9. Uncertainty Uncertainty means ‘not determined’,

Transcript:9. Uncertainty Uncertainty means ‘not determined’,:
9. Uncertainty Uncertainty means ‘not determined’, ‘liable to change’, ‘cannot be guaranteed’, ‘unreliable’, of ‘doubtful outcome’ etc.. The existential condition of uncertainty is not an occasional or passing phenomenon but rather an inescapable reality in the lives of individuals and groups. In International Relations, this has often been interpreted as requiring states to ‘assume the worst … because the worst is possible’ (Posen 1993: 28). Understanding the security dilemma and its related dynamics should therefore occupy a central place in security studies. The Quintessential Dilemma The security dilemma can be thought of as the quintessential dilemma in international relations because it demands that states contemplate insecurity even when it does not immediately appear to exist. As a consequence, governments often struggle to signal peaceful/defensive intentions towards each other. For those with mindsets dominated by the dark shadow of future uncertainty, international politics is a potential or actual ‘war system’ even when all involved believe their own intentions are peaceful, and their military preparations are defensive. What is the security dilemma? In 1950, John Herz defined the security dilemma as ‘Groups or individuals [who] must be, and usually are, concerned about their security from being attacked, subjected, dominated, or annihilated by other groups and individuals’. In 2008, Booth & Wheeler developed Herz’s position to define the security dilemma as a two-level strategic predicament in relations between states and other actors, with each level consisting of two related lemmas (or propositions that can be assumed to be valid) which force decision-makers to choose between them. The first and basic level consists of a dilemma of interpretation about the motives, intentions, and capabilities of others. The second and derivative level consists of a dilemma of response about the most rational way of responding. This dilemma of response logically begins when decision-makers have resolved this dilemma of interpretation. They then need to determine how best to react. The Drivers of the Security Dilemma The drivers of security dilemma dynamics are complex but can be simply categorized as mainly material or mainly psychological. In material terms, the problem is the ambiguous symbolism of weapons and their deployment (Booth and Wheeler 2008). This is the difficulty of safely distinguishing between ‘offensive’ and ‘defensive’ weapons. This is especially difficult in international relations because ostensibly ‘defensive’ measures (e.g., missile defence systems) might become a vital part of an ‘offensive’ strategy when used in combination with other weapons. In