Economic aspects of national

security
INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY
KW – 1
Problems to discuss
1. Security and National Security – definitions
2. The relationship between security and economics in major IR
theories
3. Evolution of understanding the concept of national security – from
state-centric to human-centric security
4. Inclusion of economic aspects to national security
5. Critical infrastructure as ‚economic’ dimension of national security
Security and National Security – definitions
• National security conceptualizations until the 19th century
• Tukidydes (more powerful actor prevails)
• Machiavelli (whatever is necessary to protect position and the security of the
realm)
• Hobbes (natural state of the world is a state of war)
• National security - states are seen as having to act selfishly in order to provide
security for themselves
• National security conceptualizations in 20th/21st century – exmples of
definitions
 Realism
The relationship
between Liberalism
security and
Constructivism
economics in
major IR Critical Theory
theories
Critical Political Economy
Realism
• Carr –
• the lack of security in the world is caused by differing endowments of resources and governmental structures, conflicting ideologies,
and the thirst for power of certain individual leaders
• two main factors of insecurity between states: interdependence and inequality
• Waltz – (neorealism)
• arguing that the lack of an overall authority means in order to survive in the anarchic world, states have no choice but to act via self-
serving means
• Defensive realism -defensive realists argue that self-interested pursuit of national security pushes states into acting cooperatively where
possible and maintaining the status quo.
• Offensive realism - offensive realists, (Mearsheimer) argue this is more likely to encourage states to seek power in order to deter the external
threat
• REALISM – common elements
• Interstate aggression, the fear and threat of violence from enemy states, and a focus on the military and conflictual aspects of security
are all factors that a state needs to respond to in order to preserve itself and its security – that is, the security of its borders, resources
and people
• Despite ‘security’ being the more frequently used term prior to the Second World War (WW2), ‘national security’ was deemed
synonymous with ‘security’ as the realist theory focused principally on the nation state
 • Inspired by Immanuel Kant - the balance of power is a
peacekeeper; any ruler’s desire to conquer comes with
the ultimate goal of achieving peace.
• Liberalism places emphasis on the relationship between
the state and international society and the importance of
interdependence between states and other actors.
• The interactions of sovereign states are bounded by the

Liberalism rules and institutions of their own making

• There is a natural acceptance of the importance of
cooperation and coexistence on the international stage
• Liberalism is more concerned about the role of
international organisations and the benefits of
international cooperation, which are often motivated by
or at least accompanied by economic cooperation
(international trade)
Constructivism
• Advocates that national security should be thought of as a socially constructed phenomenon, whereby
threats are brought into being due to social aspects (such as identity, norms and culture) rather than
being defined in terms of some abstract set of security criteria
• Wendt - the anarchic state-based international political system is socially constructed; by extension,
therefore, national security interests are likewise a social construct.
• Katzenstein - the role of domestic identity, norms and culture in the construction of national security
interests
• Two fields:
• ‘conventional constructivism’ (including Wendt), which explores the role of norms and identity in
shaping the international system and its outcomes and explores the drivers behind certain decisions
and courses of action
• ‘critical constructivism’, which examines the ways in which threat perceptions and the object of
security are socially constructed, emphasising language and discourse - often considered to fall
within critical theory
Critical Theory
• Critical theorists understand that ‘security’ as a word or idea is empty in itself, since its meaning is
defined by the context in which it is used
• Critical theory encompasses a broad range of perspectives such as feminist theory,
poststructuralism and post-colonialism
• Two prominent schools of thought within critical theory:
• The Copenhagen School (Barry Buzan, Ole Waever and Jaap de Wilde) draws on constructivist
theory, exploring security as a socially constructed phenomenon, and introducing the notion of
‘securitisation’ - the practice of state actors elevating issues of domestic level politics into
issues of high politics that impact states on the national level, thereby transforming them into
issues of national security
• The Welsh School argues for a broader definition of security. However rather than the notion
of societal security, the Welsh School focuses on human emancipation and views the individual
as the referent object, and the state as the means for ensuring this security
Critical Political Economy
• CPE may be considered a field of critical theory, but falls outside the traditional scope of critical
security studies.
• The fundamental premise of CPE is the mutual constitution of the economic and political sphere,
and the security threats posed by the unequal division of power and welfare.
• CPE theorists (Strange, Cutler) highlight the risks (in both academic and policy terms) of treating
the economy and national security as separate fields.
• A central proposition of CPE theory is that structural power of nation states has been eroded by the
integration of national economies into the globalised economy, with power thus shifting to non-
state actors, such as transnational corporations.
• CPE challenges traditional understandings of national security threats as those that primarily
emanate from malicious actors – such as other nation-states – and also considers private
corporations as both providers of, and possible threats to, national security
Evolution of understanding the concept of national
security – from state-centric to human-centric security
Dominance of realist thinking and a narrow view of national security before the 1990s
• Realist thinkers placed a great deal of importance on the territorial integrity of the state and the physical safety of its people

Redefining national security after 1990 in a new global order

• The end of the Cold War marked a turning point in traditional military-dominated conceptions of security
• Global political thinking changed, creating a shift from a realist understanding of national security and its focus on expanding security, to
encompass other previously neglected aspects (processes: globalization, europeanization, transnationalization, erosion of state
soveregnity)
• Ullman - a threat to national security could be viewed as something that threatens to ‘degrade the quality of life for the inhabitants of a
state’, or that threatens to ‘narrow the range of policy choices available to the government of a state or to private, nongovernmental
entities (persons, groups, corporations) within the state

Introducing ‘human security’ to further broaden the understanding of national security

• HS - formally defined in the 1994 Human Development Report, which lists seven dimensions of human security: economic, health,
personal, political, food, environmental and community
• In 2001, the Commission on Human Security was established, which maintains a view that human and national elements of security are
separate but mutually dependent,
• HS Commission’s definition - the protection of ‘human lives in ways that enhance human freedoms and human fulfilment
 • Security has been extended from nations to the
security of individuals.
Extension of • Security accounts for the international system.
• Security extended to look beyond military aspects
security in of security to previously neglected dimensions of
security, including political, economic, social,

four ways environmental or ‘human’ security aspects.

• Political responsibility for dealing with security

(Rothschild) matters now includes actors beyond national

governments, such as international organisations,
local government, the public, the media and the
private sector
Arguments Poor economic conditions, such as mass unemployment and
stunted growth, could mean military capabilities are under-
resourced, thus, states have weaker defences and could be more

to justify the vulnerable to foreign aggression

adoption of Poor economic conditions leads to a lower standard of living,

associated with job losses and decreased ability of people to
provide for themselves, which may fuel conflicts

a broader
view of
National security could be threatened if wars are waged in
competition for scarce resources

national Physical safety of the state could be under threat due to

environmental conditions as seen, for example, by the risk of
security flooding
 In the English language, further distinctions
are drawn between the concepts of ‘safety’
Inclusion of and ‘security’
• Safety - referring to being protected against

economic unintended threats

• Security - while the latter implies protection against
deliberate threats
aspects to Economic and welfare aspects in national
national strategic document

security Development of the concept of critical

infrastructure, sectors and processes that
enable the functioning of society
Critical infrastructure as ‚economic’ dimension of national security

• DEFINITIONS
• Critical sectors are sectors whose assets, systems and networks (whether physical or
virtual) are considered so vital that their incapacitation or destruction would have a
debilitating effect on national security, the functioning of the economy and society
• Critical infrastructure is an asset or system that is essential for the maintenance of
vital societal functions. The destruction of or damage or disruption to a critical
infrastructure may have a significant negative impact for national or EU security and
the well-being of its citizens
• Critical processes are processes that could result in severe social disruption in the
event of their failure or disruption
 • Ownership (through control and influence) by public or private actors of
critical infrastructure and sectors, or ownership of assets in physical
proximity to critical infrastructure and sectors.
• Espionage and access to sensitive information enabled, for example, by
Seven ‘risk vectors’ physical proximity or ownership.

through which • Natural resource dependence on third countries and actors for the supply of
critical raw materials and energy.
economic variables • Supplier dependence on specific suppliers for the provision and
maintenance of critical infrastructure and processes, reinforced by the
and events can presence of a skills and technology gap and lack of competition that may
result in reduced efforts to ensure resilience of critical infrastructure, sectors
impact critical and processes as well as reduced innovation and R&D
infrastructure, sectors • Government intervention through expenditure, economic policy and
regulation, which can have a strong influence on the quality, availability and
and processes and resilience of critical infrastructure, sectors and processes

could threaten • Corruption and fraud, which may undermine the resilience of critical
infrastructure and potentially create opportunities for malicious actors to
national security obtain physical or digital access to sensitive assets and information.
• Socio-economic inequality resulting from factors such as economic policies
and neoliberal market forces, which may reduce the ability of citizens to
provide for themselves, as well as risk social unrest and domestic instability
that pose a threat to critical infrastructure, sectors and processes.
Risk Factors to Critical Infrastructure

Globalisation and interdependence EU economic trends playing a critical role

Digital transformation and the between critical infrastructure, sectors and for the Netherlands, and other EU Member
implementation of industrial IoT, bringing processes of one country with others, States, due to the tight interconnectedness
challenges in relation to security of supply magnifying risks to an individual country’s via economic, business, political and
chain, cyber security and risks of data national critical infrastructures, which can governance structures, as well as an
espionage in critical sectors and processes. be affected through cascading effects from expanded influence of private actors over
developments elsewhere political processes.

Potential concerns with regard to

The political and economic paradigm of information integrity and trustworthiness,
Uncertainty in relation to resource security,
foreign states which, similar to which may act as an avenue for malicious
particularly in relation to reliance on foreign
protectionism, considers the risks related to actors – including private companies – to
suppliers of energy and the uptake of
different national economic models and disrupt critical processes such as elections
alternative energy generation, distribution
their impact on the competitiveness in the and democratic decision-making, and gain
and storage technologies.
area of critical sectors and processes. influence in critical sectors (such as
telecommunications or political institutions