Securitization and desecuritization of Russia in the national security and defence concepts of Latvia (1995-2020)

Māris Andžāns, Andris Sprūds
{"title":"Securitization and desecuritization of Russia in the national security and defence concepts of Latvia (1995-2020)","authors":"Māris Andžāns, Andris Sprūds","doi":"10.14254/2071-8330.2021/14-1/13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article revisits and applies the securitization theory in assessing securitization and desecuritization of Russia in the national security and state defence concepts of Latvia. The analysis covers the editions of concepts from 1995 up to the date. With the benefit of the quantitative and qualitative content analyses, all mentions of Russia in those fourteen documents are classified as either securitizing, desecuritizing or nonsecuritizing. Further, they are analysed in the wider picture of national security. It is concluded that most of Latvia’s national security and state defence documents have reflected the perception of the existent security situation, and they have been limited in their pre-emptive and future-proof nature, at least regarding Russia. In most of the editions of the documents prior to the 2014 Ukraine crisis, Russia has been essentially undersecuritized as compared to the then existing potential of risks and threats. Meanwhile, the final editions from 2015 and on hint that Russia might be oversecuritized – not least compared to the earlier documents, but also at the expense of securitizing other objective threats.","PeriodicalId":330787,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of international studies","volume":"112 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of international studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-8330.2021/14-1/13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

This article revisits and applies the securitization theory in assessing securitization and desecuritization of Russia in the national security and state defence concepts of Latvia. The analysis covers the editions of concepts from 1995 up to the date. With the benefit of the quantitative and qualitative content analyses, all mentions of Russia in those fourteen documents are classified as either securitizing, desecuritizing or nonsecuritizing. Further, they are analysed in the wider picture of national security. It is concluded that most of Latvia’s national security and state defence documents have reflected the perception of the existent security situation, and they have been limited in their pre-emptive and future-proof nature, at least regarding Russia. In most of the editions of the documents prior to the 2014 Ukraine crisis, Russia has been essentially undersecuritized as compared to the then existing potential of risks and threats. Meanwhile, the final editions from 2015 and on hint that Russia might be oversecuritized – not least compared to the earlier documents, but also at the expense of securitizing other objective threats.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
拉脱维亚国家安全和防务概念中的俄罗斯的证券化与非证券化(1995-2020)
本文回顾并运用证券化理论对拉脱维亚国家安全和国防概念中俄罗斯的证券化和非证券化进行评估。该分析涵盖了1995年至今的概念版本。借助定量和定性的内容分析,这14份文件中提到的俄罗斯都被归类为证券化、非证券化或非证券化。此外,他们在国家安全的更广泛的画面分析。结论是,拉脱维亚的大多数国家安全和国防文件反映了对现有安全局势的看法,它们在先发制人和防范未来的性质方面受到限制,至少在俄罗斯方面是如此。在2014年乌克兰危机之前的大多数版本的文件中,与当时存在的潜在风险和威胁相比,俄罗斯基本上没有被证券化。与此同时,2015年及以后的最终版本暗示,俄罗斯可能会过度证券化——不仅与早期的文件相比,而且以牺牲其他客观威胁的证券化为代价。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effects of Conflict-related Sexual Violence on Kinship Networks: Case of Rohingya Refugees in Bangladesh Covid-19 dan Kekerasan Terhadap Perempuan Sebagai Pandemi Bayangan (The Shadow Pandemic) Evaluating Indonesia's Disaster Diplomacy Practices Under The Jokowi Administration In 2018 Merauke “Food Estate”: Alternatif Penanganan Konflik Di Papua Dalam Perspektif Ekonomi-Sosial Dan Budaya Whose Governance, Which Legitimacy? Myanmar’s Collective Agency In A Domineering Framework On The Rohingya Crisis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1