Towards a global security studies: what can looking at China tell us about the concept of security?

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS European Journal of International Relations Pub Date : 2023-06-08 DOI:10.1177/13540661231176990
Dr Jonna Nyman
{"title":"Towards a global security studies: what can looking at China tell us about the concept of security?","authors":"Dr Jonna Nyman","doi":"10.1177/13540661231176990","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Existing scholarship has demonstrated that theorising about security is Eurocentric. This leaves us with a partial account of the concept of security, which is presented as universal. This in turn generates explanatory problems because we are only seeing part of the picture. Yet there have been few attempts to move beyond critiques of Eurocentrism to examine the concept of security ‘elsewhere’. This paper takes China as its starting point, asking: what can looking at China tell us about security? In answering this question, the paper makes two contributions. First, it presents new empirical findings, building a conceptual history of security in China. Drawing on 140 key texts dating 1926–2022, the paper traces the emergence of the concept of security in China and its evolution through three explicit security concepts. Drawing on postcolonial insights it demonstrates that these concepts are hybrid, evolving out of multiple domestic and international influences. They have similarities as well as differences with the Eurocentric concept that dominates International Security Studies (ISS) and produce a discrete approach towards security that has been overlooked in a discipline that uses ‘Europe to explain Asia’. Second, considering these insights, the paper demonstrates that the universal concept of security that underpins theorising in ISS is partial and misleading. Differences in security concepts matter for theorising security and for understanding security policy. Consequently, I argue that we need to provincialize the concept of security: a truly global security studies is of necessity a provincial one attuned to difference and similarity.","PeriodicalId":48069,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Relations","volume":"29 1","pages":"673 - 697"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661231176990","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Existing scholarship has demonstrated that theorising about security is Eurocentric. This leaves us with a partial account of the concept of security, which is presented as universal. This in turn generates explanatory problems because we are only seeing part of the picture. Yet there have been few attempts to move beyond critiques of Eurocentrism to examine the concept of security ‘elsewhere’. This paper takes China as its starting point, asking: what can looking at China tell us about security? In answering this question, the paper makes two contributions. First, it presents new empirical findings, building a conceptual history of security in China. Drawing on 140 key texts dating 1926–2022, the paper traces the emergence of the concept of security in China and its evolution through three explicit security concepts. Drawing on postcolonial insights it demonstrates that these concepts are hybrid, evolving out of multiple domestic and international influences. They have similarities as well as differences with the Eurocentric concept that dominates International Security Studies (ISS) and produce a discrete approach towards security that has been overlooked in a discipline that uses ‘Europe to explain Asia’. Second, considering these insights, the paper demonstrates that the universal concept of security that underpins theorising in ISS is partial and misleading. Differences in security concepts matter for theorising security and for understanding security policy. Consequently, I argue that we need to provincialize the concept of security: a truly global security studies is of necessity a provincial one attuned to difference and similarity.
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
从全球安全研究的角度看:中国对安全的概念有什么启示?
现有的学术研究表明,关于安全的理论是以欧洲为中心的。这给我们留下了对安全概念的部分描述,安全概念被认为是普遍的。这反过来又产生了解释问题,因为我们只看到了画面的一部分。然而,很少有人试图超越对欧洲中心主义的批评,来审视“其他地方”的安全概念。本文以中国为出发点,提出了这样一个问题:审视中国能告诉我们什么是安全?在回答这个问题时,本文有两个贡献。首先,它提出了新的实证发现,构建了中国安全的概念史。本文引用了1926年至2022年的140篇关键文本,通过三个明确的安全概念追溯了安全概念在中国的出现及其演变。根据后殖民主义的见解,它表明这些概念是混合的,是在多重国内和国际影响下演变而来的。它们与主导国际安全研究(ISS)的以欧洲为中心的概念既有相似之处,也有不同之处,并产生了一种离散的安全方法,而这种方法在使用“欧洲来解释亚洲”的学科中被忽视了。其次,考虑到这些见解,本文证明了支撑ISS理论的普遍安全概念是片面的和误导性的。安全概念的差异对于安全理论和理解安全策略至关重要。因此,我认为,我们需要将安全概念省级化:一个真正的全球安全研究是必要的,一个适应差异和相似性的省级研究。
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
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
8.80%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: The European Journal of International Relations publishes peer-reviewed scholarly contributions across the full breadth of the field of International Relations, from cutting edge theoretical debates to topics of contemporary and historical interest to scholars and practitioners in the IR community. The journal eschews adherence to any particular school or approach, nor is it either predisposed or restricted to any particular methodology. Theoretically aware empirical analysis and conceptual innovation forms the core of the journal’s dissemination of International Relations scholarship throughout the global academic community. In keeping with its European roots, this includes a commitment to underlying philosophical and normative issues relevant to the field, as well as interaction with related disciplines in the social sciences and humanities. This theoretical and methodological openness aims to produce a European journal with global impact, fostering broad awareness and innovation in a dynamic discipline. Adherence to this broad mandate has underpinned the journal’s emergence as a major and independent worldwide voice across the sub-fields of International Relations scholarship. The Editors embrace and are committed to further developing this inheritance. Above all the journal aims to achieve a representative balance across the diversity of the field and to promote deeper understanding of the rapidly-changing world around us. This includes an active and on-going commitment to facilitating dialogue with the study of global politics in the social sciences and beyond, among others international history, international law, international and development economics, and political/economic geography. The EJIR warmly embraces genuinely interdisciplinary scholarship that actively engages with the broad debates taking place across the contemporary field of international relations.
期刊最新文献
Global injustice and the production of ontological insecurity Why the West’s alternative to China’s international infrastructure financing is failing Manufacturing consensus: China’s strategic narratives and geoeconomic competition in Asia The afterlives of state failure: echoes and aftermaths of colonialism Hidden figures: how legal experts influence the design of international institutions
×
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