(De)Securitization Dilemmas: Theorising the Simultaneous Enaction of Securitization and Desecuritization

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

(De)Securitization Dilemmas : Theorising the Simultaneous Enaction of Securitization and Desecuritization. / Austin, Jonathan Luke; Beaulieu-Brossard, Philippe.

In: Review of International Studies, Vol. 44, No. 2, 2018, p. 301 - 323.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Austin, JL & Beaulieu-Brossard, P 2018, '(De)Securitization Dilemmas: Theorising the Simultaneous Enaction of Securitization and Desecuritization', Review of International Studies, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 301 - 323. <http://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210517000511>

APA

Austin, J. L., & Beaulieu-Brossard, P. (2018). (De)Securitization Dilemmas: Theorising the Simultaneous Enaction of Securitization and Desecuritization. Review of International Studies, 44(2), 301 - 323. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210517000511

Vancouver

Austin JL, Beaulieu-Brossard P. (De)Securitization Dilemmas: Theorising the Simultaneous Enaction of Securitization and Desecuritization. Review of International Studies. 2018;44(2):301 - 323.

Author

Austin, Jonathan Luke ; Beaulieu-Brossard, Philippe. / (De)Securitization Dilemmas : Theorising the Simultaneous Enaction of Securitization and Desecuritization. In: Review of International Studies. 2018 ; Vol. 44, No. 2. pp. 301 - 323.

Bibtex

@article{44b20f671df44c3ba21e7a72256adcd7,
title = "(De)Securitization Dilemmas: Theorising the Simultaneous Enaction of Securitization and Desecuritization",
abstract = "This article theorises the simultaneous enaction of securitising and desecuritising moves. It argues that the frequent simultaneity of these two processes, which are normally considered mutually exclusive within Securitisation Theory (ST), has previously gone unnoticed given a set of methodological, temporal, and ontological biases that have developed within ST. Demonstrating how these biases can be overcome – and even reconciled with the seminal texts of ST – by drawing on work from within social theory and elsewhere, we argue that the frequent simultaneity of (de)securitising moves most urgently requires us to reconsider the normative status of desecuritisation within ST. Although desecuritisation has traditionally been viewed as normatively positive, we argue that its temporally immanent enaction alongside securitising moves might introduce more violence into security politics and, in fact, exacerbate protracted conflicts. Ultimately, we make the normative ambitions of some within ST more opaque. Desecuritisation is not a shortcut to the ethical-political good within ST.",
author = "Austin, {Jonathan Luke} and Philippe Beaulieu-Brossard",
year = "2018",
language = "English",
volume = "44",
pages = "301 -- 323",
journal = "Review of International Studies",
issn = "0260-2105",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - (De)Securitization Dilemmas

T2 - Theorising the Simultaneous Enaction of Securitization and Desecuritization

AU - Austin, Jonathan Luke

AU - Beaulieu-Brossard, Philippe

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - This article theorises the simultaneous enaction of securitising and desecuritising moves. It argues that the frequent simultaneity of these two processes, which are normally considered mutually exclusive within Securitisation Theory (ST), has previously gone unnoticed given a set of methodological, temporal, and ontological biases that have developed within ST. Demonstrating how these biases can be overcome – and even reconciled with the seminal texts of ST – by drawing on work from within social theory and elsewhere, we argue that the frequent simultaneity of (de)securitising moves most urgently requires us to reconsider the normative status of desecuritisation within ST. Although desecuritisation has traditionally been viewed as normatively positive, we argue that its temporally immanent enaction alongside securitising moves might introduce more violence into security politics and, in fact, exacerbate protracted conflicts. Ultimately, we make the normative ambitions of some within ST more opaque. Desecuritisation is not a shortcut to the ethical-political good within ST.

AB - This article theorises the simultaneous enaction of securitising and desecuritising moves. It argues that the frequent simultaneity of these two processes, which are normally considered mutually exclusive within Securitisation Theory (ST), has previously gone unnoticed given a set of methodological, temporal, and ontological biases that have developed within ST. Demonstrating how these biases can be overcome – and even reconciled with the seminal texts of ST – by drawing on work from within social theory and elsewhere, we argue that the frequent simultaneity of (de)securitising moves most urgently requires us to reconsider the normative status of desecuritisation within ST. Although desecuritisation has traditionally been viewed as normatively positive, we argue that its temporally immanent enaction alongside securitising moves might introduce more violence into security politics and, in fact, exacerbate protracted conflicts. Ultimately, we make the normative ambitions of some within ST more opaque. Desecuritisation is not a shortcut to the ethical-political good within ST.

M3 - Journal article

VL - 44

SP - 301

EP - 323

JO - Review of International Studies

JF - Review of International Studies

SN - 0260-2105

IS - 2

ER -

ID: 235147650