CARIBBEAN MARITIME UNIVERSITY

Presented in Partial Fulfilment of B.Sc. in Security Administration and Management

Course Code: PNS705

Title: Private and National Security Interface

Presented By:
Kimberlee Markland

Presented to:
Mr Desmond Brooks

Date:
June 15, 2019
Critical Security Studies

 Critical Security Studies (CSS) is an umbrella term for a range of approaches that

challenged the traditional approach to security- which was too narrowly focused on the

military security of states- and called for a “deeper” and “broader” scope for

understanding threats to security (Vaugh-Williams, 2010).CSS argues that military force,

although important, is not the only potential threat to security, that other threats are

equally worthy of consideration.1

 One proponent of CSS, Barry Buzan, maintained that security ought to be considered in

five different “sectors”: military, environmental, economic, political and societal (Vaugh-

Williams, 2010). Buzan maintained that people are threatened by a multitude of issues:

not only war but also poverty, famine, political oppression and environmental

degradation, to name a few. Similar sentiments were shared by other proponents of CSS,

Ken Booth and Richard Wyn Jones, who claimed people will feel secure not just through

protection from military threats, but also through protection from the threat of poverty,

ill-health, environmental degradation, and so on (Vaugh-Williams, 2010).

 Ultimately, for CSS, the study of should security seek to illuminate the wide range of

constraints on human well-being that exist in many parts of the world and challenge the

forms of security knowledge and practices that perpetuate these constraints.

Critique- CSS broadens to scope of threats to security without providing a rubric by which

incidences are categorized as threats to security or merely risks or societal issues.

1
The Cold War proved a be a conundrum for traditional security theorists which saw the dissolution of a state
without the use of military force. The sudden lack of a security problem, in addition to the apparent declining
utility of military force, stimulated reflection and critical evaluation within the academy on the meaning of security
(Vaugh-Williams, 2010).
Feminist Security Studies

 Feminist Security Studies (FSS) sought to broaden and deepen the scope of security

studies by questioning traditional constructions of security, examining how women

are affected by such constructions and investigating the real-life security experiences

of women around the world (Vaugh-Williams, 2010).

 While there is no single feminist security perspective, feminist theorists are united by

the belief that women’s distinct experiences, needs, beliefs and voices matter to

security studies.

 One proponent of feminist security studies, Cynthia Enloe, claimed that making

women invisible led to a profoundly unrealistic caricature of security relations,

because it hides the workings of both femininity and masculinity in international

politics. Enloe’s research strategy was to focus on marginal women in order to show

how the conduct of international security to some extent depends upon men’s control

over them (liberal feminist approach) (Vaugh-Williams, 2010).

 Another proponent, Judith Ann Tickner, aimed to think about how the discipline of

international relations might look if gender were included as a category of analysis

and if women’s experiences were part of the subject matter out of which theories

were constructed (standpoint feminist approach) (Vaugh-Williams, 2010).

Critique- Research into the gendered nature of security has opened new insights into the

behaviour and identity of the state and the sexualised politics it relies upon. It has

problematised aspects of the relationship between human security and international

political economy drawing our attention to inequalities otherwise obscured in security

studies.
Post-Structural Security Studies

 Post-Structural Security Studies challenges those structures, logics and practices in

which an issue becomes a security threat. It moves away from discussions about

security as something that “is” (a state of being) to how security is a process, how

security is practiced and what security does (Williams & Mcdonald, 2018).

 From a post-structuralist perspective, security is seen as a logic informing war as

practice. Security is not limited to who can authoritatively “speak” security and how

it is practiced. Security is also an exclusionary logic, which means that security is

equally about who cannot speak security, i.e., the marginalized and silenced voices in

particular stories of security (Williams & Mcdonald, 2018).

 Jacques Derrida claimed that security always relies on the “other”. Meaning, one can

only understand what security means by having some form of recognition of what

insecurity means (Vaugh-Williams, 2010).

 Drawing upon Foucault, poststructuralists emphasized the significance of power and

knowledge, of security discourses as “plays of power which mobilize rules, codes and

procedures to assert a particular understanding, through the construction of

knowledge.” Knowledge in turn was not free of value judgments and the claim to

objectivity that classical positivists espouse was therefore upended (Vaugh-Williams,

2010).

Critique- Post-structural security studies, being derived from post-structural thought,

brings in question the very essence of what security means. It poses an endless thought-

process into what security means, how it can be achieved and who or what guarantee

security for whom.

References
Vaugh-Williams, N. P. (2010). Critical Security Studies- An Introduction (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Retrieved from
https://is.muni.cz/el/1423/jaro2017/BSS405/um/Columba_Peoples__Nick_Vaughan-
Williams-Critical_Security_Studies__An_Introduction-Routledge__2010_-__1-88_.pdf
Williams, P., & Mcdonald, M. (2018). Security Studies: An Introduction (3rd ed.). Routledge.
Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu/36497284/Chapter_6_Poststructuralism_Security_Studies_An
_introduction