Since securitization processes are agued to be able to create excessive power to actors, there are arguments that claim that securitization is a negative process. By combining aspects of the original securitization theory with Juha Vuoir’s theory of illocutionary force, this thesis makes an attempt at finding what different actors claimed was threatened in their respective securitization of the issue terrorism. The motive behind the actors are also investigated and argued to be made visible through the different speech acts each actor employs when trying to securitize an issue. The thesis concludes that all three securitizing actors use some traditional notions of what is being threatened, namely the state. However, they are all found to use less traditional referent objects in addition to the state. The thesis also concludes that the motives of the different actors are found. These are showcased through the president of the USA trying to create deterrence for attackers of his state and trying to create control on the international arena. The High Representative of the EU, trying to legitimize future acts of more integration in the Union. Finally the World Health Organization’s motive is argued to have been to put the issue on the agenda.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:lnu-91158 |
| Date | January 2020 |
| Creators | Vallin, Anders |
| Publisher | Linnéuniversitetet, Institutionen för statsvetenskap (ST) |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds