Securitizing Interwoven Security Threats

The definition of security has always been contested in international relations theory. In the Post Cold War era scholars have put forth new explanations of security, many of which have extended the referent object of security from the nation state to the entities at individual, group and international levels. The study of nontraditional security has developed through this process. Interestingly, while challenging traditional state-centric security concepts, nontraditional security has simultaneously prompted scholars to increasingly consider the impact of nontraditional security threats on state security. In recent years Chinese scholars have put forth concepts including "interwoven security" and "heterogeneous security threats" that attempt to explain the intertwining nature of traditional and nontraditional security considerations. However, the field still seeks clarity on the precise meaning and features of so-called interwoven security threats. Presently our understanding of links between state security and interwoven security threats is very limited. Moreover, the existing literature on interwoven security has neglected the process of how such threats are securitized.This thesis puts forth the notion that states securitize interwoven security threats onto their national security agendas based on unique national conditions and interests. It argues that interwoven securitization is the process of integrating traditional, state-centric security approaches with constructive, nontraditional approaches to security in which historical, cultural, political and other elements collectively construct national interests. This process involves a process of rational inclusion during which an interwoven security threat’s perceived scale, rather than its features, determines its level of securitization. Finally, this thesis argues that from the perspective of the state, interwoven security threats containing traditional and nontraditional security features are rapidly increasing but are not new phenomena. Whether states are can aptly expand their security agendas depends on if we are first able to discriminate among interwoven security threats with different levels of securitization, which current theories on interwoven security fail to do.