Block 1 February March 2017

Security in Historical Tuesdays, 15:00-18:00 - WIJNHAVEN 306

Instructors: Constant Hijzen &

Perspective Liesbeth van der Heide

E-Mail: c.w.hijzen@fgga.leidenuniv.nl
e.j.van.der.heide@fgga.leidenuniv.nl
Crisis & Security Management Office: Wijnhaven, Room 4.02, Turfmarkt 99
Office Hours: Appointment by e-mail

Overview Materials
This course introduces students to questions of security and focuses on how security can Reading materials consist of articles and
be approached from different perspectives and how security is important in defining the book chapters, all of which can be
political boundaries of our (international) society. Beyond the different approaches that accessed through Leiden Universitys
will be engaged with during the course - from human security to securitization or from online library.
Realism to Constructivism - the course focuses on specific issues, like migration,
development, nuclear proliferation, political violence or surveillance, in order to
historicize security issues from the 19th and 20th century until today. Course format
Weekly classes will be dedicated to
lectures, discussion, and group work.
Course objectives Students are required to participate
After completing the course the student will be able to: actively in class discussion. Attendance is
Understand how the idea of security as a states objective and prerogative emerged mandatory.
and how it changed over time, since the 19th century up until the present
Explain major historical developments in security thinking and practices
Operate theoretical and critical concepts to better understand evolving security Midterm written exam
practices
Historicize security: they have acquainted themselves with some crucial security [Friday 24 February]
breaches, incidents, failures, and shifts in modern European history The midterm written exam will be based
Autonomously collect, interpret, and analyze primary and secondary source on the literature and the content of the
materials lectures.
Conduct an independent analysis of historical or present day security practices by
writing a scientific paper based upon the concepts and theories adopted in this
course Final paper

Requirements [Friday 24 March]

Students are required to read primary materials, conduct research on security issues and The final paper should pose a question
adopt the concepts and theoretical perspectives provided in the course to their work. that is answered through the analysis of
The course requires a significant amount of reading and participation in class is primary and secondary source evaluation.
impossible in the absence of prior preparation. Readings that were not directly covered Central to the essay is the effort of
in class could appear in the midterm. Students are expected to demonstrate familiarity historicizing a security related topic.
with the literature as part of any written course assignment.

Evaluation
Midterm written exam (40%) and final paper (60%).

Crisis & Security Management 1

Security in Historical Perspective

Introduction
What does security mean and when did it emerge as object of unified, centralized state policy? Scholars of international security
have traditionally focused on the four Ss: the State (as the main provider of security), Strategy (as the main goal of studying
security), Science (as the underlying foundation for attaining security) and Status Quo (as the balance of power to maintain).
However, the field has moved from a narrow focus on war to a broader conception of security including other forms of
organized violence, such as terrorism. In this course we will historicize the practices and concept of security, embed various
security thoughts and philosophies in their respective timeframes and analyze its scope, object and subject, as well as its impact
on society. We will study security first of all on the level of events, including the main threats, wars, and conflicts in modern
history. Second, we will analyze how these events shaped government policies and public attitudes towards security and its
corresponding practices. Third, we will provide an overview of the main academic perspectives and theories on security
throughout history. Our focus will be on the modern era, ranging from the 19th century until the present day. In so doing, we
will try to understand how historical transformations have shaped dominant threat perceptions and security conceptions on the
level of the nation state and society as a whole. Parallel to that, the dominant ways academics have studied security will be
discussed.

The course will provide an overview of the 19th and 20th century security perspectives until today and mark the most
important events and corresponding developments in security theories and thinking. In the second part of the course we will
take a number of theoretical perspectives on security from different disciplines to shed light on a number of case studies.
We will concentrate on the West, more specifically on Europe and The Netherlands.

Students are required to read primary materials, conduct research on security issues, and adopt the concepts and theoretical
perspectives provided in the course to their work.

Attendance and participation

Since this course involves group work and class discussion, attendance is mandatory. Students are allowed to miss one class
for every subsequent class missed, a written summary of that weeks literature, guided by a research question (max. 1,000
words) should be handed in by e-mail in advance of the class. Failure will result in -1 point of the overall course grade.

Deadlines and handing in assignments

Written assignments (the final paper) are to be handed in via TurnitIn on Blackboard. The deadline for the assignments is
clearly stated in the syllabus. The cut off time for the determination of a late submission is 23.59pm; start uploading in time.

Important deadlines:

Friday 24 February 9:00-12:00, Opera Zalencentrum Midterm Written Exam

Friday 24 March 23.59pm Final Paper
Friday 16 June 13:00-16:00, Wijnhaven Resit Midterm Written Exam
Friday 23 June 23.59pm Retake Final Paper

Crisis & Security Management 2

Assessment
1. Written Exam (40%)
The midterm written exam in Week 4 will be based on the content of the lectures and the literature in the syllabus.
2. Final Paper (60%)
In week 8, students are required to hand in a referenced paper to complete this course. The paper should consist of
4000-4500 words (excluding front page, footnotes and literature list) and should be driven by a central idea or thesis
that grounds the research. The paper should pose a question, answered through the analysis of secondary source
evaluation and, if possible, primary sources as well. Central to the essay is the effort of historicizing a security related
topic. Further information will be provided during the lectures.

The grade for both the midterm written exam and the final paper needs to be 5.5 or higher in order to complete this course.

Written exam (40%)

The midterm written exam will consist of four questions related to the course contents (lectures and literature).

Final paper (60%)

In week 1, students will be assigned to groups for the final paper. Each group is required to choose a topic that is relevant to
the course (i.e. security-related). A list of topics to choose from will be provided during the course. For the group work,
students are required to do the following:

In Week 2, the groups will meet for a brainstorm session to discuss and choose a topic for the final paper. At the
end of the lecture, every group has to submit their topic to the lecturers by e-mail;
In Week 3, the groups will meet to discuss the relevant literature on the topic. Every individual student is required
to prepare for this group meeting and present at least two authors and their ideas;
In Week 4, every individual student in the group will choose a different primary source to analyze for the final
paper. This primary source should shed light on the group topic, but from a unique perspective. This requires
students to search for sources ahead of this weeks meeting;
Weeks 5-7 will be used individually by students to prepare their paper;
In week 7, every group will present their main findings in a group presentation of 10-15 minutes.

Based on the preparations in the small groups, in week 8, students are required to hand in an individual, referenced paper to
complete this course. The paper should meet the following criteria:

The paper includes an introduction, analysis, conclusion and a bibliography

The paper poses a clear research question about a topic that is relevant in light of the course content (security-
related)
In your paper, you historicize the topic that you have chosen through the analysis of (primary and) secondary source
evaluation. Preferably, a primary source is at the heart of the paper which you will subject to internal and external
criticism, and which you will contextualize and analyze in terms of the historiography.
A sound analysis based on your research question, leading to a clear conclusion
The paper should consist of 4000-4500 words

Crisis & Security Management 3

 Clearly state your name, student number, course, date and title on the first page
Font: Times New Roman 12, line spacing: 1.5
Reference style: you can use either footnotes or in-text references as long as you are consistent

Teaching staff
Dr. Constant Hijzen is an Assistant Professor in the Intelligence Studies at the Institute of Security and Global Affairs and
the Institute for History. He has published his dissertation (in Dutch) Images of the enemy: the security services and
democracy, 1912-1992 in November 2016, in which he focuses on the political, bureaucratic, and societal context of the
Dutch security services in historical perspective. His postdoctoral research focusses on the formative years of intelligence
and security services, analyzing their early institutionalization years from a comparative and intelligence culture perspective.
In addition, he teaches courses on European history, the history of intelligence and security services and intelligence
communities at the History Department, Public Administration Department, and Political Sciences Department.

Liesbeth van der Heide is a PhD Researcher and Lecturer at the Institute of Security and Global Affairs (ISGA), Leiden
University Faculty of Governance and Global Affairs (FGGA). She also works as a Research Fellow at the International
Centre for Counter-Terrorism (ICCT)- The Hague as the Project Coordinator for ICCTs activities on the rehabilitation and
reintegration of violent extremist offenders, including the development and implementation of a comprehensive modular
training course for prison officials and policy makers in South East Asia and Africa, and the development of a risk assessment
tool to identify and assess violent extremism.

Previously, she managed several research projects, including research for the Dutch National Police on lone wolf terrorism,
research for the Dutch General Intelligence and Security Services focused on a fear-based crisis communication approach, a
research project for ICCT on the Breivik trial and a project for the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice on integrity and
crime prevention.

In 2013 she was a Research Fellow at the Onati International Institute for the Sociology of Law. She is a member of the
Dutch Flemish Network for Radicalization and Terrorism Research. She holds an MA (Cum Laude) in International
Relations from Utrecht University and a BA in Political Science from the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

Crisis & Security Management 4

Weekly overview program & readings
Week 1 Tuesday 31 January The History of Security: practical matters and 1789-1848
In this introductory lecture, we will explain the contents, structure, and requirements of the course. In the second half of the
lecture we will discuss what is expected of students in this course. An overview of the course will be provided, stating the
topics and literature that will be addressed week by week. We will go through the syllabus, introduce the assignments and
present the requirements of the outline and the final paper.

In the coming lectures, we will explore a number of historical events in order to trace how and why conceptions of security
and threat perceptions (in the West) have been formed and transformed over time. The modernization process will be
central to the process changing of security. We will start with looking at the French Revolution and the Industrial
Revolution, which caused the ancien regime of Europe to fade away, making way for the modern nation state. Although the
victors of the Napoleonic Wars redrew the map of Europe at the Congress of Vienna in 1814-1815 and cancelled many
revolutionary changes, the forces of the ancien regime could not prevent that new groups came to the fore.

Due to the dual revolution, a new class of urban workers emerged (and diversified), and middle classes were expanding
and diversifying. Having gained status economically and socially, both groups demanded political participation. This conflict
burst in 1848 and although the revolutions failed in the sense that the old powers remained in charge, from then on the
responsive national state was formed. Using nationalism, rulers tried to include all groups in the new nation state.

During this process, new security conceptions and threat perceptions came to the fore. Of course, the French Revolution
itself was a violent conflict. Who were the main contenders, what were their perceptions of security and threats, whose
security was at stake, how could security be achieved? Threat perceptions and security conceptions also changed on the level
of the state: what security was, who were included in that security, and what responsibilities and government policies should
lead to security, were all subject to major changes.

The events we will explore, are the (aftermath) of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars, the European
revolutions of 1848, the rise of new ideologies in the first half of the nineteenth century, the revolutions of 1848 and the
prominence of nationalism in the second half of the nineteenth century.

Literature:

- A. Zamoyski, Phantom terror: the threat of revolution and the repression of liberty, 1789-1848 (London 2014) 157-178.
- Robert Palmer, Joel Colton and Lloyd Cramer, A History of the Modern World: Since 1815, 10th Edition, New York:
McGraw-Hill (2007), Chapter 12, Revolutions and the Reimposition of Order: 1848-1870, pp. 483-516.
- Paul Williams, Security Studies: An Introduction, Second Edition, Routledge, 2013, chapter 1, pp. 1-12.
- David A. Baldwin (1995), Security Studies and the End of the Cold War: Review Article, Princeton.

Week 2 Tuesday 7 February Nationalism in the 19th and 20th century

From there we will try to see how 19th century security conceptions transformed into 20th century ones. Except for the short
wars Bismarck waged against Denmark, Austria, and France in the 1860s and 1870-1871, the great powers managed to
confine their quarrels to Asia and Africa, where they built their colonies. From the beginning of the twentieth century,
however, tensions arose at the European continent. This led in 1914 to the outbreak of the First World War, which was
accompanied by several revolutions of great importance. In 1917 the Russian Revolution broke out, and in November 1918,

Crisis & Security Management 5

as the war was coming to an end, Germany was on the verge of collapse as well. The future of Europe was laid down in the
Versailles treatise of 1919.

These events had a large impact on security conceptions of all those involved, but on a more general level they led to the
rise of new ideas on what security should entail, who should be part of the entity that is considered worthwhile protecting
and who is considered a threat, and the idea of what should be done in order to secure the state or society as a whole. We
will answer Paul Williams questions on the level of the events and on the level of government policies and public opinion.

War and revolution changed the threat perceptions of many Western states markedly, and as the economic crisis broke out
in the early 1930s, totalitarianism grew all over Europe, manifesting itself in fascist and national socialist regimes in Italy and
Germany. The Second World War changed threat perceptions again. Although the Soviet Union and the Allied countries
had fought side by side, shortly after the war tensions arose between Stalin and the West.

Literature:

- T. Baycroft, Nationalism in Europe 1789-1945 (Cambridge 1989) pp. 24-30, 42-48, 71-81.

- Eric Hobsbawm, Nations and Nationalism Since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
(1990), Chapter 4, The Transformation of Nationalism, 1870-1918, pp. 101-130.

- Robert Palmer, Joel Colton and Lloyd Cramer, A History of the Modern World: Since 1815, 10th Edition, New York:
McGraw-Hill (2007), Chapter 20, Democracy and Dictatorship in the 1930s, pp. 795-826.

Week 3 Tuesday 14 February From the Cold War to today

Although the Soviet Union and the Allied countries had fought side by side, shortly after the war tensions arose between
Stalin and the West. The Cold War ensued, and shaped international relations and threat perceptions for several decades.
Although terrorism came to the fore already in the early 1970s, the Cold War persisted until the Berlin Wall fell in
November 1989. In the 1990s, sometimes called the holiday from history, war broke out in the Balkans. People started to
see other phenomena as threats, e.g. international drug trafficking and crime and the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The
terrorist attacks of 9/11 changed these perceptions again.

Tracing these developments, we will explore the coming about of the Cold War and the main events, such as the Prague
Coup of 1948, the Berlin blockade of 1948-1949, the Korean War (1950), the Cuban Missile Crisis (1962), and the dtente
period. New threats, such as youth and student activism and terrorism, will also be discussed, as well as end of the Cold War
and 9/11.

As in the previous lecture, we will discuss to what extent the answers to the central questions of this course (what is
security? Whose security are we talking about? What counts as a security issue? How can security be achieved?) have
changed as a consequence of these events. These ideas and perceptions will be explored on the level of the events and the
governments responses to those events.

Literature:

- Giles Scott-Smith Interdoc and West European Psychological Warfare: The American Connection, Intelligence and
National Security, 2011, 26:2-3, pp. 355-376.
- M. Sewell, The Cold War (Cambridge 2002) 130-143.
- J. Lewis Gaddis, The Cold War: a new history (New York 2005) pp. 5-47, 259-266.

Crisis & Security Management 6

Week 4 Tuesday 21 February
In week 4, the first half of the lecture will be reserved to wrap up week 1-3. We will also discuss some of your questions
about the literature. In the second half of the lecture, we will look ahead at week 5-6. This will include a presentation of the
requirements for the final paper. In addition, we will discuss the use and analysis of primary sources.

NB: WRITTEN EXAM: FRIDAY 24 FEBRUARY, 09:00-12:00 @ OPERA ZALENCENTRUM

Week 5 Tuesday 28 February

From week 5 onwards, we will shift our focus to the theoretical and academic level. What terrain does the study of security
entail? And which historical events are to be studied? According to Ken Booth, security is a derivative concept; ones
understanding of what security is derives from ones political outlook and philosophical worldview. The concept of security
has different meanings for different groups. For a Palestinian, security could mean the establishment of a Palestinian state,
whereas for an Israeli, security might mean the control over the Palestinian people and territory. Even in the same state, the
understanding of security varies among domestic groups. Take the case of South Africa during the Apartheid regime and
how the meaning of security was different for the ruling whites and majority of blacks. This feature of security gives it an
intersubjective meaning. It also requires students of security to deepen, extend and broaden the theories of security and its
practices.

How did thinking about security evolve within different disciplines such as political science and International Relations (IR)?
What do we mean by IR, political science, and world politics and how does globalization influence those fields? What are
the main perspectives in IR and what is the influence of main turning points / events on those perspectives? We will discuss
Hobbes theory of the state of nature, the difference between domestic and international politics and the globalization of
IR. We will critically reflect on those perspectives and their origins and ask what the consequences of those perspectives are
on researching security.

Starting with the field of Political Science, we will move on to IR and the concept of globalization. We will explore the four
main perspectives in IR and the thinkers associated with them: Realism (Thucydides, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Rousseau),
Liberalism (Kant, Bentham, Wilson), Marxism (Marx, Wallerstein, Gramsci), and Constructivism (Wendt, Ruggie, Foucault).
Finally, we will discuss the impact of those perspectives on research methods in the field of security.

Literature:

- Jessica T. Mathews, Power Shift, Foreign Affairs 76 (January 1997), pp. 50-66.
- Andreas Hasenclever, Peter Mayer, Volker Rittberger, Interests, power, knowledge: the study of international
regimes, Mershon International Studies Review 40 (1996) pp. 177-228.

Crisis & Security Management 7

 - John J. Mearsheimer. 'Back to the future: instability in Europe after the Cold War' International Security 15, 1, Summer
1990, pp. 5-56.

Week 6 Tuesday 7 March

Nothing becomes a security issue on itself. All actors in the security field, from states and governments to individual
members of parliament and citizens, have their own interests. Moreover, they might perceive what happens in their own
way. They might want to put issues on the agenda and propose certain policies to deal with what they present as security
issues. Whether or not these security issues and the policy proposals connected to them are accepted by the audience(s) is
dependent on the context. Security issues and security policies change over time and place. In this lecture, we turn to
thinking about security.

Using Paul Williams introductory chapter into the field of security studies, we will try to understand what security is, whose
security we are talking about, and how security can be achieved. Next, we will trace the evolution of security studies using
Buzans and Hansens description of how the field emerged and what the current challenges are. We will discuss the
emergence of the discipline of (international) security studies, explain the advantages of adopting a historical viewpoint, lay
out the main research questions, and trace back the developments in studying security since the late 1980s. Security Studies
is not a homogeneous or monolithic area of research but rather an array of different schools and perspectives consisting of
how each one of them answers the above-mentioned questions. In this lecture, we will discuss several schools of thought
within security studies. We will analyze the academic ways to investigate, explain and understand security. Students will be
introduced to the most important ideas that form the basis of security studies as a subfield of political science and IR and
learn the differences between critical and traditional security approaches. Specific attention will be paid to the
Copenhagen School of Securitization.

Literature:

- Barry Buzan and Lene Hansen, The evolution of international security studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2010, chapter 1.
- Simon Hallsworth and John Lea, (2011) Reconstructing Leviathan: Emerging contours of the security state,
Theoretical Criminology 15 (2), pp. 141-157.

Week 7 Tuesday 14 March

In week 7, every group will present their topic, approach and main findings. A schedule for the group presentations will be
published on BlackBoard the week before. Every presentation should take 10 minutes max.

NB: FINAL PAPER TO BE HANDED IN FRIDAY 24 MARCH, 23.59PM VIA TURNITIN ON BLACKBOARD.

Crisis & Security Management 8