000			02051nam a22001937a 4500
001			46931
003			OSt
005			20240419095808.0
008			240419b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aKRICKEL-CHOI Nina C
245			_aState personhood and ontological security as a framework of existence: _bmoving beyond identity, discovering sovereignty/ _cNina C. Krickel-Choi
260			_c2024
520			_aThe 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.
598			_aSECURITY FRAMEWORK, NEWARTICLS
650			_aSECURITY FRAMEWORK
773			_gCRIA: The Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Volume 37, Number 1, February 2024, page: 3-21
856			_uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09557571.2022.2108761 _zClick here for full text
942			_2ddc _cARTICLE _n0
999			_c46931 _d46931