Předmět Contemporary Approaches in Critical Security Studies (ACIS) (JPM668)

Na serveru studentino.cz naleznete nejrůznější studijní materiály: zápisky z přednášek nebo cvičení, vzorové testy, seminární práce, domácí úkoly a další z předmětu JPM668 - Contemporary Approaches in Critical Security Studies (ACIS), Fakulta sociálních věd, Univerzita Karlova v Praze (UK).

Materiál	Typ	Datum	Počet stažení

Cíl

The course seeks to familiarize students with approaches to the study of security that depart from traditional paradigms whose attention remains limited to states and material capacities. Its objective is to show that security can, and indeed should be, conceived in much broader terms. These include questions pertaining to, among other, the role of language, seemingly mundane everyday practices of security, and exclusionary nature of security policies. By demonstrating the salience of these issues, the course aims to significantly enrich students' analytical toolbox. Upon the course's completion, participants' widened perspective shall thus enable them to critically reflect on and tackle a variety of problems and phenomena which remain invisible for those opting for traditional understanding of security. Lastly, the course demonstrates the practical relevance of the discussed approaches. Throughout the semester, it highlights the connection between theoretical notions and their repercussions "on the ground". As a result, the course shows how the adoption of a critical perspective can contribute to policy-making as well as students' own work.

Sylabus

1, From states to humans (and beyond), 1st October 2015What are the main differences between traditional and critical research on security? And what are the roots of thinking that set out to challenge the dominant understanding of security? The seminar discusses these issues and introduces critical security studies as a broad school of thought that provides an innovative analytical toolbox.Required readings:Jackson, Richard (2012) `How I was radicalized; or, the effects of opening your eyes`, richardjacksonterrorismblog, available at https://richardjacksonterrorismblog.wordpress.com/2012/10/29/how-i-was-radicalized-or-the-effects-of-opening-your-eyes.Krause, Keith and Michael C. Williams (1996) ‘Broadening the Agenda of Security Studies: Politics and Methods’, Mershon International Studies Review, 40 (2): 229-254.Cox, Robert C. (1981) ‘Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory’, Millennium - Journal of International Studies, 10 (2): 126-155 (READ ONLY pp. 126-130).Recommended reading:Buzan, Barry and Lene Hansen (2009) The Evolution of International Security Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.2, Security as discourse, 15th October 2015First notions that started to challenge the dominance of rationalist approaches in the field of security studies were those that highlighted the importance of security policies' discursive dimension. These works argued that language matters even in the realm which traditional scholars portray as driven by material factors and interests. The seminar demonstrates the continuing salience of this way of thinking and familiarizes students with various approaches concerned with the linguistic construction of security threats.Required readings:Buzan, Barry, Ole Wæver and Jaap de Wilde (1998) Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Boulder, Colo.; London: Lynne Rienner Publishers: ch. 1 and 2.McInnes, Colin and Simon Rushton (2013) ‘HIV/AIDS and Securitization Theory’, European Journal of International Relations, 19 (1): 115-138.Jackson, Richard (2007) ‘Constructing Enemies: "Islamic Terrorism" in Political and Academic Discourse’, Government and Opposition, 42 (3): 394-426.Recommended readings:Balzacq, Thierry (2010) Securitization Theory: How Security Problems Emerge and Dissolve. London and New York: Routledge.Dillon, Michael and Julien Reid (2009) The Liberal Way of War: Killing to Make Life Live. London and New York: Routledge.Stritzel, Holger (2007) ‘Towards a Theory of Securitization: Copenhagen and Beyond’, European Journal of International Relations, 13 (3): 357-383.Hansen, Lene (2006) Security as Practice. London and New York: Routledge.3, Security as practice, 29th October 2015Elite decision-makers are not the only ones shaping security politics. Arguing that the ways security is practiced "on the ground" matters as well, this seminar shifts the attention from high-level politicians to policemen, military, customs officers, and other security experts and bureaucrats and from political speeches to seemingly insignificant routines of security professionals. The seminar introduces sociological approaches to security studies and outlines analytical tools for studying security as practice.Required readings:Neumann, Iver B. (2002) ‘Returning Practice to the Linguistic Turn: The Case of Diplomacy’, Millennium-Journal of International Studies, 31 (3): 627-651.Balzacq, Thierry, Tugba Basaran, Didier Bigo, Emmanuel-Pierre Guitter and Christian Olsson (2010) ‘Security Practices’, International Studies Encyclopaedia, Oxford: Blackwell.Abrahamsen, Rita and Michael C. Williams (2011) ‘Privatization in practice: power and capital in the field of global security’, in Adler, Emanuel and Vincent Pouliot (eds.) International Practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 310-331.Recommended readings:Acuto, Michele and Simon Curtis (eds.) (2014) Reassembling International Theory: Assemblage Thinking and International Relations. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Bigo, Didier (2008) ‘Globalized (in)security: the field and the ban-opticon’, in Bigo, Didier and Anastassia Tsoukala (eds.) Terror, Insecurity and Liberty: Illiberal Practices of Liberal Regimes after 9/11. Oxon and New York: Routledge: 10-48.Bueger, Christian (2014) ‘Pathways to practice: praxiography and international politics’, European Political Science Review, 6 (3): 383-406.4, Security: plurality, marginalization and resistance, 12th November 2015"Security" is not a unitary concept that has a transcendental and universal meaning. To the contrary, security is experienced differently by different people, depending on their race, class, gender and sexuality. This class thus explores issues of plurality and marginalization which are integral to the study of security. It especially attends to notions derived from post-colonial and gender scholarship as it focuses on limits of Western liberal concepts with regards to post-colonial setting as well as on gender biases of mainstream security studies.Required readings:Darby, Phillip (2009) ‘Rolling Back the Frontiers of Empire: Practising the Postcolonial,’ International Peacekeeping, 16 (5): 699-716.Hansen, Lene (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.Honke, Jana, and Michael-Markus Muller (2012) ‘Governing (in)security in a Postcolonial World: Transnational Entanglements and the Worldliness of ‘Local’ Practice’, Security Dialogue, 43 (5): 383-401.Recommended readings:Sabaratnam, Meera (2013) ‘Avatars of Eurocentrism in the critique of the liberal peace’, Security Dialogue, 44 (3): 259-278.Chakrabarty, Dipesh (2000) Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Wibben, Annick (2011) Feminist Security Studies: A Narrative Approach. London and New York: Routledge.5, Stuff that matters: Materiality and security, 26th November 2015We live in a material world. People use varieties of tools, devices and technologies to perform certain tasks in their daily life and at the same time, they are influenced by the material environment they live in. How do the interactions of human actors with material objects and built environments play out when it comes to security? How do various material devices enable or constrain security practices and how they render certain type of behaviour as a threat?Required readings:Salter, Mark (2015): ‘Introduction: Circuits and Motion.’ In Salter, Mark (ed.) Making Things International 1. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press: vii-xxii.Latour, Bruno (1991): ‘Technology is Society made durable.’ In Law, John (ed.). A Sociology of Monsters. Essays on Power, Technology and Domination. Routledge: London: 103-131.Schouten, Peer (2014): ‘Security as controversy: Reassembling security at Amsterdam Airport’, Security Dialogue, 45 (1): 23 - 42.Recommended readings:Aradau, Claudia (2010) ‘Security That Matters: Critical Infrastructure and Objects of Protection’, Security Dialogue, 41(5): 491-514.Latour, Bruno (2005) Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.6, So what? Normative dilemmas and practical challenges, 10th December 2015What perspectives on security do critical security studies offer? What practical problems and normative dilemmas related to contemporary security politics do they highlight? And how can this critique be used to improve our research, advisory or policy work?Required readings:Elkus, Adam (2015) ‘The Problem of Bridging the Gap’, Medium.com, available at https://medium.com/@Aelkus/the-problem-of-bridging-the-gap-5498d5f25581.Godehardt, Nadine (2015) It’s not about Facts, It’s about Meaning: How Do Poststructuralists Advise Policymakers in questions of International Politics and Security?. Working Paper of SWP Asia Research Unit, 2015/Nr. 1, March 2015.Wiebe, Sarah M. (2013) ‘Affective Terrain: Approaching the Field in Aamjiwnaang’. In Salter, Mark B. and Can E. Mutlu (eds.) Research Methods in Critical Security Studies: An Introduction. London and New York: Routledge: 158-161.Hagmann, Jonas and Myriam Dunn Cavelty (2012) ‘National Risk Registers: Security Scientism and the Propagation of Permanent Insecurity’, Security Dialogue, 43 (1): 79-96.Recommended reading:Gusterson, Hugh (2015) ‘Ethics, Expertise and Human Terrain’. In: Berling, Trine Villumsen and Christian Bueger (eds.) Security Expertise: Practices, Power and Responsibility. London: Routledge.

Garant

Mgr. Jan DanielDagmar Rychnovská, LL.M., MA ETH UZHMgr. Jakub Záhora

Vyučující

Mgr. Jan DanielDagmar Rychnovská, LL.M., MA ETH UZHMgr. Jakub Záhora