![pdf photo album free military pdf photo album free military](https://www.hobbymagazines.org/uploads/posts/2016-06/1466274214_8m570909-1.jpg)
For example, in the societal sector, the referent object is identity, while the referent objects in the environmental sector are the ecosystem and endangered species.
![pdf photo album free military pdf photo album free military](https://www.tooveys.com/lots/406386/3058.jpg)
In each sector, a specific threat is articulated as threatening a referent object. Securitisation theorists determined five sectors: the economic, the societal, the military, the political and the environmental sector. A referent object, a central idea in securitisation, is the thing that is threatened and needs to be protected. It is by questioning the essence of security in cases such as this that securitisation theory developed and widened the scope of security to include other referent objects beyond the state. Viewed in this light, surveillance becomes a security apparatus of control and a source of insecurity. For example, in the context of the Global War on Terror, a person who looks Arab has been regarded with suspicion as a dangerous ‘other’ and there has been an increase in surveillance operations in Muslim communities on the presumption that because they fit a certain profile, they may be connected to terrorism. By pointing at the essentially contested nature of security, critical approaches to security argue that ‘security’ is not necessarily positive or universal, but context and subject dependent and even negative at times.īecause some administer security while others receive security, security produces uneven power relations between people. Whether one agrees with the wideners or the narrowers, the end of the Cold War indicated that security was an essentially contested concept – ‘a concept that generates debates that cannot be resolved by reference to empirical evidence because the concept contains a clear ideological or moral element and defies precise, generally accepted definition’ (Fierke 2015, 35). It was an important development in the rise of a wider perspective on security. Widening the agenda from a feminist perspective brought gender into focus by placing gender and women as the focus of security calculations and by demonstrating that gender, war and security were intertwined. On the contrary, the state was often the cause of insecurities for women. Feminism had an important role in widening the agenda by challenging the idea that the sole provider of security was the state and that gender was irrelevant in the production of security. This expanded the security agenda by including concepts such as human security and regional security – together with ideas of culture and identity. Dissatisfied with this, wideners sought to include other types of threat that were not military in nature and that affected people rather than states. The narrowers were concerned with the security of the state and often focused on analysing the military and political stability between the United States and the Soviet Union.
![pdf photo album free military pdf photo album free military](https://www.hobbymagazines.org/uploads/posts/2019-11/1574360201_12mmint191.jpeg)
![pdf photo album free military pdf photo album free military](https://www.hobbymagazines.org/uploads/posts/2020-06/1593109997_militarymodelcraftint2020071-copy.jpg)
The end of the Cold War sparked a debate over ideas of security in IR between ‘narrowers’ and ‘wideners’. Securitisation theory challenges traditional approaches to security in IR and asserts that issues are not essentially threatening in themselves rather, it is by referring to them as ‘security’ issues that they become security problems. Calling immigration a ‘threat to national security’, for instance, shifts immigration from a low priority political concern to a high priority issue that requires action, such as securing borders. So, security issues are not simply ‘out there’ but rather must be articulated as problems by securitising actors. According to securitisation theory, political issues are constituted as extreme security issues to be dealt with urgently when they have been labelled as ‘dangerous’, ‘menacing’, ‘threatening’, ‘alarming’ and so on by a ‘securitising actor’ who has the social and institutional power to move the issue ‘beyond politics’. Securitisation theory shows us that national security policy is not a natural given, but carefully designated by politicians and decision-makers. This is an excerpt from International Relations Theory – an E-IR Foundations beginner’s textbook.