From securitization moves to positive outcomes: The case of the spring 2010 Mekong crisis. (October 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Biba, Sebastian
• Editors: Stavrianakis, Anna; Salter, Mark B
• Is Part Of: Security dialogue. Volume 47:Number 5(2016)
• Page Start: 420
• Page End: 439
• Publication Date: 2016-10
• Subjects: Audience -- Mekong -- positive outcomes -- (re)politicization -- securitization; Security, International -- Periodicals; International relations -- Periodicals; 327.05
• DOI: 10.1177/0967010616657795
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0967-0106

Abstract

Full securitization has largely been regarded as something negative that should be avoided. While acknowledging this, the present article adds that securitization moves that fail to succeed (i.e. that end in securitization failure) can, at least in the environmental sector of security, trigger positive outcomes if a given issue becomes (re)politicized rather than depoliticized. This is because securitization moves can be helpful in raising sufficient awareness of an issue to gain the attention of the relevant audience(s). Subsequently, the article argues, different audience strategies determine whether securitization moves are turned into securitization failure as (re)politicization or securitization failure as depoliticization. The article introduces different behavioral strategies that audiences can employ to reject securitization moves: the passive recipient strategy, the blocking strategy, and the active reshaping strategy. Only the latter indicates that an audience not interested in letting securitization moves succeed simultaneously seeks to have the issue in question be, or remain, a part of the political agenda. The article uses the spring 2010 Mekong crisis as a test case to support its theoretical arguments.