Reading 1: The Renaissance of Security Studies
This article, published in International Studies Quarterly in 1991, examines the
evolution of security studies, focusing on its resurgence since the mid-1970s. Walt
analyzes changes in the field, its relationship with social science, and its growing
theoretical and methodological rigour.
1. Definition and Scope of Security Studies
Walt defines security studies as the analysis of the threat, use, and control of military
force. Although historically focused on war and military strategy, the field has evolved
to include topics such as diplomacy, arms control, and crisis management. Despite
proposals to expand its scope to non-military issues such as the environment or poverty,
Walt warns against an overly broad definition that could dilute its focus.
2. The "Golden Age" (1955-1965) and Its Decline
During the Cold War, security studies flourished, with an emphasis on nuclear
deterrence and strategy. However, the lack of empirical evidence, the oversimplification
of international politics, and the excessive influence of military interests limited its
development. The Vietnam War and détente between the U.S. and the USSR reduced
interest in the field, leading to a decline in academic production.
3. The Renaissance of Security Studies (Since the 1970s)
Starting in the mid-1970s, the field experienced a resurgence due to:
Greater access to data: Declassified documents and increased transparency
allowed for more rigorous analyses.
Use of history and theory: The application of structured case studies
strengthened analysis.
Challenges to deterrence theory: Research on perception, psychology, and
bureaucracies refined the concept.
Interest in conventional warfare and strategy: Nuclear parity led to broader
approaches to conventional conflicts and national strategies.
Connection with academia: Increased acceptance in universities, the creation of
specialized journals, and funding from institutions like the Ford Foundation.
4. Problems and Future Opportunities
Walt warns against two risks:
1. Excessive politicization: Proximity to political debates can compromise
academic objectivity.
2. Disconnection from reality: An overly theoretical or methodological approach
can make the field lose practical relevance.
Among the future challenges, Walt highlights the need to:
Analyze the impact of domestic politics on international security.
Explore the conditions that promote peace and cooperation.
Examine the role of ideas in security policy.
Adapt to changes following the end of the Cold War, including the emergence of
new threats and strategies.
Conclusion
The resurgence of security studies is a positive development for international relations.
However, to remain relevant, the field must balance theoretical rigour with applicability
to real-world problems, avoid politicization, and ensure access to data for research.
Reading questions:
1. How has Security Studies changed over time?
There has been a shift from war being managed only or exclusively by generals
and the military, to a security field managed by politicians as well.
During WW2, the turning point in Security studies comes with the nuclear
revolution, that is, the use of nuclear weapons as a deterrent for conflict.
2. Should Security Studies focus only on military threats?
Security studies during the 20th century focused at first in only war. Nowadays tho
there are other threats that have been identified, such as climate change (water
scarcity, resources, …), arms control, hybrid warfare (fake news, …), …
3. How does security research impact real-world policies?
Research is carried out mostly by civilians, who serve as support or guidance for
decision makers when deciding how to solve a conflict,
Reading 2: "Critical Approaches to Security in Europe: A Networked
Manifesto”
1. Introduction
The article examines the evolution of critical security studies in Europe, analyzing
how different theoretical perspectives have influenced the field. The authors argue that
traditional classifications of "schools" in security studies—such as the Copenhagen,
Aberystwyth, and Paris Schools—are misleading because there has been significant
cross-fertilization among these perspectives. The manifesto, written collectively, aims
to challenge traditional, state-centered security concepts and advocate for a more
inclusive and interdisciplinary approach to security studies.
Main Goals of the Manifesto:
Assess the evolution of critical security studies in Europe.
Examine how different critical approaches interact and influence each other.
Analyze the political and ethical implications of security discourses.
Encourage a networked, collaborative method of research rather than
competitive academic agendas.
2. Theoretical Foundations and Evolution of Critical Security Studies
2.1 The Traditional "Schools" of Security Studies
Three major "schools" of thought have shaped critical security studies in Europe:
Copenhagen School (Barry Buzan, Ole Wæver, and others)
o Developed securitization theory, arguing that security is a speech act—
issues become "security threats" when political actors label them as such.
o Introduced the concept of security sectors, recognizing that security is
not just military-focused but also includes political, societal, economic,
and environmental dimensions.
o Critics argue that the Copenhagen School underestimates power
structures and neglects the role of security professionals in shaping
security policies.
Aberystwyth School (Critical Security Studies - CSS) (Ken Booth, Richard
Wyn Jones)
o Focuses on emancipation as the core objective of security, aiming to
free individuals from oppression and violence.
o Challenges the state-centric approach, arguing that real security should
focus on human freedom, justice, and dignity.
o Critics claim that the Aberystwyth School is too normative and
idealistic, lacking concrete methods to implement emancipatory
security policies.
Paris School (Didier Bigo, Jef Huysmans, and others)
o Uses political sociology to study security as a form of governance
rather than a reaction to threats.
o Focuses on security professionals, including police, military, and
intelligence agencies, and how they shape security practices.
o Analyzes the political effects of security measures, such as increased
surveillance and control.
o Critics argue that the Paris School focuses too much on institutions and
professionals, neglecting grassroots resistance and social activism.
2.2 Overcoming the "Schools" Division
The authors argue that these classifications are too rigid and create false divisions
between scholars who actually share many ideas. They advocate for an
interdisciplinary and networked approach to security studies, integrating elements
from all three schools.
3. Expanding Security Studies to New Fields
Security has expanded beyond its traditional focus on military and state threats. The
article examines how security thinking now applies to areas such as development,
migration, and human rights.
3.1 The "Security Trap"
When security is extended to new areas (e.g., peace, development, and
migration), it often justifies increased state control and coercion.
For example, framing poverty as a security issue may increase surveillance
and intervention in poorer communities rather than addressing economic
inequality.
This paradox is called the "security trap"—expanding security studies might
unintentionally lead to more state power and less freedom.
3.2 Security and Development
The post-Cold War era has merged security and development under the
concept of human security (introduced by the UNDP in 1994).
While human security aims to protect individuals rather than states, it can
justify foreign intervention and hierarchical relationships between
developed and underdeveloped countries.
The authors argue that development should be treated as a political and
economic issue, not just a security concern.
3.3 Security and Peace Studies
Historically, peace research and security studies were separate disciplines.
However, critical security studies and peace research now overlap, both
seeking alternative solutions to conflict beyond military force.
The authors argue that peace research should adopt a more critical approach,
reflecting on how peace policies can unintentionally reinforce security
structures.
3.4 The Privatization of Security
Security is no longer the exclusive domain of states—private military
companies (PMCs) and private security firms (PSCs) now play a major role.
This "marketization of security" raises ethical concerns, as security is
increasingly driven by profit motives rather than public interest.
The privatization trend blurs the line between state and private actors,
making it difficult to hold security providers accountable.
4. Political and Ethical Implications of Critical Security Studies
The article discusses how critical security studies can contribute to political and ethical
debates:
4.1 The Role of Security Professionals
Security is shaped by police, intelligence agencies, and military actors who
decide what constitutes a threat.
The Paris School focuses on how these professionals construct security
narratives, shaping public perceptions of risk and danger.
4.2 The Ethics of Securitization
A. Securitization can justify extreme measures (e.g., emergency laws,
surveillance, and military intervention).
B. The authors argue that critical scholars must analyze how security discourses
can limit political debate and reinforce authoritarian tendencies.
4.3 Engaging with International Politics
The authors discuss how critical security studies should engage with
policymakers and the public.
They challenge the idea that scholars should remain neutral observers, arguing
that academics have a responsibility to challenge oppressive security
practices.
5. Future Research Directions
The manifesto outlines key areas for future research in critical security studies:
1. Understanding Security as a Governance Tool
o Investigating how security is used to govern populations, beyond
traditional threats.
2. Challenging the Expansion of Security Narratives
o Examining how security is increasingly applied to development,
migration, and human rights.
o Avoiding the "security trap", where well-intentioned policies increase
state control.
3. Studying Security from a Global Perspective
o Moving beyond Eurocentric approaches to security.
o Engaging with Global South perspectives on security and
development.
4. Exploring Alternative Security Models
o Researching non-military security approaches, such as conflict
resolution and community-based security models.
Conclusion
The C.A.S.E. Collective calls for a more integrated and networked approach to
critical security studies. They advocate for:
Breaking down artificial divisions between schools of thought.
Challenging traditional security discourses and their political effects.
Bridging academia and policymaking, engaging with real-world security
issues.
Encouraging ethical and reflexive scholarship that questions power structures.
Final Thoughts
This manifesto is a foundational text for critical security studies, providing an in-
depth analysis of how security is constructed, applied, and challenged. It encourages
scholars to critically reflect on their own research, ensuring that security studies
contribute to freedom and justice rather than reinforcing state power.
Reading questions:
1. How do critical security studies challenge traditional views of security?
They shift the focus from the traditional dynamics and actors of the traditional
theories, and in turn try to shine light on new/different actors, perspectives, …
2. What are the risks of labeling something as a “security threat”?
The security trap, not tackling the core issues, breaching over human rights, …
3. Who really controls security, governments, experts, private companies, …?
Reading 3: "In Defense of New Wars”
