Search

Begin New Search Topic Security Journal Security Studies

1. Killing Norms Softly: US Targeted Killing, Quasi-secrecy and the Assassination Ban

Author:
Andris Banka and Adam Quinn
Publication Date:
07-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Security Studies
Institution:
Security Studies
Abstract:
This article argues that when actors engage in controversial new security practices, it is misconceived to view secrecy as an opposed, counterproductive alternative to the pursuit of legitimation. Rather, we propose, deployment of “quasi-secrecy”—a combination of official secrecy with leaks, selective disclosure, and de facto public awareness—can be an effective strategy for achieving normalization and legitimation while containing the risks entailed by disclosure. We support this claim via a detailed case study of US targeted killing. First, we establish the existence of an American norm against targeted killing during the period 1976–2001. We then detail the process by which an innovation in practice was secretly approved, implemented, became known, and was gradually, partially officially acknowledged. We argue that even if quasi-secrecy was not in this instance a coherently-conceived and deliberately pursued strategy from start to finish, the case provides proof of concept for its potential to be deployed as such.
Topic:
Security, Legitimacy, Normalization, and Secrecy
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2. Soldiers, Civilians, and Multilateral Humanitarian Intervention

Author:
Stefano Recchia
Publication Date:
06-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Security Studies
Institution:
Security Studies
Abstract:
Approval from the United Nations or NATO appears to have become a necessary condition for US humanitarian military intervention. Conventional explanations emphasizing the pull of legitimacy can- not fully account for this given that US policymakers vary consider- ably in their attachment to multilateralism. This article argues that America’s military leaders, who are consistently skeptical about humanitarian intervention and tend to emphasize its costs, play a central role in making multilateral approval necessary. As long as top-ranking generals express strong reservations about intervention and no clear threat to US national security exists, they can veto the use of force. In such circumstances, even heavyweight “humani- tarian hawks” among the civilian leadership, who initially may have wanted to bypass multilateral bodies to maximize US freedom of action, can be expected to recognize the need for UN or NATO approval—if only as a means of mollifying the generals by reas- suring them about the prospect of sustained multilateral burden sharing. Two case studies drawing on interviews with senior civil- ian and military officials illustrate and probe the plausibility of the argument.
Topic:
Security, NATO, Humanitarian Intervention, Multilateralism, and Civil-Military Relations
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, and North America

3. Identity, Insecurity, and Great Power Politics: The Tragedy of German Naval Ambition Before the First World War

Author:
Michelle Murray
Publication Date:
10-2011
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Security Studies
Institution:
Security Studies
Abstract:
Why did Germany pursue naval expansion at the turn of the twentieth century? This question has long puzzled scholars of international security, who consider German naval ambition to be an instance of suboptimal arming—a decision that decreased Germany's overall security and risked the survival of the German state. This article argues that the social desire to be recognized as a world power guided Germany's decision to challenge British naval hegemony. From the beginning of its naval planning, Germany had one clear aim: a powerful fleet of battleships stationed in the North Sea would alter the political relationship with Britain in such a way that it could no longer ignore Germany's claim to world power status. Reconceptualizing Germany's naval ambition as a struggle for recognition elucidates the contradictions at the center of German naval strategy, explaining how the doomed policy could proceed despite its certain failure. The article concludes that the power-maximizing practices of great powers should be seen as an important component of identity construction and an understudied dimension of contemporary security practice.
Topic:
Security and Power Politics
Political Geography:
Britain and Germany