1. Ch. 12 International security

2. What is security?
Most writers agree that security is a ‘contested concept.’
So far, a lot of scholars understood and used the term ‘security’ as in military way.
- To secure one’s country from possible threats by others

3. Security in terms of international relations
Current days, the word ‘security’ includes a lot in various ways
According to Barry Buzan, he stated that current concept of the word ‘security’ includes:
Political
Economic
Societal
Environmental
Military aspects

4. Emergence of societal security
According to this view, growing integration in regions like Europe is undermining the classical political order based on nation-states, leaving nations exposed within larger political frameworks(like EU). (Baylis, 178)
Soviet Union& Yugoslavia
-Has created new problems of boundaries, minorities, and organizing
ideologies that are causing increasing regional instability.
Dissolution of Soviet Union
Kosovo War between Yugoslavia & Servia
Embryonic global society
-Point to the fragmentation of the nation-state but they argue that more
attention should be given to global society.
Transformation of state

5. ‘Security’ for traditional theories
To states, 1st prioritized task
-Why?
-Due to Westphalian treaty, self-help is emphasized
In historically…
- Notable scholars such as Hobbes, Rousseau, and Machiavelli often
argued that the pessimistic picture of state sovereignty
- For them, inter-state relations were seen as a struggle for power
- So, the best way to obtain their own sovereignty would be maintaining the
balance of power between states
These views evolved into neoclassical realism, or neo-realism

6. Various reactions from each theories…
Neo-Realists
Liberal institutionalists
Constructivists
National security is the result of structure of international system
Institutions have played a crucial role
Structure only a distribution of material capabilities (p.182)

7. Security on neo-realists
The international system is anarchic
States claiming sovereignty will inevitably develop offensive military capabilities to defend themselves and extend their power
Uncertainty, leading to a lack of trust, is inherent in international system
States will want to maintain their independence and sovereignty and survival will be the most basic driving force influencing their behavior
Although states are rational, there will always be a room for miscalculation

8. Security on liberal institutionalists
How they approach security when speaking of international politics?
- They view that the developing pattern of institutionalized cooperation
between states opens up unprecedented opportunities to achieve
greater international security in the years ahead
Shares some factors within realists framework, but they emphasize ‘cooperation’ rather than ‘power’
According to Douglas Hurd stated that institutions played a crucial role in improving security in Europe

9. Constructivists view on security
According to constructivists, fundamental structures of international politics are social rather than strictly material
They also shares some views with realists
- The key factor in international relations is the statehood, itself
- International relations is anarchic
- States possess offensive traits
However, they view that the structure as the product of social relationships
- Security dilemma shared understandings
- Security community shared knowledge

10. Other theories… Feminist theory
- So far, women were ignored by mainstream of the society
- Argues against male-dominated society
- Share the view that works on international politics in general, and
international security have been written from a ‘masculine’ point of view
(Baylis, 183)
Critical theory
- Focus their attention on the way these existing relationships and
institutions emerged and what might be done to change them.
Poststructuralist theory
- Share the view that ideas, discourse, and ‘the logic of interpretation’ are
crucial in understanding international politics and security.

11. Globalization & Geopolitics?
Different views from scholars?
VS.
Geopolitics in Asia-pacific
-United States vs. China
Brian Blouet
Ellen Frost
Negative correlation between globalization and geopolitics
Douglas E. Streusand
The policy imperatives that geopolitical analysis generates do not contradict the principles of globalization

12. Globalization & Geopolitics?
After the end of cold war, the threat of a Eurasian hegemon receded
However, the importance of ‘Rimland’ has re-emerged in recent years
According to Ross Munro and Richard Bernstein…
- The main issue for both United States and its allies in East Asia is whether
China would take the hegemon in this region or United States and its allies
cooperate with each other to counterbalance against China’s rise
From this, we can infer that the key point for geopolitical thinking
is the notion of the importance of achieving world order through a
balance of power which seeks to prevent regional hegemons from
arising

13. Old Geopolitics vs. New Geopolitics
According to Richard Falk…
Old Geopolitics
New Geopolitics
Has not registered the implications for the world order of the collapse of the colonial order or the relative weakening of the position of the United States
Focusing on lesson the importance of military power and more on the importance of soft power
Ex) BRICs, other non-state actors

14. Questions? Are globalization and geopolitics compatible?
What comes to you if you think the word ‘security’?
The author mentioned the issue about hegemonic competition between United States and China (China and United States). How do you assess the regional relations in next 10years?