The purpose of the essay is both to bring forward the threats images, sectors, actors and referents that can be found at the European border between 2007-2010 and to explore whether they change during this period. Furthermore, the essay also intends to review the Copenhagen School’s theory of securitization. The analysis of the essay will be done on the European commission’s “Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges”, a rapport that focus on the European border and its enlargement. The frame of analysis will be the Copenhagen School’s theory of Securitization with the acknowledgement of the critic brought forward by Johan Eriksson and Thierry Balzacq. The Copenhagen school brings forward with their theory, the importance of the discourse of security and thus presents actors and referents which are involved in the process. They also include different sectors in which the different threats images may appear. All of this will be crucial for my examination of the theory as a hole. Furthermore, the essay will modify its methodology to include some of the critic. The purpose is to test if the theory can give a satisfying view of the threat images, sectors, actors and referents at the European border, with a qualitative and a quantitative method. In conclusion, the essay found that the securitization actor during the period between 2007-2010 was the commission itself and the reference object was EU and indirect its members states. The functional actors was the organization PKK and the UN, who with their actions changes the security dynamic in the region. Furthermore, the threat images that was constantly present in the rapports, was organized crime which was consistent with the result that the most found sector was the military sector. These results can be linked to the work of Peter Andreas who argues that the American and European border have shifted from a military tasks to policing tasks. This task change is something that also can be related to Johan Eriksson’s work regarding the change of task in the Swedish security. My final conclusion is that the Securitization theory most be seen as a framework for analyses. Further discussions are need regarding the theories concepts. I notice there are three fundamental discussions that need to be focused on; the focus on the securitized threats images, the lack of including the context and the focus on the speech act.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:sh-6122 |
| Date | January 2010 |
| Creators | Cerda, Salvador |
| Publisher | Södertörns högskola, Institutionen för samhällsvetenskaper |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0029 seconds