Keywords
Copenhagen School
security
security policy
Ukraine
Russian aggression
How to Cite
Abstract
The contemporary international security system is under pressure from multidimensional threats, ranging from pandemics, cyberattacks, and climate change to mass migration. Russia’s war against Ukraine has radically reshaped the global security architecture, returning the military-political dimension to the forefront and challenging the relevance of existing theoretical frameworks. In this context, securitization theory, which initially sought to expand the notion of security beyond the military sphere, gains renewed significance but also requires rethinking in today’s militarized political environment. This study aims to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the intellectual evolution of securitization theory. The research is based on qualitative conceptual analysis and critical synthesis of the academic literature, employing an interpretivist approach focused on meaning-making, conceptual evolution, and interaction of ideas in security studies. This article presents a conceptual analysis of the academic literature on securitization theory, focusing on its theoretical evolution driven by scholarly communities in various countries. It examines the core tenets of the theory as developed by the Copenhagen School of International Security Studies and explores its evolution through the lens of its main critics. This includes the Paris School, which shifted focus from discursive means of policy formation to everyday bureaucratic management practices, as well as critiques from postcolonial and feminist perspectives. The article also analyzes research applying securitization theory to key global non-military challenges, such as pandemics, migration, and cyber threats. Furthermore, the study investigates the adaptation of securitization theory by its proponents in response to Russia’s war against Ukraine. The article substantiates the argument that the Russo-Ukrainian War catalyzes rethinking the normative and practical aspects of securitization theory, highlighting its dual nature as both a tool of aggression and a means of survival.
References
1. Buzan, B., Wæver, O., & de Wilde, J. (1998). Security: A new framework for analysis. Lynne Rienner Publishers. https://books.google.com.ua/books/about/Security.html?id=j4BGr-Elsp8C&redir_esc=y
2. Buzan, B. (1983). People, states and fear: The national security problem in international relations. University of North Carolina Press. https://archive.org/details/peoplestatesfear0000buza
3. Balzacq, T., Léonard, S., & Ruzicka, J. (2016). ‘Securitization’ revisited: Theory and cases. International Relations, 30(4), 494–531. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047117815596590
4. Bigo, D. (2019). Beyond national security, the emergence of a digital reason of state(s) led by transnational guilds of sensitive information: The case of the Five Eyes Plus network. In B. Wagner, M. Kettemann, & K. Vieth (Eds.), Research Handbook on Human Rights and Digital Technology (pp. 33–52). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781785367724.00009
5. Wæver, O. (1995). Securitization and desecuritization. In R. D. Lipschutz (Ed.), On security (pp. 46–87). Columbia University Press. https://researchprofiles.ku.dk/en/publications/securitization-and-desecuritization
6. Huysmans, J. (2011). What’s in an act? On security speech acts and little security nothings. Security Dialogue, 42(4–5), 371–383. http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1177/0967010611418713
7. Webber, M., & Sperling, J. (2017). NATO and the Ukraine Crisis: Collective Securitisation. European Journal of International Security, 2(1), 19–46. https://doi.org/10.1017/eis.2016.17
8. Bigo, D. (2002). Security and Immigration: Toward a Critique of the Governmentality of Unease. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, 27(1_suppl), 63–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/03043754020270s105
9. Bigo, D. (2001). When Two Become One: Internal and External Securitisations in Europe. In M. Kelstrup, & M. Williams (Eds.), International Relations Theory and The Politics of European Integration. Power, Security and Community (pp. 171–204). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203187807
10. Huysmans, J. (2006). The politics of insecurity: Fear, migration and asylum in the EU. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203008690
11. Hansen, L. (2000). The Little Mermaid’s silent security dilemma and the absence of gender in the Copenhagen School. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 29(2), 285–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298000290020501
12. Bertrand, S. (2018). Can the subaltern securitize? Postcolonial perspectives on securitization theory and its critics. European Journal of International Security, 3(3), 348–369. https://doi.org/10.1017/eis.2018.3
13. Bourbeau, P. (2011). The securitization of migration: A study of movement and order. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203829349
14. Hansen, L., & Nissenbaum, H. (2009). Digital Disaster, Cyber Security, and the Copenhagen School. International Studies Quarterly, 53(4), 1155–1175. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27735139
15. Kaunert, C., Leonard, S., & Wertman, O. (2022). Securitization of COVID-19 as a security norm: WHO norm entrepreneurs and the cascade to member states. Social Sciences, 11(7), 266. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11070266
16. Floyd, R. (2019). The morality of security: A theory of just securitization. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108667814
17. Pearce, J. C., & Yuchshenko, A. (2018). Defending Russia, securitising the future: How the past shaped Russia’s political discourse regarding Crimea. Europolity – Continuity and Change in European Governance, 12(1), 85–106. https://europolity.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/VOL-12-NO1_Pearce_Europolity_12_1_2018.pdf
18. Knott, E. (2023). The securitised ‘others’ of Russian nationalism in Ukraine and Russia. LSE Public Policy Review, 3(1), 1–10. http://doi.org/10.31389/lseppr.80
19. Kurnyshova, Y. (2024). Securitisation and its extensions: a framework for analysis of Russia’s war on Ukraine. European Security, 33(4), 576–593. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2024.2366864
20. Lupovici, A. (2024). Securitization, deterrence, and extended deterrence by denial: The war in Ukraine. Foreign Policy Analysis, 20(1), orae031. https://doi.org/10.1093/fpa/orae031
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 Yaroslav Bozhko