Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

State–society complexes in ontological security-seeking in IR

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of International Relations and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article provides a framework for theorising ontological security-seeking in IR in an analytically complex yet non-reductionist manner. Drawing on an historical-sociological perspective, it relocates the referent object of ontological security from the state to the state–society complex, thus enabling us to elucidate the links between individual, society and the state in ontological security-seeking, and to explicate the synergism between internal and external referentiality in the constitution of self-identity. I argue that ontological security is the result of mutual reflexivity in state–society relations. Where such reflexivity is low, ontological security-seeking lapses into the securitisation of identity. This theoretical framework is illustrated in the context of Russia’s ontological security-seeking.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Some earlier works, notably by Mitzen (2006) and Steele (2008), offered justification of state-centric application of ontological security. Many recent studies, however, simply accept it at face value (see Subotic 2016; Ejdus 2017). A notable exception is Zarakol's contribution to the special issue of Cooperation and Conflict (2017) which engages explicitly with the issue of state personhood. See, Zarako (2017) 'States and Ontological Security: A Historical Rethinking. Cooperation and Conflict 52(1): 48–68.

  2. In the 1990s, Wendt (1994), Huysmans (1998) and McSweeney (1999) refered to ontological security without engaging in systematic theory building centred on this concept.

  3. Admittedly, differences between these approaches are often a 'matter of emphasis' (Kinnvall and Mitzen 2017: 4). Indeed, Zarakol (2010: 8) noted that a third, midway approach that brings together reflexive construction of self-identity and systemic influences on the constitution of state identity is possible (see also Ejdus 2017). This approach has garnered little attention in the literature but is best suited to generate a non-reductionist, comprehensive understanding of ontological security-seeking behaviour in IR.

  4. I am grateful to one of the anonymous reviewers for bringing this point to my attention. I would also like to note that this disagreement has been described as the tension between psychology and sociology (see Zarakol 2010: 6).

  5. The two problems are inter-related but nonetheless distinct. See Wight (2006) Chap. 3.

  6. Critical situations are defined as ‘radical disjunctions that challenge the ability of collective actors to 'go on' by bringing into the realm of discursive consciousness four fundamental questions related to existence, finitude, relations and autobiography’ (Ejdus 2017, published online https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-017-0083-3)

  7. 'Putin: shkolnye uchebniki—ne ploshchadka dla politicheskoi borby, s istorii "nado sniat vsu shelukhu i penu"' at http://www.newsru.com/russia/27Nov2003/pres.html (13 December, 2016)

  8. 'Den Rossii: prazdnik s korotkoi istoriyey' at http://wciom.ru/index.php?id=236&uid=115282 (21 October, 2016)

References

  • Berenskoetter, Felix. 2014. Parameters of a National Biography. European Journal of International Relations 20 (1): 262–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browning, Christopher, and Pertti Joenniemi. 2017. Ontological Security, Self-Articulation and the Securitization of Identity. Cooperation and Conflict 52 (1): 31–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chacko, Priya. 2014. ‘A New “Special Relationship”?: Power Transitions, Ontological Security, and India–US Relations. International Studies Perspectives 15: 329–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubin, Boris. 2014. ‘“Chuzhye” Natsionalizmy i “Svoi” Ksenofobii Vcherashnikh i Segodnyashnikh Rossian. Pro et Contra 1–2 (62): 4–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ejdus, Filip. 2017. Critical Situations, Fundamental Questions and Ontological Insecurity in World Politics. Journal of International Relations and Development. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-017-0083-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, Fred. 1987. ‘State and Society in International Relations: A Second Agenda. Millennium 16 (2): 215–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobson, John. 1998. Debate: The “second wave” of Weberian historical sociology - The historical sociology of the state and the state of historical sociology in international relations. Review of International Political Economy 5 (2): 284–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobson, John. 2000. The State and International Relations. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnemore, Martha, and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. ‘International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization 52 (4): 887–917.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frankel Pratt, Simon. 2017. A Relational View of Ontological Security in International Relations. International Studies Quarterly 61: 78–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Human Rights Watch. 2017. ‘Russia: Government vs. Rights Groups. The Battle Chronicle’ at https://www.hrw.org/russia-government-against-rights-groups-battle-chronicle.

  • Huysmans, Jef. 1998. ‘Security! What Do You Mean? From Concept to Thick Signifier. European Journal of International Relations 4 (2): 226–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, Anthony. 1991. Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gudkov, Lev. 2012. Sotsialny Kapital i Ideologicheskie Orientatsii. Pro et Contra 3 (55): 6–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustafsson, Karl. 2014. ‘Memory Politics and Ontological Security in Sino-Japanese Relations. Asian Studies Review 31 (1): 71–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobson, John. 1998. ‘Debate: The “second wave” of Weberian historical sociology - The historical sociology of the state and the state of historical sociology in international relations. Review of International PoliticalEconomy 5 (2): 284–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khapayeva, Dina. 2016. ‘Triumphant memory of the perpetrators: Putin’s politics of re-Stalinization. Communist and Post-Communist Studies 49: 61–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khapayeva, Dina. 2008. Goticheskoe Obshchestvo: Morfologia Koshmara. Moscow: Novoe Literaturnoe Obozrenie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinnvall, Catarina. 2004. Globalization and Religious Nationalism: Self, Identity, and the Search for Ontological Security. Political Psychology 25 (5): 741–767.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinnvall, Catarina, and Jennifer Mitzen. 2017. An Introduction to the Special Issue: Ontological Securities in World Politics. Cooperation and Conflict 52 (1): 3–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koposov, Nikolay. 2010. Memorialnyi Zakon and Istoricheskaya Politika v Sovremennoi Rossii. Ab Imperio 2: 249–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotsubinsky, Daniil. 2013. Ternovyi Venets Rossiyskoho Avtoritarizma. http://www.rosbalt.ru/blogs/2013/07/20/1154494.html.

  • Krolikowski, Alanna. 2008. State Personhood in Ontological Security Theories of International Relations and Chinese Nationalism: A Sceptical View. Chinese Journal of International Politics 2: 109–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laffey, Mark, and Jutta Weldes. 1997. ‘Beyond Belief: Ideas and Symbolic Technologies in the Study of International Relations. European Journal of International Relations 3 (2): 193–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipman, Maria. 2009. ‘Ot Redaktora. Pro et Contra 3–4 (46): 2–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lo, Bobo. 2015. Russia and the New World Disorder. London: Chatham House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lupovici, Amir. 2012. Ontological Dissonance, Clashing Identities, and Israel’s Unilateral Steps towards the Palestinians. Review of International Studies 38 (4): 809–833.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacMillan, John. 2013. Intervention and the Ordering of the Modern World. Review of International Studies 39: 1039–1056.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malksoo, Maria. 2015. Memory Must be Defended: Beyond the Politics of Mnemonical Security. Security Dialogue 46 (3): 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • McSweeney, Bill. 1999. Security, Identity and Interests: A Sociology of International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Alexey. 2011. Labirinty Istoricheskoi Politiki. Rossia v Globalnoi Politike 3 at http://www.globalaffairs.ru/number/Labirinty-istoricheskoi-politiki-15219.

  • Miller, Alexey. 2009. ‘Rossia: Vlast i Istoria. Pro et Contra 3–4 (46): 6–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitzen, Jennifer. 2006. ‘Ontological Security in World Politics: State Identity and the Security Dilemma. European Journal of International Relations 12 (3): 341–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putin, Vladimir. 2012. Samoopredelenie Russkogo Naroda. Nezavisimaya Gazeta, January 23.

  • Rossdale, Chris. 2015. Enclosing Critique: The Limits of Ontological Security. International Political Sociology 9: 369–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumelili, Bahar. 2015. Identity and Desecuritization: The Pitfalls of Conflating Ontological and Physical Security. Journal of International Relations and Development 18: 52–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shevel, Oxana. 2011. Russian Nation-Building from Yel’tsin to Medvedev: Ethinc, Civic, or Purposefully Ambiguous? Europe-Asia Studies 63 (2): 179–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steele, Brent. 2005. Ontological Security and the Power of Self-Identity: British Neutrality and the American Civil War. Review of International Studies 31 (3): 519–540.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steele, Brent. 2008. Ontological Security in International Relations: Self-Identity and the IR State. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Subotic, Jelena. 2016. Narrative, Ontological Security, and Foreign Policy Change. Foreign Policy Analysis 12: 610–627.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tannenwald, Nina. 2005. Ideas and explanation: Advancing the Theoretical Agenda. Journal of Cold War Studies 7 (2): 13–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tolz, Vera. 1998. Forging the Nation: National Identity and Nation Building in Post-Communist Russia. Europe-Asia Studies 50 (6): 993–1022.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsygankov, Andrei. 2016. Crafting the State-Civilization: Vladimir Putin’s Turn to Distinct Values. Problems of Post-Communism 63: 146–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsygankov, Andrei. 2008. Self and Other in International Theory: Learning from Russian Civilizational Debates. International Studies Review 10: 762–775.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valdai Discussion Club. 2014. National Identity and Russia’s Future. http://valdaiclub.com/a/reports/national_identity_and_russia_s_future/.

  • Wendt, Alexander. 1994. Collective Identity Formation and the International State. American Political Science Review 88 (2): 384–396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wight, Colin. 2006. Agents, Structures and International Relations: Politics as Ontology. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, Michael. 2008. (In)Security Studies, Reflexive Modernization and the Risk Society. Cooperation and Conflict 43 (1): 57–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yee, Albert. 1996. ‘The Causal Effect of Ideas on Policy. International Organization 50 (1): 69–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zarakol, Ayse. 2017. States and Ontological Security: A Historical Rethinking. Cooperation and Conflict 52 (1): 48–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zarakol, Ayse. 2011. After Defeat: How the East Learned to Live with the West, Cambridge. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zarakol, Ayse. 2010. Ontological (In)security and State Denial of Historical Crimes: Turkey and Japan. International Relations 24 (1): 3–23.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

An early version of this article was presented at the 2016 annual conference of the Canadian Political Science Association in Calgary, Alberta. The author wishes to thank W. Andy Knight, Erik Ringmar, Allen Sens and Vasyl Lashchivsky for their comments on the earlier version of the manuscript and suggestions for improvement.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, University of Winnipeg, 515 Portage Ave, Winnipeg, MB, R3B 2E9, Canada

    Tanya Narozhna

Authors
  1. Tanya Narozhna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tanya Narozhna.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Narozhna, T. State–society complexes in ontological security-seeking in IR. J Int Relat Dev 23, 559–583 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-018-0164-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-018-0164-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation