definition may not include all forms of security arrangements Alliances are outward oriented: improve security against external parties Collective Security Arrangements are inward oriented: improve security among parties e.g. Snyder: Alliances are formal associations of states for the use (or nonuse) of military force, in specified circumstances, against states outside their own membership [...] [t]heir primary function is to pool military strength against a common enemy, not to protect alliance members from each other.Alliance persistance

the average duration was 13.4 years defensive alliances with no offensive component have tended to last nearly twice as long on average as those with an offensive componentTheories of Alliance formation

International Determinants balanced-power theory: states form alliances to balance power of other states especially when they are not able to do so themselves or when it is too expensive weak states will ally when confronted with a much more powerful state until alliance no longer required to balance power states form alliances in response to common threats geographical proximity offensive capabilities aggressiveness of intentions Domestic Determinants other things being equal, states will tend to ally with states whose political orientations are similar to their own similarities in culture, ideologies, political institutions similar value systems -> common interests and common interpretation of what constitutes a threat weak regimes might enhance legitimacy alliance might immediately brake when regime change, revolution, ...

Ch 26 Counterinsurgency Joanna Spear (Summary: Pauline GG)

Intro: The current discourse on counterinsurgencyOngoing campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan: raise q in America: how to defeat 'determined but illusive' opponents in challenging environment where superior technology is not an answer.'Vietnam syndrome': fear of politicians of losing American lives in futile overseas operations, has a new aspect: recent 'discovery' of counterinsurgency because in Iraq Bush thought he would be welcomed as a liberator. So, no planning for post-conflict reconstruction

death of American troops also raises the issue American amnesia on counterinsurgency after Vietnam process of relearning counterinsurgency need for soldiers to be autonomous there : this runs against traditional military practice (cf hierarchy)

Definition:Insurgency: 'organized movement aimed at overthrow of a constituted gvt through the use of subversion and armed conflict' (def of the NATO, British and US military doctrine)

Counterinsurgency: (def NATO+ br doctrine) 'those military, paramilitary, political, economic, psychological, and civic actions taken to defeat insurgency'US def: 'those military taken by a government'

The state of the fieldCounterinsurgency scholar-practitioners : T.E. Lawrence 'Lawrence of Arabia', Roger Trinquier (Algrie, counterinsurgency)...

The problem that counterinsurgency responds to insurgencyinsurgency: old form of violence (from Roman Empire, French resistance).Starting point of counterinsurgency with late colonial insurgenciesinsurgent tactics: no direct challenge to the state, hard to detect. Response of the gvt: mass punishment of population counter-effectso, dvt of knowledge to deal with insurgent tactics

D.Kilcullen: scholar-practitioner: identifies different kind of insurgencies. Today, in Iraq, Afghanistan..., insurgent is not necessarily the revolutionary force but they fight to preserve the status quo. Insurgents are nowadays in the local population, providing them food in exchange of services.

Complexity of insurgencies: fight against external occupiers but also among local groups: counterinsurgencies can thus create alliances with some local forces. Limit: alliance not guaranteed

'Hearts and minds'successful counterinsurgency has to win the support of the local population'Hearts and minds' Gerald Templer. Real battle: ex Soviet Union lost its popularity in Afghanistan

The role of military force in counterinsurgencyRobert Thompson, Five Principles of Counterinsurgency:

1. the gvt has a clear political aim: establish and maintain a free, independent and united country. Viable economy and politics

1. the gvt acts in accordance with the law2. the gvt must have a plan

1. give priority to defeating political subversion2. if guerrilla, a gvt must secure its base areas first

but, important point: try not using forceD.Galula: ideal counterinsurgency: 80% political, 20% military

yet, failure of planning of reconstruction (ex: Iraq: use of military force is counter-productive, no support of the local pop)

Learning on the groundKilcullen: ' the nature of counterinsurgency is not fixed but shifted', because 'it evolves in responses to changes in insurgency' gvt must allow forces on the ground to use their best judgements in responding the situations 'strategic corporals'hard for the US, very hierarchical need and effort to transform the US military, to undertake a 'Revolution in Military Affairs' (RMA)

What difference does it make to be doing counterinsurgency in the media age?Press is a weapon. Hard to controlchallenge: everything done by the counterinsurgent is observed

Similarities to post-conflict peacebuildingcomparisons between counterinsurgency operations and post-conflict peacebuilding:

ideal ratio force/ non-violence is the same stand up and support weak gvts focus on the knowledge level more than the strategic level tendency to apply 'standard models' both learn from the past (UN/ USA failures) mix of actors involved in the operations: NGOs, international org, private firms, military and civilian authorities

ConclusionWhat is victory? 'In modern counterinsurgency, victory may need to be re-defined as the disarming and reintegration of insurgents into society, combined with popular support for permanent, institutionalized anti-terrorist measures that contain the risk of terrorist cells emerging from the former insurgent movement' Kilcullen

Security studies kap. 29

Den internationella vapenhandeln

Abstract

Det hr kapitlet beahndlar dynamiken av den globala vapenhandeln, och hur den har frndrats sedan slutet av Kalla kriget, och gick in en ny era efter 9/11 attackerna.

Frsljning av omfattande stridsutrustning innebr fortfarande en utmaning fr relationerna mellan stater. Men eftersom antalet konflikter som utkmpas inom stater blivit vanligare n vpnade konflikter mellan stater har ocks frsljning och spridning av mindre och lttare vapen (SALW) kat.

I en era av osymetrisk krigsfring har frgan om massfrsrelsevapen s som krnvapen, kemiska och biologiska vapen blivit ett allt strre bekymmer att hantera.

Kapitlet frsker spra politiska, ekonomiska och strategiska faktorer fr att frklara tre stndpunkter av vapenhandel: Major combat system, small arm, and teknik anpassad fr att bygga krnvapen.

The impacts of exported weapons depend on the forces driving the trade and the circumstances under which they are used. changed dynamics: Cold War - War on Terror rationales for trade: geopolitics (cementing relations with key strategic allies), geoeconomics (securing weapons deals to subsidize own weapon industry)Three channels for arms transfers

1. trade in major systems: e.g. combat aircraft, tanks, warships2. trade in small arms and light weapons (SALW): e.g. shoulder fired missiles3. trade in dual use items with both civilian and military applications: e.g. shotguns, unarmed helicopters, equipment for manufacturing weapons

drivers of trade: economics

revenues and profits for military firms contribute to balance of trade provide jobs in importing and exporting state politics and security

SALW: easy to maintain and transport relatively cheap hard to track -> weapons of choice for non-state groups in modern wars (terrorists, militias, ) access gained through: theft or purchase from government forces taking advantage of lax local gun laws black market on a global scaleArms sales take off: The 1970s and 1980sincrease in arms trade driven by two major factors:1. geopolitical (most important): promote US interests around the world without military intervention as in Vietnam -> Nixon Doctrine (president Richard Nixon): armament of regional allies to protect security interests rather than sending US troops2. economic incentives: strengthen US economyPost-Cold War dynamics

economic motives moved to the forefront Clinton administration: importance of weapons exports to support the US defense industrial base Jobs for AmericaPost-9/11 arms exports

human rights and nonproliferation restrictions on sales increased military aid (states to receive US military aid doubled, including undemocratic regimes) explicit armament of repressive governmentsProspects of restraints

consideration of ways to mark and trace weapons so that arms involved in conflicts and human rights abuses can be traced to their source countries

Kap. 30Counterterrorism:Combating international terrorism: dissuading individuals from joining terrorist groups dissuading groups from using terrorism reducing the capability of terrorist groups erecting physical defences against terrorist attacks mitigating the effects of attacksThrough: diplomacy intelligence financial controls criminal justice systems military forceRaising policy issues about: other values, esp. personal liberty and privacy

Introduction

counterterrorism since the end of the 19th century terrorist attacks in the US in 1970s without public alarm

Basic elements

Different approaches linked to conception of roots of terrorism: living conditions conflicts as source of rage allure of extremist ideologies -> reduce the motivation for individuals to join terrorist groups A government may promote political and social change to weaken roots of terrorism as well as waging a battle of ideas against extremist ideologies. (-> not exclusive approaches) Shaping the incentives for groups to use peaceful rather than violent means to pursue their objectives negotiated resolution incident management: mitigate the effects once a terrorist incident occurs weaken the will of the terrorists while avoiding harm to hostages communication with the public: limit public attention use of force to rescue hostages trend to use direct and unprovoked collateral killing of innocent people instead of hostage taking -> emergency responses efforts to curb the ability of terrorists to conduct attacksDefenceDifferent level of defensive strategies: protection of individual sites security provided to entire systems (e.g. civil aviation) protection of an entire country by keeping terrorists outside the borders

Strategies: direct prevention of attempted terrorist attack complicating terrorists planning -> more time to detect them

Limitations: expensive not everything can be protected self-negating aspect: terrorists choose where to attack -> attacks where security is weakGoing on the offensiveTools: diplomacy: cooperation with other governments multilateral: creating a worldwide climate that recognizes terrorism as a shared problem bilateral: cooperation between involved states financial control: freezing of terrorist assets extremely hard to detect ineffective: most terrorism is cheap intelligence: uncover enough details about next major terrorist plot to enable authorities to roll the plot up before it can be executed that hope is largely misplaced successes will always be rare more strategic sense of terrorist threats: increasing or decreasing activities? help to guide policymaking collection and analysis of information on terrorist organizations and infrastructures, enabling them to be disruptedLaw enforcement and military force

crime or war? Terrorists clearly commit crimes (such as murder), while their political objectives give them something in common with warfare and distinguish their actions from non-political crimes motivated by greed or passion. -> criminal prosecution or military force?Issues and debates

conflict with liberty and privacy Liberty: denial of access to formerly public places in the interest of security Privacy: collection of data on individuals to idetify possible terrorists

Increase in international population movements: matter of concern to at least two and sometimes more states rapid population growth globalization: revolution in communication and transportation turmoil and uncertainty motivate people to move, escape, search for a better life Migration can be economically beneficial to both sending and receiving countries and for the migrant.

Security concern

9/11 -> Western focus on immigration as a possible security threat -> control and management of population movements Problems caused turn civil wars into international conflicts spread of ethnic conflict and civil unrest from one country to another lead to conflict, including wars can facilitate terrorism economic hardship and increase in competition for scarce resources

Refugees become minorities in statesPopulation movements categorized

involuntary or forced: refugee movements voluntary or free: economic migration legal permanent settler migration (settlers) legal temporary migration (movements for education, business, tourism, employment) illegal migration

Box 34.1 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees no state should return refugees to a state where their life or liberty might be in danger universal definition of refugees codification of the rights of refugees minimum standards for the treatment of refugees without discriminiation

Population movements and violent conflict

Often, receiving states get involved in the conflict in the sending state, threatening to arm or actually arming the refugees; and sometimes deploying their own armed forces.Population movements and foreign policy

Their continued political involvement in states in which they no longer live, and whose laws they are not subject to, presents a serious challenge to the sovereignty of that state. By the same token, they challenge the ability of host states to exercise independent control over the direction of their own foreign and domestic policy. maintain strong connection to home countries -> turbulences there find expression within the migrant community raise attention of the world raise funds within their diaspora community -> financial support to forces or victims in home country get support from host government and population

Population movement and internal security

long lasting social effects on receiving countries: society becomes multicultural social concerns - threat to nation-states challenge traditional notions of membership of a state, the meaning of nationality and citizenship, and the rights and duties of citizens towards their state economic burden on society perceived to be criminals and carriers of diseases concerns about the costs of welfare provision to migrants, particularly asylum seekers and refugees hostility when perceived as threat to the culture or way of life, especially when large numbers arrive or when they are seen as not integrating

Conclusion

number of migrants will increase due to ongoing conflicts and globalization divided world