Security studies have been a subject of research academically not long ago and so far its definition is still very arbitrary. For its traditional aspects, security mainly of a state fell in between safety and threats – the ability to increase greater safety and minimize upcoming threats from internal and external. From this point of views, security studies tended to be matched with realist areas of specialists. However, in reality security is not just of a concern of the states but different levels ranging from state leaders, bureaucracy, and societal groups. Then security from this ground is not anymore a subject to threats, peace or military force, security studies in a growing sense and of many factors has moved away from its traditional definition. Security studies in this modern time largely focus not only on military power, proliferation of arms but also about diplomacy, crisis management, poverty, and energy and many other nonmilitary issues etc. Today’s issues are mostly borderless. It may pose harm to any states at its effect.
Throughout the history, security aspects departed from just covering power superiority and military capability to failure of controlling weapon of mass destruction, arms trafficking and side-effects of nuclear weapons etc. In a failed or weak state, weapon is not serving to stabilize the country but would rather destabilize since very weak central government could cause corruptive actions and numerous irregularities which allow arm smugglers to trade arms easily. Hence, security studies was seen to incorporate more and more emerging issues of this global world. Its coverage simply expanded with the time since the end of WWII and even multiply enlarged right after the end of the Cold War.
There are possibly few reasons why security studies have been enlarged over time. Access to issues by greater freed of data sharing, the end of bipolar world which often drew attention on ideologies versus reemerging of powerful states in the regions such as the EU, India, China and Russia etc., the openness of scholarly studies which has led to various publication of different books, articles about security, and last but not least the full coverage of mass media.
In brief, the article was trying to argue that security studies have been getting more and more attention from all sectors. One should not undermine security studies as not important, especially after the end of the Cold War where any thinkers were welcoming the peace-dividend – no more worries about military power and just take time to focus more on social and economic aspects. But not all, the worse and complicated violent conflicts happens in Rwanda, Sudan, former Yugoslavia, and in the Middle East remind that security studies not just simply important but seriously vital and they must take more comprehensive, more holistic approach and even longer term visionary than ever before.
I, personally, mostly agree with the literature so as security ties to almost all issues including politics, economic, domestic, international & regional community, ideologies, identity and last but not least the power of each and every individual’s mind. The security focused is widely depended on the circumstance, times and space it is facing. During volatile time, military powers gains much higher attention while in stable time nonmilitary issues take place instead. Hence, the study of security is still relevant through time. And in fact, in our current world there are inflations of security studies since the academic sphere enjoys much higher encouragement and support both financial and technical from the public. For some reason, security studies may even go ahead of time since thinkers could foresee the future with their warning-system.
Security studies is crucial for both academic and strategist nationalist, but studying security does not always contribute to peace and stability. Unless we have a clear fact and fixed issues then we can have a precise solution to preserving security of a state or nation. But we are doing security studies versus social facts, the facts that always change and update their apparent, size, impacts in every second. Can we say with a clear-cut this is a security concern and that is not? Security studies for some time might lead to biases and miscalculation. The war in Iraq in 2003, for example, was the outcome of wrong security studies. The U.S was very selective in choosing factors and hypotheses in order show that it was threated to peace and required a necessary move to do pre-emptive strike against Saddam Hussein government in 2003.
To a certain extent, security studies becomes a hostage of the strong and powerful states. Of course, security is completely relevant to all humans and states of all types. Security studies should serve general human race’s interests, not just a particular group or nation. Hence, security studies should be conducted inclusively from inter-disciplinary and approaches. Security subject and real world must be closely studied in order to produce a theoretical basis that is applicable for a practical one.
Finally, few qestions have been born in my head and I would love to post this for answner from the public:
Is security studies universal for everyone or it just existed from the mid-1970s onwards?
What are most important issues deserving a subject of today’s security studies?
What make security misconception? How to deal with it?
