Tag: international relations

Critical Security Studies

Any analysis on Security Studies first and foremost requires one to understand what the term ‘security’ entails. This, however, is not an easy task. As scholars like Ken Booth pointed out, this is because Security is a Derivative concept. This implies that one’s understanding of the term is derived from their political outlook and philosophical worldview. Hence, even within the same community, different conceptions of security may exist. In this sense, the process becomes political in nature.

In 1991, Ken Booth gave a minimalist definition of security i.e. security as the absence of threat. This may further be questioned as to what all can be termed as a ‘threat’ is it only physical in nature? Or are other factors involved? This is where Critical Security Studies (CSS) differs from Traditional Security Studies.

The foundations of Security Studies are based on the Traditionalist understanding also known as the Realist approach. This follows a Top-Down strategy that focuses inherently on state-centrism. The problem that CSS notes with this is that it tends to overlook the potential of human agency as it gets marginalized or is rendered absolutely invisible in such an approach. It reflects and constitutes a state dominated field with the belief that liberty can only be achieved through military force. Therefore, CSS deem it as narrow in nature and entirely masculinist as it overlooks aspects of gender inequality, wartime rape, trafficking and among other aspects. They also criticize the traditionalist approach for being Eurocentric in its nature and scope.

As aforementioned, Security is a derivative concept and the process is political in nature. Ken Booth also highlighted that Security has 1) an instrumental value. It provides the freedom to do something other than security from threat. 2) it is a process rather than an end point. That is to say that it enables the possibility of finding ways of coexistence without depriving others of their life chances. Being a pioneer of this approach Booth called for the rethinking of security as Emancipation. One of the first and foremost aspects that he recognized was that security is what we make of it. It is created inter-subjectively and it is possible to expand international security studies and still remain within an asserted neo-realist framework and approach.

A key idea of CSS is Emancipation. Booth identifies Emancipation as freeing of people from physical and human constraints which stop them from carrying out what they would freely choose to do. For him, it is emancipation that produces true security. Security and emancipation are therefore identified as two sides of the same coin. This understanding helps to gauge that the relationship between critical theory and security is crucial to CSS. This enables 1) Broadening i.e. includes a range of issues beyond military force. 2) Deepening i.e. connects our understanding of security to deeply rooted assumptions about political life. 3) Extending i.e. recognizes a multiplicity of issues and actors. 4) Focusing i.e. it has a normative goal in the form of Human Emancipation of security studies.

CSS does have its own share of limitations but it also has inherent potentialities. It attempts to offer a way to change the traditional global security narrative. Its focus is on the development of human potential.

Securitization

The notion of Securitization is among the most significant conceptual innovations to have emerged out of the debate on the nature of Security. It is associated with the Copenhagen School of security studies which is linked to the likes of Barry Buzan and Ole Wæver. However, overtime, the concept has also been taken up and adapted by those outside the realm of Copenhagen School.

What is securitization? The work of Copenhagen School and their initial development of the concept of securitization as the basis for a new framework of analysis can be understood as a fusion of two works. First being Buzan’s notion of different sectors of security and second, Wæver’s concept of securitization. Later authors have asked the question of how to define security in the context of the ever-broadening agenda. The all important question was- what is a security issue and what is not one? They argue that we need a principle to help answer this. Otherwise, it would become way too broad a concept and effectively.

To answer the question of what is a security issue and what is not a security issue, they say that security as a concept is fundamentally about survival. Therefore, an issue is a security issue when it is represented as possessing an existential threat to the survival of a referent object. This is the same basic principle that is found in the conventional notion of national security and defence. One of the ways to identify an existential threat is to see the response it generates because when an issue is presented as an existential threat, it legitimizes the use of exceptional political measures. For example: A State’s right to self-defence when under attack, it can legitimately use extraordinary measures that go beyond normal day-to-day politics. It can declare emergency and suspend or change its functions during it. An appropriate understanding of Securitization would thus be: shifting an issue from the realm of normal politics to that of emergency politics by presenting it as an existential threat.

One of the most striking implications of the Securitization Theory is that it believes that security need not always be a good thing. It states that more securitization need not always be better as securitization of an issue brings with it emergency politics where space and time for deliberation and participation is constricted and also results in a militarized mode of thinking. Thus, thinkers like Wæver argued that in most cases we should aim for Desecuritization. It refers to shifting an issue out of the realm of emergency politics back to the that of normal political or technical debate. He also suggests that the condition of Asecurity is optimal. It refers to a condition where occurrence of securitization is minimal or absent and issues, unless necessary, are not conceptualized in terms of security.

Securitization Theory has had significant impact on the way security is studied as it offers a clearly identifiable research agenda. It studies societal security as an alternative to focusing solely on the state. It offers an analytical framework and also a site of critical opportunity for thinking through the important questions of the nature of contemporary security politics.

Book Review-‘Bananas, Beaches and Bases’

Cynthia Enloe’s Book ‘Bananas, Beaches and Bases’ has been, and continues to be widely read by scholars and students of International Relations. What makes her work stand out from other works in the discipline, is her usage of a gendered lens to analyse the world of International Politics. Where are the women in International Politics? Who put them there? and who benefits from them being there? These, Enloe believes, are crucial to a thorough analysis of International Politics but have hitherto been ignored and overlooked. Another crucial question that Enloe wants us to ask is that what does the woman who is put in a particular position think about being there? How would she interpret her position? These questions would hint at what Enloe attempts to do and that is, to view International Politics from the vantage point of women.

An essential point that Enloe makes is that what’s more important is to ask questions of the existing system rather than having ready-made answers. The reason behind this is the very fact that the existing system does not put forth a wholesome picture as it doesn’t include the experiences of women.  Enloe believed that the absence of women in IR was far from natural, in fact, it is constructed. This is because the existing structure is marked by manipulation by and domination of masculine culture and politics. The position of women is constructed by men and thus, for women to feature in such a system, they have to become like men. This implies that in doing so, they devalue femininity and acknowledge that the masculine traits are superior.

Typically, when people wrote in IR their focus was on making links between political and international without accounting for gender. Enloe is assertive when she points out such an understanding is far from complete. The reason behind this, she highlights in the key phrase of ‘The personal is international, the international is personal’.

 For Enloe, feminist informed investigation of international politics yields valuable insights into the complex politics of masculinity. The international is much broader than mainstream experts assume and the political is well beyond the public square. In this book she focused on aspects that are not thought of as ‘consumer goods’ i.e. tropical beaches, women’s sexuality, the service of flight attendants to name a few. Enloe views women in third world countries as global political actors.

Enloe takes the case of The League of Nations to cite as an example. At the face of it, in conventional works of IR, one would think of it as a site for preventing war post the wreckage caused by the First World War. But thinking of it from the premise of women brings in a hitherto overlooked aspect of The League of Nations i.e. as a site for promoting social justice as some women emerged as international civil servants because of the same. It is important to applaud Enloe’s work for its positive impact. It has enabled an area for dialogue where many more women have now joined the conversation. These women add their experiences and findings to the conversation. The coming together of women enables a genuine exchange of ideas. Therefore, the doors to reinterpret international politics using a gendered prism has been thrown wide open to us.

India-Australia Relations

A virtual bilateral summit was held virtually for the first time between the Prime Ministers of India and Australia.

A few of the major outcomes of the Summit was the Elevation of the bilateral Strategic Partnership to Comprehensive Strategic Partnership. The Elevation of the “2+2” engagement to the level of Foreign and Defence Ministers, where strategic discussions will be taking place every two years. India previously has had such mechanisms with USA and Japan.

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was established for cooperation in the field of mining and processing of Critical and Strategic minerals. Along with it, the Mutual Logistics Support Agreement was also signed. A Joint declaration on the shared vision for Maritime Cooperation in the Indo- Pacific region was also emphasized upon.

India- Australia Relations is not a ‘today affair’ as the two countries began their alliances during the cold war period back since when Australia was United States’ closest ally, also remembered to when India opted for non-alignment. The end of the Cold War and the launch major economic reforms in 1991 provided the first positive move towards development of closer ties between these two nations.

However, this could not last long as India’s nuclear status outside the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) resulted in Australia taking a particularly strong stance against India’s 1998 nuclear tests.

 With the changing global scenario in 21st century, Australia looked at India as an important partner in promoting regional security and stability. This led to up progression of their bilateral relationship to a ‘Strategic Partnership’, as well as a Joint Declaration on Security Cooperation in 2009.

Talking of the Economic and commercial relations, the Bilateral goods and services trade between these two nations was about $30.3 billion in 2018-19, and the level of two-way investment was $30.7 billion in 2018.

Australia announced implementation of “An India Economic Strategy to 2035” in 2018. A vision document to shape India- Australia bilateral ties. India is also preparing an Australia Economic Strategy Paper (AES) on these similar outlines.

The two countries have also decided to re-engage meetings on a Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA). These discussions first started in 2011, and the last time it happened was in 2015.

In the Defence and security cooperation field, there was a Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement signed between the two in 2014 which had also enabled India to secure uranium from Australia.

Both of the countries also contracted Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT), Extradition Treaty and the Social Security Agreement.

Maritime Security cooperation is seen in the form of joint exercises like AUSINDEX 2019, AUSTRAHIND, Exercise Pitch Black and Kakadu biennial exercise (Hosted by the Australian Navy).

Some concerns that remain in India-Australia relations is the Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) which is still unsettled after nine rounds of negotiations. India had also earlier opted out from Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). Among other things, India and Australia could not reach to agreement on the market access over agriculture and dairy products.

Furthermore, an Australia-India Strategic Research Fund commenced in 2006 for scientists to collaborate on leading-edge research. Agreement on Cyber and Cyber-Enabled Critical Technology was also signed of late to promote cooperation in the extents of digital economy, cyber security, critical and emerging technologies.

The economy of Australia has been quite heavily dependent on China, as China is one of Australia’s largest trading partners and accounts for 26 % of its world trade. Chinese aggressions and assertive foreign policies are common apprehensions between the two nations and certainly has brought both the democracies closer.

Both the countries have also shown similar interests in the vision of an open, free inclusive and rules-based Indo-Pacific region. Australia’s Pacific Step Up and India’s Forum for India-Pacific Islands Cooperation (FIPIC) give reaffirmation of their cooperation in the South Pacific region.

Both also have co-operated in various multilateral fora including QUAD security dialogue, G-20, Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA), East Asia Summits, ASEAN Regional Forum etc.

The People to People Relations have found a different edge for these countries as the Indian diaspora, estimated at nearly 7 lakhs is the fastest growing in Australia and has become a constructive factor in the bilateral relations. Including that, almost 1 lakh Indian students are enrolled for studying in Australia and the under New Colombo Plan of Australian government, Australian undergraduates have studied and completed numerous internships in India.

Australia Government has also affirmed to help in establishing a world class Sports University in India.