‘Memory must be defended’: Beyond the politics of mnemonical security
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
‘Memory must be defended’ : Beyond the politics of mnemonical security. / Mälksoo, M.
In: Security Dialogue, Vol. 46, No. 3, 2015, p. 221-237.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - ‘Memory must be defended’
T2 - Beyond the politics of mnemonical security
AU - Mälksoo, M.
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - This article supplements and extends the ontological security theory in International Relations (IR) by conceptualizing the notion of mnemonical security. It engages critically the securitization of memory as a means of making certain historical remembrances secure by delegitimizing or outright criminalizing others. The securitization of historical memory by means of law tends to reproduce a sense of insecurity among the contesters of the ‘memory’ in question. To move beyond the politics of mnemonical security, two lines of action are outlined: (i) the ‘desecuritization’ of social remembrance in order to allow for its repoliticization, and (ii) the rethinking of the self–other relations in mnemonic conflicts. A radically democratic, agonistic politics of memory is called for that would avoid the knee-jerk reactive treatment of identity, memory and history as problems of security. Rather than trying to secure the unsecurable, a genuinely agonistic mnemonic pluralism would enable different interpretations of the past to be questioned, in place of pre-defining national or regional positions on legitimate remembrance in ontological security terms.
AB - This article supplements and extends the ontological security theory in International Relations (IR) by conceptualizing the notion of mnemonical security. It engages critically the securitization of memory as a means of making certain historical remembrances secure by delegitimizing or outright criminalizing others. The securitization of historical memory by means of law tends to reproduce a sense of insecurity among the contesters of the ‘memory’ in question. To move beyond the politics of mnemonical security, two lines of action are outlined: (i) the ‘desecuritization’ of social remembrance in order to allow for its repoliticization, and (ii) the rethinking of the self–other relations in mnemonic conflicts. A radically democratic, agonistic politics of memory is called for that would avoid the knee-jerk reactive treatment of identity, memory and history as problems of security. Rather than trying to secure the unsecurable, a genuinely agonistic mnemonic pluralism would enable different interpretations of the past to be questioned, in place of pre-defining national or regional positions on legitimate remembrance in ontological security terms.
KW - Faculty of Social Sciences
KW - agonistic memory politics
KW - Copenhagen School
KW - desecuritization
KW - identity
KW - mnemonical security
KW - ontological security
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-84930151007&partnerID=MN8TOARS
U2 - 10.1177/0967010614552549
DO - 10.1177/0967010614552549
M3 - Journal article
VL - 46
SP - 221
EP - 237
JO - Security Dialogue
JF - Security Dialogue
SN - 0967-0106
IS - 3
ER -
ID: 284506364