According to Monahan[1], the literature about critical security studies has been known of their shared analysis of the way in which political issues become security issues. This implies that the assumptions, analysis, practices and implications of political issues are produced and reproduced. However, in the recent years, making political issues to be security issues has been associated with a tendency to conceiving of security linked with violence, totalization and even logic of exclusion. This paper will discuss how something goes from being a regular political issue to a security issue. Furthermore, it will explore the role of fear in the process and what the move of making something into security issue becomes possible. Finally, the paper will detail the making something into a security issue hide it from view.
societies deem as normal gender roles. Gender is personal, part of everyone’s developing identity and web of relationships, but it is also Political issues are diverse and come in different dimensions. Some of the political issues include the electoral politics, foreign policies, and internal national politics among others. Politicization of issues can sometimes become a national security issue. Arnold et al [2] asserted that combination of political matters such as electoral politics and foreign policies can be explosive and later become security issues. For instance, if a president is considered to be using matters that are weighty like war or peace for political gains, it can become a security issue and he can be slapped down. Mclver[3]pointed out that this was the similar scenario with president Obama of United States who was criticized for raising the issue of commemorating the assassination of Osama bin laden. Moreover, these are some of the things his administration was blamed for many security leaks. Goldman[4] added that his political issues of resetting the schedule of withdrawal of the Afghanistan troops to line up with the calendar of election did not go well with the conservationists.
Company has occupied the market niche for an automobile in Japan. To overcome the Political issues has become the most contested and significant elements in the debates of the contemporary society and even among the politicians. The political issues debates have even extended over to the future and nature of security in a country or even at the international platform. A key source of all these contestations lies in the manner in which largely unacknowledged claims about political issues and knowledge are related historically in one of the most pervasive and powerful conceptions of the relationship between security and politics.
The desire to exclude political issues from the realms of security provides a clearer understanding of the model and structure of the upcoming debates between critical and neorealist theorists. These are issues that obscure instead of illuminating the fundamental question asked about the relationship between politics and security.
According to Wolf[5], national security is a very critical consideration especially for the presidency. Therefore, political issues can easily change and become security issues. Two examples were forwarded by Wolf[6] and they put these concerns at the center and front. During the election times, the white house was in a campaign mode and politics was the order of the day. Many of the important foreign policy initiatives of the administration were pushed to the back until after the elections were held. From Iran and Syria to reductions of nuclear arms, and the peace talks among the militia group of Taliban were laid back. The political issues of the campaign period become security issues as the administration was avoiding decisions and playing for time that could land the country into security lapse.
Moreover, the subordination attempts of the foreign policies to domestic politics were a phenomenon that occurs after four years of elections. However, the lengthening of the season of politics by the politicians and the understandable desire of the president of Obama to be reelected meant political issues were shifting gears to be security issues because of the longer distractions[7].
Mayer[8] pointed out that fear plays a significant role in the way in which political issues becomes security issues. The fear of the unknown by the citizens may fuel a little issue to become out of control. This is the manner in which fear of the political happenings during the election period posed a security threat to United States. The conservatives displayed fear in the manner in which the administration was delaying in acting and shirking away the responsibilities of the national security so that President Obama could be reelected. Similarly, fear of war can push political issues to be security issues. Maclver[9] observed that Eli Lake News Paper reported that the Central Intelligence Agency was scrambling to locate the areas of the biological and the chemical weapons in Syria, while assessing the loyalties, compositions and backgrounds of the groups that rebelled that were poised to assume power in the even the president of Syria Bashar al-Assad falls.
The move to make something into a security issue is always possible in the wake of the technological advancement in the flow of information. The paper will analyze some of the ways in which political issues can be made into security issues. The analysis of the political issues and security is distinct from competing political concepts and security politics. There are three means that helps in moving of political issues into security issues. The first means is the modern politics organization with sectors and spheres that coordinate well. The political organization are coordinated and well organized with their sectors. This enable flow and manipulation of information according to the intended purpose. The second means is the relationship politics has with science and ethics. This relationship enables politics assumes the intended directions of the political opinion makers. Application of science and ethics in politics are intended to steer political issues to their destinations and to the intended people.
According to Monahan[10], mass media has made it possible for accountability and openness in contemporary democracies. However, mass media has assisted in hindering political transparency and hiding of political issues from being made security issues from the view of the public. Political operatives and politicians can simulate the transparency of a political virtue through media manipulations and rhetoric’s. Monahan[11] indicated that the television tend to make conversion of the coverage of politics and law into forms of mass consumption and entertainment. Therefore, the television serves as the fertile ground for culture of self proliferation of scandals.
Because of the limited available time for broadcast, limited audience attention, political strategy stories, political scandals, political infighting and the politicians private lives tend to get more audience and are entertaining more than policy questions that are substantive. Goldman[12] observed that many politicians tend to shift political issues to become security issues and therefore hide them for mostly their political gains. Moreover, hiding of the political issues in the disguise of security issues protect their image and hood wink the public from most of the truths. This mainly shifts attention from the issues that may paint their names to other issues that affects the common citizens like the security issues.
The mass media have been identified by [13] as one of the culprits used by the government, politicians and the political operatives to hide political issues behind the security concerns of the country. However, the basic question is the manner in which they do it. Wolf[14] explained that hiding of political issues using the mass media is very simple. They use different methods to subvert the attention from the main points to other irrelevant issues. One of the strategies applied that is most effective by the media is to leave an issue to the public openly and just alters the content and the context in the manner the public will analyze it.
According to Wolf[15], politicians have long understood the point. When faced with difficult situations, they understand well that the most ineffective strategy is to show a stone face and avoid disclosing the sensitive information to the public. Instead, they tend to develop a dual strategy; strategic maneuver, and aggressive over compliance. They flood the public with too much information of which some are just extraneous. This makes the public unable to get the information relevant because they lack the ability and time
The example provided demonstrates the two strategies that simulate political transparency. That is supplementation of reality and diversion of attention. The goal is to consume the public’s time and their attention. Also important, is the shifting of the battle ground to information management issues and the procedure of technical questions[16].
References
Monahan, Torin. 2006. Surveillance and security: technological politics and power in everyday life. New York: Routledge.
Arnold, R. Douglas, Michael J. Graetz, and Alicia Haydock Munnell. 1998. Framing the social security debate values, politics, and economics. Washington, D.C.: Distributed worldwide by Brookings Institution Press.Accessed from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=4955.
Goldman, Stuart D. 2006. Russian political, economic, and security issues and U.S. interests. [Washington, D.C.]: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.
MacIver, D. N. 2014. Political issues in the world today. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
Wolf, Charles. 2008. Looking backward and forward policy issues in the twenty-first century. Stanford, Calif: Hoover Institution Press. Accessed from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=563091.
Mayer, Jane. 2008. The dark side: the inside story of how the war on terror turned into a war on American ideals. New York: Doubleday.
[1] Monahan, Torin. 2006. Surveillance and security: technological politics and power in everyday life. New York: Routledge
[2] Arnold, R. Douglas, Michael J. Graetz, and Alicia Haydock Munnell. 1998. Framing the social security debate values, politics, and economics. Washington, D.C.: Distributed worldwide by Brookings Institution Press.Accessed from
[3] MacIver, D. N. 2014. Political issues in the world today. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
[4] Goldman, Stuart D. 2006. Russian political, economic, and security issues and U.S. interests. [Washington, D.C.]: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.
[5] Wolf, Charles. 2008. Looking backward and forward policy issues in the twenty-first century. Stanford, Calif: Hoover Institution Press. Accessed from
[6] Ibid.,117
[7] MacIver, D. N. 2014. Political issues in the world today. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
[8] Mayer, Jane. 2008. The dark side: the inside story of ho the war on terror turned into a war on American ideals. New York: Doubleday
[9] MacIver, D. N. 2014. Political issues in the world today. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press
[10] Monahan, Torin. 2006. Surveillance and security: technological politics and power in everyday life. New York: Routledge.
[11] Ibid.,29
[12] Goldman, Stuart D. 2006. Russian political, economic, and security issues and U.S. interests. [Washington, D.C.]: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.
[13] Ibid.,229
[14] Wolf, Charles. 2008. Looking backward and forward policy issues in the twenty-first century. Stanford, Calif: Hoover Institution Press. Accessed from
[15] Ibid.,185
[16] Mayer, Jane. 2008. The dark side: the inside story of how the war on terror turned into a war on American ideals. New York: Doubleday
With a student-centered approach, I create engaging and informative blog posts that tackle relevant topics for students. My content aims to equip students with the knowledge and tools they need to succeed academically and beyond.
