The University of St Andrews

Research@StAndrews:FullText >
International Relations (School of) >
International Relations >
International Relations Theses >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
This item has been viewed 75 times in the last year. View Statistics

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
The full text of this document is not available.pdfElectronic version restricted until 2nd September 20202.61 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Title: Beyond securitization : a critical review of the Bush administration and Iraq
Authors: Donnelly, Faye
Supervisors: Fierke, Karin Marie
Issue Date: 2010
Abstract: This thesis responds to the longstanding call from constructivist and poststructuralist scholars for a turn to discourse. It focuses on the paradox of the ability of language to act as a constituting and constraining device within an agent-structure discussion. The Copenhagen School (CS), its attention to language and its concept of securitization is examined in terms of its strengths and weaknesses, including bringing discourse onto the security agenda to an unprecedented extent. This thesis seeks to speak security at a deeper level and move securitization beyond the moment of utterance and the notion of agents breaking free of rules that would otherwise bind, as well as beyond a singular definition of security. It is proposed that the CS framework can be theoretically complemented by Wittgenstein’s notion of language games on board. The analytical shift made by juxtaposing a speech act and a language game also foregrounds the link between language and rules. Wittgenstein’s idea of ‘acts of interpretation’ is also considered, and substantive questions are raised about what the language of security legitimates in principle and in practice. The Bush administration’s justifications for the 2003 Iraq war are taken as a point of departure, and covers how the Bush administration deployed the language of security to justify highly controversial moves. Their narrative about the use of the pre-emptive use of force without an imminent threat existing and ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ such as those seen in the Abu Ghraib photographs in the name of security exemplify that words matter. The arguments conclude that adjustments are needed in the way security is currently spoken in IR theory.
Type: Thesis
Publisher: University of St Andrews
Appears in Collections:International Relations Theses

This item is protected by original copyright

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.


DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2012  Duraspace - Feedback
For help contact: | Copyright for this page belongs to St Andrews University Library | Terms and Conditions (Cookies)