Impact turns + answers – bfhmrs russia War Good


EU defensive measures are based in securitizing impulses in order to justify modernization



Download 0.83 Mb.
Page266/311
Date18.04.2021
Size0.83 Mb.
#56361
1   ...   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   ...   311
Impact Turns Aff Neg - Michigan7 2019 BFHMRS
Harbor Teacher Prep-subingsubing-Ho-Neg-Lamdl T1-Round3, Impact Turns Aff Neg - Michigan7 2019 BFHMRS

EU defensive measures are based in securitizing impulses in order to justify modernization


Jasper and Portela 10 (Ursula Jasper, University of St. Gallen, Switzerland and Clara Portela, Singapore Management University, “EU Defence Integration and Nuclear Weapons: A Common Deterrent for Europe?”, Security Dialogue, 41 (2))//vl

Official narratives of nuclear proliferation in the two countries have con- verged, becoming increasingly dominated by the theme of how the ‘custo- dians of law’ are responsible not only for their own protection but also for preventing countries such as North Korea or Iran or non-state actors from realizing their aspirations for nuclear programmes. Underlying these pos- tures are linguistic frames and metaphors of (in)security that portray the ‘world out there’ as an inherent danger to ‘benevolent’ Europe, hence legiti- mizing the given nuclear order of haves and have-nots. As Gusterson (1999: 132) argues: The discourse on nuclear proliferation legitimates this system of domination while pre- senting the interests the established nuclear powers have in maintaining their nuclear monopoly as if they were equally beneficial to all nations of the globe. And, ironically, the discourse on non-proliferation presents the subordinate nations as the principal source of danger in the world. By framing the current nuclear order as a dichotomy of (i) the passively deterring ‘benign’ and ‘rational’ Self against (ii) the ‘evil’ and ‘passion- ate’ Other, the very order is constructed, naturalized and legitimated. This prevailing frame is used as a justification for a continued policy of nuclear deterrence and non-proliferation directed at potential nuclear enemies while ignoring problems arising from the European nuclear status. Some references to the desirability of complete nuclear disarmament notwithstanding, nuclear weapons will therefore remain the cornerstone of British and French military postures for the foreseeable future. But, how is this approach to global security to be reconciled with the security vision upheld by the EU and its member- states? What does it imply for the further process of European integration and the long-term goal of a common European defence? In the following section, we look at the current state of the CFSP and assess the feasibility and convenience of framing a common European deterrent.


Download 0.83 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   ...   311




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page