A friend from Jacobs University Bremen and I have written a paper on the re-division of EU security studies into an internal and an external domain. In it, we argue against recent developments in security studies, which emphasise the merging of two previously distinct spheres.
What was traditionally considered an internal policy issue (e.g. policing, terrorism, organised crime) and those of the xternal domain (e.g. WMD, failing states) presumably have merged. Now I would be the last one to question the phenomenological merger of threats. International terrorism is the most obvious example.
What I don’t really see, and that is what we argue in the article, is a blurring of the boundaries when we look at the behaviour of states when trying to deal with these problems. Security studies, international relations and in particular governance proponents since recently claim that not only phenomena merge, but that states’ responses also merge.
In our paper we show, however, that when we look at the example of EU security policy, the logics of decision-making and implementation in Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) and External Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) fundamentally differ. Their logics are just different.
As this is a rather bold claim, I was wondering if anyone out there has a comment or two. I would love to hear them. And here is the paper Security Re-Divided, for those of you who want to read it. Enjoy!
