| dc.description.abstract | The EU as well as other major international organizations have increasingly placed a link between security and development policies at the centre of their foreign policy. Yet, profound controversy over the value and practical consequences of such a link exists. In this paper, we aim at disentangling the various dimensions of the security-development nexus. We attempt to order the debate, investigate current claims of the relation between security and development, and investigate in how far current policy response are sufficient and whether they imply a superiority of security or of development measures. We argue that thinking the security development nexus requires us to rely on nondogmatic, non-paradigmatic ideas, to accept the contingency (or uncertainty) of our knowledge, and to address in analytical and policy practice situation-specific problems. Our discussion is structured in four sections. The first section carves out some accessible routes of the conceptual jungle of the security-development nexus. We discuss the underlying concepts of Security and Development briefly, and three major frameworks (Peacebuilding, Human Security, and the Global War on Terror) The second section discusses a range of claims that have been made in the framework of the Security Development Nexus. We shall investigate the vicious circle argument and the threatening character of underdevelopment on a global, regional and national level. What follows from this discussion is that hardly any claim goes uncontested. In other words, our knowledge about the dynamics is limited, and we should treat any claim to secured knowledge with suspicion. Section three firstly introduces the major policy responses. Those responses can be meaningful differentiated in, one, architectural responses – the re-organization and maintenance of new bureaucratic infrastructures –, two emergency responses policies – tools developed to cope with situations that have identified as emergency situations –, three, long-term structural policies directed towards prevention and re-construction – policies in post-conflict situations, situations that are on the verge of the outbreak of conflict, and policies towards countries which are in a long-term violent state. We shall discuss, the policies in the light of whether the responses lead to a subordination of development policies, to the dissolution of meaningful security strategies, and whether they increase efficiency and effectivity. Section four, concludes in arguing the need for pragmatic problem solving strategies. | |
