Science, Strategy and War The Strategic Theory of ... - Boekje Pienter

decades various authors have applied post-modern or critical theory in studying war andsecurity. ‘The traditional focus on power and politics in security studies has been challengedrobustly this decade by the development of ideational approaches to the subject’, TheoFarrel noted in a review of constructivist studies on international security. Constructivistsfocus on the normative character of ideas, language, identities, images, belief systems andinstitutions as sources of change, behavior and power 60 . Norms are used as shorthand for‘intersubjective beliefs about the social and natural world that define actors, their situations,and the possibilities of action. Norms are intersubjective in that they are beliefs rooted in anreproduced through social practice, Alexander Wendt states 61 . Constructivism and otherpost-modern – or critical – schools of security studies locate actors in a social structure thatboth constitute those actors and is constituted by their interaction 62 . It is closely tied to the“reflexivity concept” developed by Giddens, including the looping effect (!) betweenobservation and action 63 .Keith Krause and Michael Williams for instance state that concerning the study ofsecurity: ‘What is involved is a shift in focus from abstract individualism and contractualsovereignty to a stress on culture, civilization, and identity; the role of ideas, norms andvalues in the constitution of that which is to be secured; and the historical context withinwhich this process takes place. Epistemologically, this involves moving away from theobjectivist, rationalist approach [...] to a more interpretive mode of analysis’ 64 . Subsequently,‘anarchy is what states make of it’ 65 . A state is not only an actor, but also a social constructthat has been given meaning and role; it is socially constituted and presumes a state culture 66 .Like Boyd, these schools point towards the impact of practice, institutionaltraditions, repertoires of responses, language, perceptions on behavior of actors in theinternational arena in matters of national and international security. Ted Hopf mentions ‘thepower of practice’: both material and discursive power are necessary for any understandingof world affairs 67 . Like military doctrine or a CAS’ schemata, ‘Ideas are not merely rules, or1999, p. 92. Mark Neufeld, The Restructuring of International Relations Theory, p. 33, quoted in Mutimer, p.92.60 Theo Farrell, ‘Constructivist Security Studies: Portrait of a Research Program’, International StudiesReview, 4/1(2002), p.49. He echoes others in positing constuctivism as a challenge for realism. Othersconsidere constructivism a welcome addition to IR theory to add insight where realism is foundwanting. This is not the place for a full overview of extant literature on constructivism or criticalsecurity studies. Nor is the argument made here a defence or critique on either the realist orconstructivist schools in IR. The argument is that Boyd’s ideas mirror notions, arguments andconcepts that have been developed in the past two decades in security studies, the same period inwhich Boyd developed his ideas. The benefit of this argument is that it provides an interesting linkbetween Boyd’s strategic thought and current discussions in IR.61 Alexander Wendt, ‘Constructing International Politics’, International Security, 20, No.1 (1995), pp.73-74.62 Ted Hopf, ‘The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory’, International Security,Vol.23, No.1 (Summer 1998), pp.172-173.63 See Guzzini p.150 for the argument that constructivism follows from reflexive modernity.64 Keith Krause and Micheal Williams (ed), Critical Security Studies, Concepts and Cases (London, 1997), p.49.65 Alexander Wendt, ‘Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics’,International Organization, 46, pp. 391-425.66 After Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, Cambridge, 1999 p. 372. For a critical account seeDale C. Copeland, ‘The Constructivist Challenge to Structural Realism’, International Security, Vol.25,No.2 (Fall 2000), pp. 187-212.67 Hopf, p.177.297