State personhood and ontological security as a framework of existence: moving beyond identity, discovering sovereignty/ Nina C. Krickel-Choi
Material type:
TextPublication details: 2024Subject(s): Online resources:
In:
CRIA: The Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Volume 37, Number 1, February 2024, page: 3-21Summary: The concepts of ‘self’ and ‘identity’ are often implicitly conflated in constructivist research, limiting our understanding of important theoretical issues. The Ontological Security Studies (OSS) literature provides one example of this, often reducing a concern with ‘security of the self’ to a matter of identity, thereby limiting OSS’ analytical reach. This article draws from the writings of Laing and Giddens to make the case for keeping ‘self’ and ‘identity’ analytically distinct. Understanding ontological security as a multidimensional framework meant to affirm the self’s existence, it proposes to see ‘identity’ as just one dimension of ontological security, and to conceptualise ‘self’ in terms of personhood. Such a reading allows us to grasp the discursive and ritualistic institution of sovereignty as an existential framework on which the personhood, and therefore ontological security, of all states depends. Thus, OSS would benefit from considering ontological security beyond identity. Beyond this, the article shows that distinguishing more clearly between ‘self’ and ‘identity’ illuminates the debate on state personhood in IR, indicating that paying more attention to these key concepts would be helpful for constructivist research more generally.
| Item type | Current library | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal Article | Mindef Library & Info Centre Journals | SECURITY FRAMEWORK (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | Not for loan |
Browsing Mindef Library & Info Centre shelves, Shelving location: Journals Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
| SECURITY) Fraud round-up : crime of choice | SECURITY COOPERATION East Asian security cooperation shortcoming and opportunities for second-tier actors in the region/ | SECURITY CRISIS The unknown meaning of implementation/ | SECURITY FRAMEWORK State personhood and ontological security as a framework of existence: moving beyond identity, discovering sovereignty/ | SECURITY STUDIES Ideological polarity and balancing in great power politics/ | SECURITY STUDIES Remote warfare – Buzzword or Buzzkill?/ | SECURITY THREATS Integrating non-military arts of statecraft to address national security threats/ |
The concepts of ‘self’ and ‘identity’ are often implicitly conflated in constructivist research, limiting our understanding of important theoretical issues. The Ontological Security Studies (OSS) literature provides one example of this, often reducing a concern with ‘security of the self’ to a matter of identity, thereby limiting OSS’ analytical reach. This article draws from the writings of Laing and Giddens to make the case for keeping ‘self’ and ‘identity’ analytically distinct. Understanding ontological security as a multidimensional framework meant to affirm the self’s existence, it proposes to see ‘identity’ as just one dimension of ontological security, and to conceptualise ‘self’ in terms of personhood. Such a reading allows us to grasp the discursive and ritualistic institution of sovereignty as an existential framework on which the personhood, and therefore ontological security, of all states depends. Thus, OSS would benefit from considering ontological security beyond identity. Beyond this, the article shows that distinguishing more clearly between ‘self’ and ‘identity’ illuminates the debate on state personhood in IR, indicating that paying more attention to these key concepts would be helpful for constructivist research more generally.
SECURITY FRAMEWORK, NEWARTICLS
There are no comments on this title.