Begrepp frn

Security studies

Polarity
Introduction

powers

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

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
WarInledning
Krig 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 krigsfilosofier
1. Politiska
2. Eskatologiska
3. 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 vinnaBegrnsat 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, och
om 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 slutsats
Lsning 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
strid
Finns 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.

Uncertai
nty kap. 10
Introduction:
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 dilemma
Security 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 logics
about 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 others
2. 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
powers
b. mistrust concerning missile defences and the weaponization of
space
c. Consequently, under fatalist logic, there is no prospect of Sino-US
cooperation in preventing space from becoming weaponized.
2. The danger of new arms races
3. The danger of a world of many nuclear powers
4. The danger of terrorism

War kap.
13
Three 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 activity
2. 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 conflicts
2. 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 relationships
3. decline in battle deaths
4. trend towards non-state armed conflicts
5. 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

debate

13.4 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
Introduktion
r 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.

Conclusion
Studier 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.

Strategi
Strategi 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/deterr
ence 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
17
Lemkin:
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 Convention
Article 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 BY

THE ROME STATUTE OF
THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT
For 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 selfdefence
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
enemy

International
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 indirectly

Resolution 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 rights
2. humanitarian view
deepen and strengthen international law
need to restore basic human rights and dignity
3. 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 component

Theories 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 counterinsurgency
Ongoing 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'

practitioners : T.E.
counterinsurgency)...

Lawrence

'Lawrence

of

Arabia',

The state of the field

Counterinsurgency scholarRoger Trinquier (Algrie,

The

problem

that

counterinsurgency responds to insurgency

insurgency:

old

form

Starting

point

of

violence (from Roman Empire, French resistance).

of

counterinsurgency with late colonial insurgencies

insurgent tactics: no
direct challenge to the state, hard to detect. Response of the gvt: mass punishment
of population counter-effect
so, dvt of knowledge to
deal with insurgent tactics
D.Kilcullen:
scholarpractitioner: 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 counterinsurgency
Robert

Thompson,

Five

Principles of Counterinsurgency:
1.

1.

the gvt has a clear political aim: establish and maintain a free,
independent and united country. Viable economy and politics
the gvt acts in accordance with the law

2.

the gvt must have a plan

1.
2.

give priority to defeating political subversion

if guerrilla, a gvt must secure its base areas first
but, important point: try not

using force
D.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 ground
Kilcullen: ' 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
control
challenge: everything done
by the counterinsurgent is observed
Similarities

to

post-

conflict peacebuilding
comparisons

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
Conclusion
What 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 antiterrorist 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, warships
2. trade in small arms and light weapons (SALW): e.g. shoulder fired missiles
3. 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 scale

Arms sales
take off: The 1970s and 1980s
increase 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 troops
2. economic incentives:
strengthen US economy

Post-Cold War

dynamics
economic motives moved to the forefront
Clinton administration: importance of weapons exports to support the US defense
industrial base
Jobs for America

Post-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 governments

Prospects 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. 30
Counterterrorism:
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 attacks

diplomacy
intelligence
financial controls
criminal justice systems
military force

Through:

Raising 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 attacks

Defence
Different 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 weak

Going on the
offensive
Tools:

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 disrupted

Law
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 nonpolitical 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 states

Population
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