The Securitization Dilemma

Abstract Motivated by the neglect of uncertainty and perverse consequences in constructivist studies of security, this article pursues a reconceptualization of the security dilemma. Approaching the dilemma as a “logic of self-limitation” constituted by choice, uncertainty, and tragedy, the article explores how this logic can be transposed to the constructivist context of securitization theory. The resulting “securitization dilemma” draws renewed attention to the unintended character of social life, highlights how the choice to engage in practices of threat construction are shaped by uncertainty, and shows how the failure to recognize these limitations can have tragic consequences. While the argument aims to broaden the empirical focus of securitization studies to include perverse and unintended consequences, it also looks to engage with the literature's distinctive ethical claim over how speaking security is never a neutral act. Political actors may well be responsible for the security claims they make, but we need to recognize that this responsibility includes the effects of security claims that actors anticipate, as well as those they do not.