Security-risk management has long been a concern at Médecins du Monde (MdM),
as it was for other humanitarian agencies operating at the height of the Cold War.
However, it was in the 1990s that security had to address its own set of issues. The
collapse of the Soviet bloc and the post-Cold War conflicts created safety issues
for humanitarian agencies: a booming aid sector led to an increase in exposure,
together with a trend for
This book brings together a number of contributions that look into the political regulation of movement and analyses that engage the material enablers of and constraints on such movement. It attempts to bridge theoretical perspectives from critical security studies and political geography in order to provide a more comprehensive perspective on security and mobility. In this vein, the book brings together approaches to mobility that take into account both techniques and practices of regulating movement, as well as their underlying infrastructures. Together the contributions inquire into a politics of movement that lies at the core of the production of security. Drawing on the insight that security is a contingent concept that hinges on the social construction of threat – which in turn must be understood through its political, social, economic, and cultural dimensions – the contributors offer fine-grained perspectives on a presumably mobile and insecure world. The title of the book, Security/Mobility, is a direct reference to this world that at times appears dominated by these two paradigms. As is shown throughout the book, rather than being opposed to each other, a great deal of political effort is undertaken in order to reconcile the need for security and the necessity of mobility. Running through the book is the view that security and mobility are entangled in a constant dynamic – a dynamic that converges in what is conceptualised here as a politics of movement.
This strategy is guided by principled realism. It is realist because it acknowledges
the central role of power in international politics, affirms that sovereign states are the best
hope for a peaceful world, and clearly defines our national interests… We are also
realistic and understand that the American way of life cannot be imposed upon others, nor is it
the inevitable culmination of progress .
The White House, ‘National Security Strategy of the United States of America’
( The White House, 2017
➤ The principles of social security in the Welfare State
➤ Review of how social security developed up to 1979
➤ Description and analysis of the reforms and new attitude to social security
under the Conservatives after 1979
➤ Analysis of New Labour’s attitude to social security after 1997
BEVERIDGE: FROM THE CRADLE TO THE GRAVE
The Beveridge Report of 1942 which heralded in
the post-war Welfare State proposed a compreA form of taxation levied on
hensive National Insurance system which would
those in work and employers.
For over five decades, the Cold War security agenda was distinguished by the principal strategic balance, that of a structure of bipolarity, between the United States (US) and the Soviet Union (USSR). This book seeks to draw from current developments in critical security studies in order to establish a new framework of inquiry for security in the Middle East. It addresses the need to redefine security in the Middle East. The focus is squarely on the Arab-Israeli context in general, and the Palestinian-Israeli context in particular. The character of Arab-Israeli relations are measured by the Israeli foreign policy debate from the 1950s to the 1990s. A dialogue between Islam and Islamism as a means to broaden the terrain on which conflict resolution and post-bipolar security in the Middle East is to be understood is presented. The Middle East peace process (MEPP) was an additional factor in problematizing the military-strategic concept of security in the Middle East. The shift in analysis from national security to human security reflects the transformations of the post-Cold War era by combining military with non-military concerns such as environmental damage, social unrest, economic mismanagement, cultural conflict, gender inequity and radical fundamentalism. By way of contrast to realist international relations (IR) theory, developing-world theorists have proposed a different set of variables to explain the unique challenges facing developing states. Finally, the book examines the significance of ecopolitics in security agendas in the Middle East.
Eurasian security governance:
new threats, institutional adaptations
Halford Mackinder developed the geostrategic formulation recognising that
international politics encompasses the globe. His simple formulation, which
guided early twentieth-century policy-makers and theorists in North
America and continental Europe alike, held that the state that controls the
Eurasian heartland controls the periphery, and the state that controls the
periphery controls the world.1 More so than in the first decade of
Introduction: writing securitySecurity is among the most debated
and contested concepts in the study of international relations (IR).
‘Security’ commands a unique metaphysical and disciplinary
power which involves the drawing of imaginary lines, the consolidated
resentment of difference ( vis-à-vis the
‘other’), as well as the constitution of self
Water scarcity, the 1980s’ Palestinian uprising and implications for peace
D ID WATER
SCARCITY precipitate the 1980s’
intifada – the violent conflict between the
Palestinians and the Israelis? This difficult question is the type of
issue with which environmental security researchers grapple. Obviously,
violent conflict results from multiple factors, such as ethnic tension,
failed deterrence, and misperception. The environmental
Reflections on Eurasian security
David P. Calleo
It seems an especially appropriate moment for American scholars to consider
the long-term issues of Eurasian security. At this time, of course, it is not easy
to have a long-term vision of anything. Since the atrocities of September 11
2001, the world seems to have changed for us in fundamental ways. Old
trends, therefore, may no longer apply.
It is not true, however, that the hatred of the United States that exploded
on September 11 began on that same day. Indeed, even