Summary Security:
Actors, Institutions and
Constellations
LECTURE 1: INTRODUCTION
Hobbesian Statism: originated to resolve radical interpersonal insecurity + radical
violence internationalism, and it advocates for radical centralized violence (sovereign).
- Consequences of statism:
o Creation of the three unique agents: individual, the people and the
sovereign
o Creation of legitimacy
o Creation of purpose
o Creation of coordination (hierarchy)
o Creation of accountability
International relations has not changed much since it originated (seen as boring)
Nietzsche: truth are illusions which we have forgotten are illusions. We think they are
binding. You get locked in a paradigm.
The field expanded to include critical security studies (CSS): new agents, new
levels of analysis, new topics, new levels of analysis.
Critical security studies (Krause and Williams 2018)
CSS critiques traditional state-centric and military focused security frameworks. It
focusses on the construction of security threats through language and power
dynamics.
- Language of security: terms like proliferation influence policy by framing certain
actions as threats.
- Non-state actors: examens how non state actors challenge state sovereignty in
defining security.
Future of security studies (Gheciu and Wohlforth 2018)
Security studies must evolve to address contemporary complexities:
- Rise of non-state actors (ex. private security and NGO)
- Transnational issues (ex. climate change, migration)
- Interplay between security and development securitization of humanitarian aid
After 9/11 there was a focus on terrorism, which narrowed the security agenda. This
privileged militarized approaches.
,We should rethink paradigms to include a diverse set of agents and intersections
between security, environment and development.
We have come to the new dark ages, where the fear of violent death of Hobbes has
returned: brutalism, hypocrisy, fanaticism, mass violence, mass meaninglessness. the
world is changing.
TECHNOLOGY
(New) technology has always been important for security actors at all governance levels.
There are some broad trends in the field of security:
- Data driven practices
- Moving from relative to proactive models
- Surveillance of data flows and infrastructure
- Pluralization of security actors. Partnerships and security networks.
As the world is changing the role of technology for security actors is betting much
bigger.
The problem is that the role of technology in IR and also in security studies has been
often conceptualized as either: passive, apolitical and instrumental OR as dominated by
deterministic views. This does not think of the active role of technology.
- Instrumentalism: technologies as tools, neutral means for chosen human ends.
o Critique: Winner, 1980: do artifacts have politics? While we tend to take
infrastructures as neutral, material arrangements can embody political
charge.
- Technological determinism: technology seen as a quasi autonomous force
which advances according to an internal logic, independent of social forces and
as the main factors causing fundamental changes in society.
o Critique: technology does not advance as a result of an internal logic,
decoupled from society. Ex. ASML chip war. Technological development
is profoundly socio-political.
Theoretically inadequate: lacks an adequate account of complex
interactions between users, designers, organizations, policy
makers, public institutions or legal regimes.
Reductionist: it presumes that it is mainly technology which drives
change in social structures and cultural values.
Politically debilitating: why would we devote energy to try to shape
technologies for the better if we conceptualize technology as
changing independently from our input or by forces outside our
realm (Bijker, 2010).
Technology and global affairs (Fritsch 2011)
- Technological determinism: assumes technology evolves autonomously and
drives social change.
o Critique: ignores human agency and political contexts
- Social constructivism: views technology as deeply intertwined with cultural,
economic and political systems. It is shaped by social forces and not an
independent driver.
, - Fritsch: we need a middle-ground perspective. Technology does have a role in
driving systemic change, there is a reciprocal relationship with societal values,
politics and global structures.
Alternatives
- Mutual shaping paradigm: a bidirectional relationship of influence.
- Actor network theory: technology as actants playing social roles alongside
users, designers etc.
- Technological mediation theory: technologies profoundly mediate our
relationship with the world.
Science, technology and security (S. W. Evans, Leese, and Rychnovská 2021
There is a symbiotic relationship between science, technology and security practices.
- STS (science and technology studies) brings valuable insights into the social
construction of technology:
o How technologies shape societal perceptions of security
o Ethical dilemmas in the use of AI for law enforcement and surveillance.
- The challenges:
o Avoiding the legitimization of harmful practices. Ex. authoritarian
surveillance.
o How power dynamics are embedded in security tools.
But we need to study the invisible forces within our technological infrastructure. We
need an:
- Empirical analysis of security actors and practices
- Studies of the role of technologies by security actors
- A sedimentology of the layers of information infrastructure.
This would satisfy the need for legitimacy, transparency and responsibility.
, LECTURE 2: RETHINKING FEMICIDE
Domestic homicide: killing of an individual within a domestic of familial context. It
often includes intimate partner homicide but also extends to other family members, such
as children or elderly relatives.
Intimate partner homicide: killing of an individual by their current or former
intimate partner. This term is distinct in tis focus on violence within intimate
relationships, including those that are married, cohabiting, dating or have separated.
difference between this and femicide is motivation.
Feminicide: expands on femicide by including the notion of state complicity and
neglect in addressing VAW. The term points to the failure of institutions, such as the
police and judiciary, to protect women or hold perpetrators accountable.
Femicide: killing of women because they are women. It highlights the gendered nature
of the violence, emphasizing that the murder arises from misogynistic motives or
patriarchal power dynamics.
- UNODC: intentional killing of women or girls based on their gender motivation
- Of all female homicide victims more than 50% are killed by a partner or relative
(but 80% of all homicide is male/male)
- Femicide kills more women per 100 000 then terrorism does.
D. P. Evans et al. 2023: global patterns of femicide
- Globally 58% of female homicides are femicides, most committed by intimate
partners
- Risks come from gendered power imbalances and a perpetrators having a history
of substance abuse or ciolent behavior.
There are 3 key starting points:
1. Femicide is a social and cultural problem on a global scale, it transcends national
borders. Latin America does have some of the highest numbers globally
2. Different nature of male-male homicide and femicide and the difference in rates
of intimate homicide according to gender.
3. In spite of the increasing social awareness, the development of a range of
political and institutional programs, and the enforcement of femicide-specific
laws, the rates of this crime have remained relatively stagnant throughout the
last decade in Latin America.
In literature the main things that have been studied are:
What has been studied Pro Con
Victim focused Magnitude and impact Hampered understanding
Risk factors of perpetration
Addressing epistemic Position burden on victim
injustice
Focus on statistical data Magnitude and impact Hampered understanding
production and risk factors Risk factors of perpetration
Does not consider how risk
factors work
Focus on law enforcement Creation legal response Criminalization over
and penal consequences prevention
Actors, Institutions and
Constellations
LECTURE 1: INTRODUCTION
Hobbesian Statism: originated to resolve radical interpersonal insecurity + radical
violence internationalism, and it advocates for radical centralized violence (sovereign).
- Consequences of statism:
o Creation of the three unique agents: individual, the people and the
sovereign
o Creation of legitimacy
o Creation of purpose
o Creation of coordination (hierarchy)
o Creation of accountability
International relations has not changed much since it originated (seen as boring)
Nietzsche: truth are illusions which we have forgotten are illusions. We think they are
binding. You get locked in a paradigm.
The field expanded to include critical security studies (CSS): new agents, new
levels of analysis, new topics, new levels of analysis.
Critical security studies (Krause and Williams 2018)
CSS critiques traditional state-centric and military focused security frameworks. It
focusses on the construction of security threats through language and power
dynamics.
- Language of security: terms like proliferation influence policy by framing certain
actions as threats.
- Non-state actors: examens how non state actors challenge state sovereignty in
defining security.
Future of security studies (Gheciu and Wohlforth 2018)
Security studies must evolve to address contemporary complexities:
- Rise of non-state actors (ex. private security and NGO)
- Transnational issues (ex. climate change, migration)
- Interplay between security and development securitization of humanitarian aid
After 9/11 there was a focus on terrorism, which narrowed the security agenda. This
privileged militarized approaches.
,We should rethink paradigms to include a diverse set of agents and intersections
between security, environment and development.
We have come to the new dark ages, where the fear of violent death of Hobbes has
returned: brutalism, hypocrisy, fanaticism, mass violence, mass meaninglessness. the
world is changing.
TECHNOLOGY
(New) technology has always been important for security actors at all governance levels.
There are some broad trends in the field of security:
- Data driven practices
- Moving from relative to proactive models
- Surveillance of data flows and infrastructure
- Pluralization of security actors. Partnerships and security networks.
As the world is changing the role of technology for security actors is betting much
bigger.
The problem is that the role of technology in IR and also in security studies has been
often conceptualized as either: passive, apolitical and instrumental OR as dominated by
deterministic views. This does not think of the active role of technology.
- Instrumentalism: technologies as tools, neutral means for chosen human ends.
o Critique: Winner, 1980: do artifacts have politics? While we tend to take
infrastructures as neutral, material arrangements can embody political
charge.
- Technological determinism: technology seen as a quasi autonomous force
which advances according to an internal logic, independent of social forces and
as the main factors causing fundamental changes in society.
o Critique: technology does not advance as a result of an internal logic,
decoupled from society. Ex. ASML chip war. Technological development
is profoundly socio-political.
Theoretically inadequate: lacks an adequate account of complex
interactions between users, designers, organizations, policy
makers, public institutions or legal regimes.
Reductionist: it presumes that it is mainly technology which drives
change in social structures and cultural values.
Politically debilitating: why would we devote energy to try to shape
technologies for the better if we conceptualize technology as
changing independently from our input or by forces outside our
realm (Bijker, 2010).
Technology and global affairs (Fritsch 2011)
- Technological determinism: assumes technology evolves autonomously and
drives social change.
o Critique: ignores human agency and political contexts
- Social constructivism: views technology as deeply intertwined with cultural,
economic and political systems. It is shaped by social forces and not an
independent driver.
, - Fritsch: we need a middle-ground perspective. Technology does have a role in
driving systemic change, there is a reciprocal relationship with societal values,
politics and global structures.
Alternatives
- Mutual shaping paradigm: a bidirectional relationship of influence.
- Actor network theory: technology as actants playing social roles alongside
users, designers etc.
- Technological mediation theory: technologies profoundly mediate our
relationship with the world.
Science, technology and security (S. W. Evans, Leese, and Rychnovská 2021
There is a symbiotic relationship between science, technology and security practices.
- STS (science and technology studies) brings valuable insights into the social
construction of technology:
o How technologies shape societal perceptions of security
o Ethical dilemmas in the use of AI for law enforcement and surveillance.
- The challenges:
o Avoiding the legitimization of harmful practices. Ex. authoritarian
surveillance.
o How power dynamics are embedded in security tools.
But we need to study the invisible forces within our technological infrastructure. We
need an:
- Empirical analysis of security actors and practices
- Studies of the role of technologies by security actors
- A sedimentology of the layers of information infrastructure.
This would satisfy the need for legitimacy, transparency and responsibility.
, LECTURE 2: RETHINKING FEMICIDE
Domestic homicide: killing of an individual within a domestic of familial context. It
often includes intimate partner homicide but also extends to other family members, such
as children or elderly relatives.
Intimate partner homicide: killing of an individual by their current or former
intimate partner. This term is distinct in tis focus on violence within intimate
relationships, including those that are married, cohabiting, dating or have separated.
difference between this and femicide is motivation.
Feminicide: expands on femicide by including the notion of state complicity and
neglect in addressing VAW. The term points to the failure of institutions, such as the
police and judiciary, to protect women or hold perpetrators accountable.
Femicide: killing of women because they are women. It highlights the gendered nature
of the violence, emphasizing that the murder arises from misogynistic motives or
patriarchal power dynamics.
- UNODC: intentional killing of women or girls based on their gender motivation
- Of all female homicide victims more than 50% are killed by a partner or relative
(but 80% of all homicide is male/male)
- Femicide kills more women per 100 000 then terrorism does.
D. P. Evans et al. 2023: global patterns of femicide
- Globally 58% of female homicides are femicides, most committed by intimate
partners
- Risks come from gendered power imbalances and a perpetrators having a history
of substance abuse or ciolent behavior.
There are 3 key starting points:
1. Femicide is a social and cultural problem on a global scale, it transcends national
borders. Latin America does have some of the highest numbers globally
2. Different nature of male-male homicide and femicide and the difference in rates
of intimate homicide according to gender.
3. In spite of the increasing social awareness, the development of a range of
political and institutional programs, and the enforcement of femicide-specific
laws, the rates of this crime have remained relatively stagnant throughout the
last decade in Latin America.
In literature the main things that have been studied are:
What has been studied Pro Con
Victim focused Magnitude and impact Hampered understanding
Risk factors of perpetration
Addressing epistemic Position burden on victim
injustice
Focus on statistical data Magnitude and impact Hampered understanding
production and risk factors Risk factors of perpetration
Does not consider how risk
factors work
Focus on law enforcement Creation legal response Criminalization over
and penal consequences prevention
