Securitization
Introduction
Various agendas receive varying degrees of attention in politics and international relations, depending on how they are prioritized. Certain issues which require urgent and extensive measures may remain undone due to where they fall on the priority list. Issues are prioritized in order of their importance to the national and international communities. Matters related to security are given top priority(Eroukhmanoff, 2018). Therefore, if state actors need to have an agenda given immediate attention, they declare it as a security issue through a process known as securitization. Securitization of an issue may not necessarily qualify it as a national security threat.
In most cases, securitization is fueled by power and politics. Issues which do not necessarily affect security may be securitized if powerful political actors are pushing the agenda. Therefore, it is important to understand when, in the absence of a political agenda, an issue should be securitized, and the advantages and disadvantages of making such a move. Policy issues should be securitized only when they pose a significant threat to security since the securitized issue overshadows all other policy issues to receive disproportionate attention and resources.
Securitization
Securitization is the process through which state actors transform policy issues into security matters(Eroukhmanoff, 2018). When an issue is securitized, it moves to the top of the priority list and is therefore allocated resources as a matter of high priority. The definition of security continues to evolve over the years as new security threats continue to emerge. As a result, issues that can be securitized are defined as per the definition of security adopted under the circumstances. Biosecurity and terrorism are some of the common areas from which issues are securitized. For instance, a disease outbreak may be securitized to enable it to be given top priority so that actors may be authorized to use extraordinary measures to combat the spread and come up with a cure or control measures for the disease. Otherwise, without securitization, the disease may continue to spread as actors wait to be allocated resources to fight it.
Issues should only be securitized if they constitute a significant form of security threat. Securitized items receive disproportionate attention and are allocated more extensively than other topics (Eroukhmanoff, 2018). Political power, however, interferes to a considerable extent with the type and impact of issues that are securitized. For instance, influential political leaders may push their agendas forward by linking them to national and sometimes international security. Such agendas take up the top spots on the priority list, which would otherwise be occupied by real threats and other important issues. Logically, successful securitization depends on the actor’s ability to construct and present an issue as an existing or foreseeable problem. The issue of actors, referent objects, threats, conditions, audience, and securitization outcomes needs to be re-examined and redefined to come up with more definitive ways of understanding securitization and its importance. That way, issues can be securitized in a manner that will benefit the communities other than individuals.
Pros and Cons of Securitization
Securitization has its advantages and disadvantages. When deserving issues are securitized, the communities benefit from the prompt and extreme measures employed to contain the threat. For instance, in the event of a disease outbreak, interdisciplinary teams are deployed to the affected areas with sufficient funding, equipment, and any other materials that may be required and adequate funding to curb the spread of the disease (Rushton, 2014). Medical researchers and pharmacological experts are supported in different ways and means to help them come up with a cure or a control mechanism for the disease. These would not happen if the pandemic is not packaged as a security issue.
As a second advantage, securitization enables policymakers to fast-track certain policy decisions. As a result, resources and attention are channeled towards the accomplishment of the goals set in policy, enabling field actors to arrest various threatening situations before they escalate(Rushton, 2014). For instance, the securitization of a looming act of terrorism enables the government to take extreme measures to protect the nation and its citizens. The government may, for example, instruct the military to take extraordinary measures to ensure that the act is thwarted and that the people are not hurt in any way.
On the contrary, however, securitization may be disadvantageous to the affected communities. Several issues evidently affect the communities more than the so-called securitized issues. Thousands of people die annually of communicable diseases, road accidents, preventable diseases, floods, and hunger, among others. It is in very rare circumstances that such problems will be pushed to securitization. In several communities, these and such related issues are viewed as ‘normal,’ yet they claim numerous lives and affect millions of others in different ways. Disease outbreaks may be securitized with ease, but community-based prevention before the outbreak is often overlooked(Rushton, 2014). Community issues such as education, health, and sanitation are evidently very important and beneficial to the people. However, these may be easily ignored as resources are channeled towards securitized issues, which may, in reality, be weakly linked or unrelated to security. Therefore, while communities may benefit from the securitization of certain issues, accrued damages could be prevented if the issue was treated with similar emphasis at a preventive stage.
As determined earlier, securitization is an act whose success depends largely on the ability of the actor. Therefore, it is very likely that unimportant issues are securitized whenever they are brought forward by capable actors. These securitized issues, regardless of their genuineness, will be prioritized and treated with urgency at the expense of more deserving issues(Eroukhmanoff, 2018). As a result, wrongly prioritized issues are given attention, while the real threats still lie within the communities. A rumored act of terrorism may be allocated all the necessary attention and resources, while tribal clashes, local crime, and drug abuse, which are essentially the real threats, are ignored. Such issues claim several lives and destroy several others each year, yet they may never receive such attention.
Conclusion
Public issues are resolved in order of priority. Priorities are based on the level of importance and urgency of the issue at hand. Security issues top the list, and therefore, problems that require immediate attention are securitized. Securitization of the deserving problems helps to neutralize the threat at the onset, and also it enables actors to address threats pro-actively, thus preventing their onset. On the other hand, securitization may cause other important issues to be overlooked. Misguided securitization also causes serious harm to communities as the real threats remain unresolved. It is clear that matters should only be securitized if they present real and significant security threats. However, political interference hinders the realization of this objective. It is, therefore, necessary to review the process and the parties involved in securitization to redefine it and accord it its deserved meaning.
Word Count – 1150
References
Eroukhmanoff, C. (2018). Securitisation theory: An introduction. E-International Relations. Retrieved from https://www.e-ir.info/2018/01/14/securitisation-theory-an-introduction/
Rushton, S. (2014).Arguments for securitizing global health priorities. In Brown, W.G., Yamey, G. &Wamala, S. (Eds). (2014). The handbook of global health policy. New Jersey, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd