Abstract
Between Rationalism and Reflectivism: Constructivist Security heory and the Collapse of Yugoslavia
The theme of this dissertation is the conceptualisation of security in international relations theory (IRT) and the way such theory can help us understand processes like those that led to the Yugoslav War of Dissolution.
Keohane argued already in 1988 that the main theoretical division in IRT does not any longer go between (neo)realism and (neo)liberalism, but rather between the rationalists (neoliberalists and neorealists) on the one hand, and the reflectivists (poststructuralists and critical theory) on the other. The dissertation presents the way security is conceptualised in the main schools of thought, and discusses the extent to which they are useful in the analysis of the process that led to the Yugoslav War of Dissolution.
It argues that while a solid theory of security may still be rooted in the realist tradition, it would benefit from opening up to parts of the critique posted by the reflectivist/poststructuralist side. An enhanced understanding of identity and identity realignment as political and discursive processes seems almost inevitable in an attempt to deal properly with the questions posed by the course of events in the Balkans. Reflectivism, however, is better at criticising and deconstructing established models of thought than of presenting a framework of analysis on its own, at least if a traditional understanding of what social research is supposed to do is applied.
It is therefore argued that the theoretical foundations of the study of contemporary security questions requires a wider, more inclusive framework than what is provided by the established rationalist theories. What is needed is a theoretical approach that can successfully combine a focus on power and strategy, the traditional strongholds of rationalism, with the focus on identity politics, group realignment and structural change on the other that has become trademarks of the reflectivist positions.
The dissertation suggests that theoretical middle ground between the two opponents is underway in the form of social constructivism, which has been imported to the field of IRT from sociology. So far, however, constructivism in IRT is at an early stage, and relatively few attempts have been made to link it to the study of security and war. The most comprehensive attempt to do so can be found in the Copenhagen School of Security Studies, which introduces concepts like securitisation and societal security into a constructivist theory of security, while still maintaining that they remain rooted in the rationalist tradition. Building further on this constructivist turn I will move on to suggests a few modest suggestions on my own, particularly with respect to a concept of conflict entrepreneurship. Conflict entrepreneurs exploit the high level of insecurities and uncertainties about the future that characterises periods of rapid change for purposes of power maximation through, among other factors, identity politics, discourses of threat and danger, and the redefinition of social and / or physical borders. In order to apply this to the case of Yugoslavia, to identify the causes of the deteriorating climate, the deliberate acts taken to exploit these developments, as well as the relationship between the two. In conclusion, it is argued that a constructivist perspective may be successfully applied to the case of Yugoslavia, and that the conceptualisation of security in international relations theory may successfully open up to the added insights provided by a constructivist approach plus by applying some of the basic contributions of classical Realism within this new wider framework.
Digitalisert 2024. Noe understrekinger.