The return of military conscription in
Europe: understanding the political
decision of bringing back the draft in
Sweden
An in-depth case study of the policy change in Sweden’s defence
strategy through the theoretical lens of securitisation
Author: Jet Marres
Number: 11024968
Date: June 23rd, 2017
Supervisor: Rocco Bellanova
Second Reader: Beste Isleyen
Thesis group: European Security Politics
Abstract
On march 2nd 2017, the Swedish government formally announced it will reinstate a conscription model to realise military readiness of the Swedish Armed Forces. This century old military institution for the mobilisation of manpower through compulsory military service, was abolished by the Swedish government in 2010 when the military transformed into an all-volunteer professionalised force. Most European countries have demilitarised the armed forces since the end of the Cold War, yet a debate on bringing back conscription models to remilitarise national defences is being held in numerous European national governments. The Swedish government debated bringing back conscription over the last four years and the government maintained the power to reinstate the draft only if the national defence would be in a state of emergency which requires a high level of military preparedness. As such, bringing back conscription shows a policy rotation of the Swedish defence strategy and a change in the political discourse of the Swedish government. The political discourse justifies this defence policy change with clear interconnected statements on the ‘deteriorating security environment in Europe’ and ‘Russia’s assertive posture’ in Sweden’s vicinity. Herewith, a mutual attraction between the securitisation theory and the case of Sweden’s remilitarising its defence policy transpires. Securitisation constitutes a process of articulating an issue as an urgent security matter through which extraordinary measures are legitimated. Thereupon, this thesis critically examines the political discourse in Sweden’s governmental speeches, reports, parliamentary proposals and debates through the lens of securitisation in order to identify a securitised move in Sweden’s stark policy turn and a possible connection to Russia’s so-called ‘assertive posture’. The analysis of the language uttered by governmental actors identifies a securitising move in the speeches and public statements. The securitising move is connected to Russia’s assertive posture and the importance of countering that threat by strengthening national defence capabilities through conscription in order to be ready for multilateral military cooperative endeavours.
Keywords: securitisation theory, speech act, conscription, Swedish Armed Forces, militarisation, European security, defence policy, military preparedness.
Acknowledgement
First and foremost, I would like to mention that the process of researching a fairly unstudied and new topic has been challenging, though rewarding. Hereby, I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor, dhr. R. Bellanova, from whom I have received guidance and encouragement throughout the research process. I want to thank all the people that have helped me find my way in the search for the relevant documents in the Swedish government data. Furthermore, I would like to acknowledge the positive atmosphere in the course group of European Security Politics specialisation. This has made the writing process an upbeat experience.
Amsterdam, June 2017
Table of content
List of Acronyms ... 5
List of Tables ... 5
1.Introduction: Bringing back the draft ... 6
1.1 Contextual background of Sweden’s defence policy ... 8
1.2 State of the art ... 10
1.3 The Research ... 12
1.4 Objectives & Relevance ... 13
1.5 Disposition ... 14
2. Theoretical Frameworm: from politicastion to securitisation ... ………..16
2.1 The concept of Security ... 16
2.2 The Copenhagen School of Security Studies ... 18
2.3 Securitisation and desecuritiation ... 19
2.4 The speech Act ... 23
2.5 The state of the (de-)securitisation debate ... 24
2.6 Securitisation and the case of Sweden ... 26
3. Methodology ... 28
3.1 Critical Discourse Analysis ... 28
3.2 Case Selection ... 30
3.3 Data Collection and materials ... 31
3.4 Analytic Procedure ... 33
3.5 Limitations and considerations ... 34
4. Analysis ... 36
4.2 Discussions within the parliament ... 42
4.3 Public statements and political speeches ... 48
4.4 The results ... 52 5.Conclusion ... 53 5.1 Results ... 53 5.2 Discussion ... 56 5.3 Further Research ... 57 Bibliography ... 58 Appendix ... 71
List of Acronyms
AVF All-volunteer force
CDA Critical Discourse Analysis
EU European Union
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
SAF Swedish Armed Forces
List of Tables
Table 1: The securitising process
Table 2: Timeline of the selected data
Table 3: Operationalising the securitisation theory
1. Introduction: Bringing back conscription
“The security environment in Europe and in Sweden's vicinity has deteriorated and the all-volunteer recruitment hasn't provided the Armed Forces with enough trained personnel. The re-activating of the conscription is needed for military readiness”, a public statement cited by the government of Sweden on March 2nd , 2017 (Radebo, 2017).
With this public statement, the Swedish government formally announced it has decided to reinstate a conscription model to realise military preparedness. The statement ads that the conscription, also called drafting, is based on a gender-neutral recruitment and will include both men and women (Radebo, 2017). Herewith, the Swedish Armed Forces (SAF) will recruit four thousand young men and women annually to undergo basic military training with compulsory service, starting no later than the first of January 2018 (Armed Forces, 2016b). In 2010, Sweden’s then centre-right government eliminated the conscription model after more than hundred years of using the draft. The elimination decision argued an all-volunteer force (AVF) with targeted recruitment that would increase the quality and effectiveness of the military in times of peace and stability (Järvenpää, 2016, p. 12). Seven years later, over seventy percent of the current left-leaning coalition in Sweden’s parliament, voted in favour of bringing back the draft (Radebo, 2017). Which illustrates a significant change in Sweden’s defence strategy and security policy.
Since the end of the Cold War, Sweden has gradually scaled back its military- and defence- spending and actively moved towards a smaller, more professionalised army (Kernic, 2013, p. 165). This so called ‘strategic timeout’ resulted into the dramatic decline of the SAF structures, as the general assumption was that there was no imminent threat to Swedish national territory (Kunz, 2015, p. 11). However, when the former Supreme Commander of the SAF, Sverker Göransson, made the headlines in January 2013 when he explained that ‘Sweden would only be
able to defend itself for no more than a week’, the issue of the state of the SAF and its military readiness became a heated topic of debate and resulted in questions to the parliament (Nünlist, 2013, p. 2). Since then, the issue of defence strategy and the awareness of security threats became an issue on the political agenda of Sweden’s government. For the first time in the post-Cold War era, the Swedish political discourse uttered issues such as ‘boosting its national territorial defence’ and establishing ‘military preparedness for possible wartimes’ (Dalsjö, 2017, p. 6).
This sweeping turn in defence strategy displays a change in the Swedish legislative perception on the threats to Sweden’s national security (Kunz, 2015, p. 13) The current government of Sweden has justified this turn by arguing it as a response to ‘the deteriorating security situation and problems connected to the manning of military forces’, in the public statement for reintroducing the conscription model (Radebo, 2017). The Swedish Minister of Defence, Peter Hultqvist, argues in an interview with CNN that a main trigger for the decision is that ‘we have a new security situation due to Russia’s annexation of the Ukrainian territory of Crimea which is against international law and their increased military exercises are close to the border’ (Masters, Smith-Spark and D’Agostino, 2017). The Swedish government has abundantly cited to have legitimate military and security concern for the Nordic and Baltic sea region due to the growing assertive posture of Russia, which poses a threat to its national security (Dalsjö, 2017, p. 17). In so doing, Sweden’s government justifies the remilitarising policy of the SAF in the light of a growing Russian threat and a significant shortage in military manpower. These threat-related political discourse of the Swedish government indicates an interconnectedness between the renewed security perception and the stark defence policy U-turn of bringing back the draft.
When the Swedish parliament voted in favour of the 2010 Government Bill ‘The Total Defence Duty‘ which transformed the territorial defence focus rooted in conscription into the AVF emphasis on specialised operations abroad (Ministry of Defence, 2010) The vote simultaneously decided that conscription can only be brought back in the light of a territorial security emergency which requires a high level of Sweden’s defence preparedness (ibid.). Hence, the development concerning bringing back conscription demonstrates a changing perception on security, namely a
security emergency which poses a threat to national territory and therefore necessitates a high level security measure. In this regards, it is relevant to look into Sweden’s security background over the last years and put it into the context of defence policies.
1.1 Contextual background of Sweden’s defence policy
Sweden has a history of classifying itself as a neutral state during both the World Wars and all through the Cold War era, for it pursued a policy of non-involvement in any armed interstate conflicts (Kernic, 2013, p. 166). As such, Sweden has upheld significant military capabilities to defend its national territory through the guiding principle of neutrality in its defence and security policies (Gotkowska, 2013, p. 12). Mandatory military service for men has been the foundation of the national defence policy since 1901 and until its abolishment in 2010 (ibid.). During that time, Sweden designed a ‘Total Defence’ strategy, which meant that large amounts of government resources and spending were directly focussed on preparing the whole of the society for war (Dalsjö, 2017, p. 146). This military doctrine nurtured self-reliance of its national territorial defence policies, which made the idea of military cooperation obsolete and caused Sweden to be one of the most militarised democracies in the world (Dalsjö, 2017, p. 148). When Sweden joined the European Union (EU) in 1995, this doctrine gradually started to change. When joining the EU, the policy of neutrality started to be replaced by military non-alignment, by which Sweden strategically maintained the ability to come back to a policy of neutrality when a conflict in its neighbourhood would occur (Holmberg, 2015, p. 239). As an EU-member, Sweden has become a morally charged player in the affairs of international security and actively promotes democratic norms, peace missions and human rights (Dalsjö, 2017, p. 149). By means of this, Sweden has transformed its armed forces to fit these globally focused missions which signifies the so-called ‘strategic time out’ of Sweden’s security and defence policies. Drastic cuts in military spending transformed the army to more professionalised and specialised units, based on the so-called ‘Revolution in Military Affairs’ framework (Hedlund, 2013, p. 139). Consequentially, the SAF dismantled its ability to mobilise and militarise its defence capabilities and instead became a frontrunner in international crisis management as appose to sustain national territorial defence policies (Kragh and Åsberg, 2017, p. 19). With this, the public and
policy debates in Sweden has grown on the topic of joining military alliances, with the military alliance of North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) as the most prominent one over the last two decades (Kunz, 2015, p. 12).
The ongoing debate about Sweden’s membership of NATO has become increasingly turbulent since the Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008, by which the perceived insecurity in the Baltic sea area appeared (Sperling and Webber, 2016, p. 23). Sweden’s response to the rising insecurity in the region consisted of the declaration of solidarity that specified that Sweden would not stand by passively in any case of an armed attack on the EU or Nordic countries and it expects the same of those countries in return (Dalsjö, 2017, p. 150). This declaration has become more prominent through Russia re-arming its military and the illegal annexation of Crimea, which stands as a violation of international law (Raik and Järvenpää, 2017, p. 17). Additionally, a supposed Russian submarine has infiltrated waters around Stockholm, which resulted in a week long search of the SAF in 2014 (Lasconjarias, 2017, p. 4) Russia is supposedly also guilty of cyberattacks on the Swedish air traffic control system last year (ibid.). They also conducted a mock invasion of the Swedish island Gotland in march 2015, which is considered to be a possible strategic military place in the middle of the Baltic sea area (Kragh and Åsberg, 2017, p. 29). According to statements of the Swedish government, the self-assured Russian presence in the Baltic and Nordic region has resulted in the decision to remilitarise the Gotland island and open up the debate on enhancing the Swedish national defence capabilities (The Government of Sweden, 2017). With this, the debate on the choice of a conscription model and the effects it will bring to society, have gained more attention in the European security sphere.
Besides the Swedish government, countries Germany, Italy, France, Latvia, Lithuania, the United Kingdom, Ukraine, Poland, Romania, Czech Republic, Denmark, and the Netherlands all have suspended or eliminated military conscription over the last two decades (Braw, 2017:2). The end of the Cold War brought about fundamental transformations in security policies in Europe and their national defence agenda’s (ibid.). This has resulted in phasing out conscription models throughout Europe, for it was considered to be an outdated defence model and unfit for a secure world where mass mobilisation is more and more replaced by cyberwarfare, air power, terrorism and foreign cooperative operations (Joenniemi, 2006, p. 8) Nevertheless, in the last
year many of these countries governments have been debating the pros and cons of bringing back a drafting system and Ukraine, Estonia and Lithuania actually reinstated conscription over the last couple of years (Breitenbauch et al., 2017, p. 4). Additionally, Norway has continuously used a soft form of conscription and it is the first country in Europe to implement compulsory military service for men and women since the start of 2016 (Dalsjö, 2017, p. 147). As such, the concept of conscription has not only been brought back in national security and defence discussions in Europe, it is has opted an extended version of a gender neutral compulsory draft to the table. With the announcement of reinstating conscription, Sweden breaks the trend of phasing out conscription in Europe and puts forth a shift towards the remilitarising of its armed forces. Analysing the political decision-making process of Sweden’s return to conscription will provide insight of a possible frontrunner in the shift of the re-emergence of conscription models in Europe.
1.2 The state of the art
Conscription armies have played a crucial role in the establishment of the current international state system and intensified the connection between the state and its civilians (Mjøset & van Holde, 2002, p. 4). Military service directly relates to state formation, legitimation of state claims to the people, nationalist socialisation, and has historically transformed societies into states which constituted a central matters for historical and social science (Raymond, 2012, p. 5). Yet, the phenomenon of military conscription as a national institution and its various stages in history, has not been a central research topic in social science or related political and international relations core issues. The historical impact of conscription in Europe has not been abundantly researched, stronger yet, Martin Anderson (1976) and Peter Karsten (1998) seems to be one of the view authors to explicitly focus on conscription and its bearing in military history. For most of the nineteenth century, conscription models have been by far the most dominant way of military recruitment and defence building, which has brought about social and economic consequences for the societies at the time (Lucassen and Zürcher, 1998, p. 406). Nevertheless, the phenomenon has received very little attention from a social historical context, as well as from
an economic historical context of the position the conscripts took in as a paying or non-paying labour.
Indeed, economic considerations of conscription have produced some studies in the last century. However, they are generally credited for ending it all together (Oi, 1967; Friedman, 1967, Bradford, 1968; Fisher, 1969). Additionally, studies about the totality of conscription as a social, political or economic institution in contemporary security policies is lacking, however conscription as a social institution for the creation of citizenship, social discipline and nationalist support during the Cold War era have been studied (Petersen, 1989; Levi, 1996) These studies are all done in specific case studies, like the United States case or the case of the United Kingdom (O’Sullivan 1982; Adams & Poirier, 1987; Flynn, 1993). The most prominent case study is the case of France, for it is considered to be the historical birthplace of the conscription model and the idea of recruiting manpower (Cobban, 1962; Dolye, 1989; Marble, 2012). Nevertheless, conscription and its developments in contemporary Europe, within the European security policies or in comparative analysis between western democracies is only been touched upon by George Flynn (2002). That is, in his comparative overview of conscription in the United States, the United Kingdom and France, and these cases are yet again of an historical context.
Military services and necessities in foreign policy spheres, have been and still remains one of the central issues of the contemporary modern world (Mjøset & van Holde, 2002:4). As the organised use of violence and survival of the state have always been a central topic in international politics. The large number of conscription armies in the history of European states have not only brought about questions of external threats or state competitions, it has opted debates about what is to be protected, by whom, and by which moral compass (Joenniemi, 2006, p. 6). It is in this regard that the notion of defence and security became an issue of the people of the nation, rather than of the state itself, which turns military service and conscription into a duty for all (Avant, 2000, p. 43). As such, the literature on military services has shifted over the last years from topics on state power and mass mobilisation towards research on topics like; women in the army and the role of women in conflicts (Segal, 1995; Carreiras, 2006), gender issues in the armed forces (Krosnell & Svedberg, 2001), the Revolution in Military Affairs (Metz &
Kievit, 1995), civil-military relations (Bland, 2001; Burk, 2002) and various ways of effectively recruiting the armed forces (Avant, 2000; Kaldor, 2003). In so far, the recruitment of military services, voluntarily or compulsory, does therefore constitute a continued relevant research topic. Yet, the contemporary research on conscription, transforming an AVF into a conscription army, gender neutral conscription or for that matter the renewed conscription models in Europe is showing a significant research gap. In addition to that, the political motives for conscription as a form of remilitarising the defence policy, the pros and cons of conscription models in contemporary international relations and state politics, are research matters that fall short and what makes the study of this topic extremely relevant and original. In seeking to fill this gap, this thesis calls for a greater focus on the study of contemporary military and defence policy changes and the possible consequences it brings to defence and security policies in the European region. The theory of securitisation typically focusses on the moment when change occurs in a given political state of affairs and an issue of regular politics is transformed into high politics (McDonald, 2008, p. 576). In this regard, the thesis will focus on the political decision-making process of the Swedish government in the re-establishing of the conscription model and on the political discourse that shows a possible change in the political state of affairs.
1.3 The Research
This research examines the seemingly mutual attraction between the case of Sweden’s return to the conscription policy and the securitisation theory. The securitisation theory examines the change in the security conditions through the analysis of the performative power of political discourse and the labelling of threat politics (Waever, 2014, p. 123). Subsequently, for Sweden to bring back conscription is a policy that has to be justified by military threats to national territory, then the stark change in the policy has to show a change in the perception of threats represented by relevant government officials of Sweden. The theory of securitisation seeks to understand the politics of re-presentation in the possible meanings and contexts given of those presentations (Vuori, 2008, p. 74). As such, the reciprocal connection with the case of Sweden’s conscription seems a suitable one, for it is the return of conscription that signifies the stark
moment of policy change in ending ‘the strategic timeout’ and the start of remilitarising Sweden’s national defence capabilities.
This thesis inspires to study the political discourse in the process of making the political decision to reinstate conscription by way of Swedish government documentation and the way in which this move is represented. The analysis aims to examine whether change in the perception of security threats can be identified in such a way that a possible connections to the public statement of Sweden’s government on Russia’s assertive posture in the region is exposed. Hence, the thesis examines the following two questions:
Can a securitising move be identified in the political discourse of the Swedish governmental decision of reinstating conscription?
How has Russia’s assertive posture in the region affected this political decision-making process?
1.4 Objectives & Relevance
The research topic of the return of conscription models and the re-positioning of governmental defence strategies in Europe, can be considered a pilot study in a research field that is gaining more relevance due to its growing reality, but is simultaneously lacking contemporary research. Therefore, the subject of the return of conscription and the research presented in this thesis, consist of several objectives. According to George & Bennett (2005), research objectives should be embedded in a renewed, well informed assessment that identifies gaps in current knowledge on the topic and acknowledgements in the contradictory and in the evidence of theory (George and Bennett, 2005, p. 44). Accordingly, the objectives of this research consist of descriptive purposes and exploratory purposes, which are rooted in the relevance of the study.
The aim of this study is to describe whether a securitising move can be identified in Sweden’s political decision process of reinstating conscription, and if Russia’s assertive posture has affected this process. Thereupon, the research objective is descriptive because it aspires to find out why a certain action is being taken and how the content of research materials can explain this action (Darke, et al., 1998, p. 278). Attached, this thesis will include an exploratory objective in the study, as the study consists of gathering preliminary information that will put forth a contribution to the nature of the research topic (George & Bennett, 2005, p. 49). And as such, aspires to lay down a basis for better understanding the topic of the return of contemporary conscription models as empowering national defence capabilities. As a result, this thesis ensures scientific relevance of the study precisely because it will fill a significant gap in the existing scientific knowledge on the topic of bringing back the draft and it identifies a field that has not been extensively researched in social science.
The debates concerning the return of conscription have gained an important momentum with Sweden formally reintroducing the draft system. This change in the strategic posture of Sweden will have direct consequences for its role in the European security assembly, its political alliances and in relation to its neighbouring countries (Breitenbauch et al. 2017, p. 3). As of now, bringing back a draft system with a gender neutral addition, can be considered a vital reality against the backdrop of the growing international tension in Europe, and specifically in the Nordic-Baltic region (ibid.). Understanding the contemporary debates and policy documentations concerning the topic of conscription in Sweden and the political discourse concerning the decision process, is thus an important one for it will have political, economic and social impact in international and domestic ways. And as such, the research subsists of social relevance in its aim to better understand political and social processes that will have an effect on society.
1.5 Disposition
The structure of the thesis is outlined as follows. In order to clarify how this thesis approaches the examination of the political discourse of the Swedish decision to bring back conscription, the thesis will first discuss the conceptual consideration of security issues and the securitisation
theory in the theoretical framework and engages in theoretical on the analytical value of the theory. The speech act theory, which gives the securitisation theory its analytical and theoretical foundations, will also be discussed in the theoretical framework and thereafter operationalised in the methodology chapter. The chapter on methods provides an explanation on how the operationalisation of the speech act has resulted the use of critical discourse analysis and will give a justification to the methodological choices. Henceforth, the analysis chapter provides a discussion on the results of the critical discourse analysis of the Swedish documentation on the decision to reinstate conscription, and these research findings will be analysed critically. Finally, the concluding chapter will provide an overview of the main findings, it will answer the research questions, deliver a critical discussion on the research process and outcomes and gives suggestions for further research.
2. Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework of this inquiry is predominantly based on the securitisation theory, which origin is grounded in the Copenhagen School of Security Studies. By drawing up on the prime authors of the securitisation theory, namely the work of Barry Buzan, Ole Waever, and Jaap de Wilde (1998) in their book ‘Security: A New Framework for Analysis’, this chapter will address the foundations, analytical contribution and theoretical basis of the securitisation theory. Moreover, the concept of ‘security’ and ‘security issues’ will be set forth in the field of political decisions making and processes of securitising an issue. The emphasises is put on laying down the basis of a securitising move and how it can be identified in order to connect the theoretical framework with the aim of this study. In doing so, the objective of this chapter is delivering a theoretical foundation from which the analytical inquiry is based on in chapter four. This following chapter will firstly cover the conceptualisation of security and the related debates in the security studies. Secondly, it will also bring about a focus on where the securitisation theory comes from, what it does and how it can be utilised and applied throughout different theoretical presentations. Finally, this chapter will concentrate on to the ‘speech act’ framework, which moves the utterance of security itself into measures of language and can therefore be operationalised into a analytic tool.
2.1 The concept of security
The concept of security is increasingly part of a reconceptualization debate since the end of the Cold War, for it marks a changing understanding of the international environment in the political sense as well as the theoretical one (Buzan, 1991; Crawford, 1991; Art, 1993; Adler, 1997; Baldwin, 2001; Fierke, 2015). The reconceptualization of the security context resulted into renewed security issues on political agendas and academic debates concerning the definition, content and scope of the concept. These debates within social science emerged amongst three kind of scholars, namely the traditionalist, wideners and the critical scholars (Baldwin, 2001, p.7). Which makes security in itself a contested concept and dynamic in its analytical use. A commonality in the concept of security is rooted in aspects like ‘threats to precious values’ or
‘freedom from threats’, however this does not resolve the obscurity (Buzan, 1991, p. 18; Art, 1993, p. 280; Williams, 2008, p. 5). It is in the obscurity of the security concept that the relation to political, individual and societal value is exposed and were the relevance of the reconceptualization debate in social science is anchored. As social science, and especially the study of international relations, aims to understand the behaviour, relationships and meanings of those political and societal considerations.
Classically, security is conceptualised as an objective sense which can be measured by the absence of threats (Wolfers, 1962, p. 149). Traditionalist like Stephen Walt (1991) and Colin Gray (1992) argue that security exists within the domain of the state and the government’s aim is to prevent or manage threats to the survival of the state (Walt, 1991, p. 213; Gray, 1992, p 27). Herewith, the traditionalists point of view is one that is state-centric and focusses on the materialism of force, like military capabilities (Nye, 1988, p.7). One can argue that objectivity in security issues is a necessity for the maintaining of it , but then again subjective factors are influential in the perception of security itself by interactions, negotiations, for the policymakers and the society who is subject to it (Booth, 2007, p. 105). Thereupon, traditionalists have excepted the wider range of issues in security that can cause conflicts, however the traditionalists argument is that the expansion of the research field by widening the security concept would mean losing the focus of the field and will consequentially means a loss of analytical coherency (Buzan, 1998, p. 9). This view is in contract with scholars who are arguing for a widening and deepening of security concept.
The wideners scholars, such as Ole Waever (1995), Barry Buzan (1998) and Lene Hansen (2000) aim to go beyond the state-centric paradigm and argue a wider range of threats to security. With this, these scholars argue for a broader and deeper security concept by adding new elements to the security agenda (Huysmans, 2011, p. 372). They reject the narrow space of state and military elements in the security research agenda and added issues like economics, health and environmental challenges (Buzan et al., 1998, p. 24). This wider range of the security agenda exposes a subjectivity in the angle of which one can study security, which leaves room for different theoretical approaches and scholars directions for research.
Besides the traditionalists and widening debates, critical scholars such as Alexander Wendt (1998) and Michael Williams (2003) have focussed on the totality of the frame from which security exist. This post-positivist turn questions the core assumptions on which security is researched on positivist grounds and thereby challenges the traditionalist and the wideners debates all together (Fierke, 2007, p. 103). With this, the critical study of the issue of security prevails counter arguments for the positivist considerations, as Jim George (2008) cited:
“For the most part the debate over science and international relations has been carried out as a debate between positivism and its critics. This debate continues into the present with tensions within constructivist theory a particularly evident example of it” (George, 2008, p.34).
By this means, critical studies move beyond the liberal-realist and materialism controversies and towards a more discursive understanding of security. Understanding security as a process or an act, which can be influenced by interactions, norms, values, cultural and historical influences (Wendt, 1998, p. 413). It is in this post-positivist perspective in international relations that the social constructivist approach enters new ways of analysing security in contemporary politics (Adler, 1997, p. 256; Wendt, 1998, p.415). This makes the conceptualisation of security intersubjective and gives importance to actors who are involved, how these actors present security and what kind of language is used in political and public discourses. This makes the security concept both open to be used in the name of prevention or control, and as such is open to evoke extraordinary measures as to avoid them.
2.2 The Copenhagen School of Security Studies
The origin of the security studies can be traced back to the traditionalist scholars, with the uprising of critical security scholars, the Copenhagen School of Security Studies in the security research field is one of the most prominent (Buzan, et al., 1998, p. 21). The Copenhagen School of Security Studies, as part of the post-positivist movement, is a body of academic research which emphasises the social features of security (Knudsen, 2001, p. 355). By adding social features unto the security concept, different stadia emerges in which security is spoken of (Buzan
et al. 1998, p. 6). Consequentially, the Copenhagen School brings about a broadening of the security concept and joins the ‘widening debate’. This by including the different sectors, such as environmental threats, regional or societal threats in which it is possible to analyse security in different ways and with different factors. Herewith, the Copenhagen School agrees with the traditionalist notion that security is about survival, for it entails the analysis of threats to an object that makes security an issue in the first place and therefore needs counter measures (Buzan, 1991, p. 437). However, the analytical apparatus of the Copenhagen School differs from the traditionalist one, for it does not analyse the threat as an objective state of affairs but rather an concept that can be constructed.
Accordingly, the Copenhagen School and the primary associated authors Barry Buzan, Ole Waever and Jaap de Wilde (1998), have developed an analytic tool to conceptualise those security issues that evoke extraordinary measures in light of threats (Buzan et al., 1998, p. 27). This approach addresses social and linguistic aspects of security in the analysing of the constructing of the threat, which entails a social constructivist perspective that breaks down the aspects of what constitutes the security issue (Booth, 2007, p. 102).This conceptualisation is outlined in the prominently debated theory of securitisation. As such, the practical aspects and consequences of securitisation allow for a broader understanding of contemporary security issues in the field of political and societal processes and developments.
2.3 Securitisation & de-securitisation
The securitisation theory signifies a disruption in the security field of International Relations (Peoples & Vaughan-Williams, 2015, p. 93). As stated above, it represents a body of theoretical challenges to the traditional ‘state-centric’ paradigm of analyses and thereby opts for new conceptual definitions and identifies new kinds of threats. These reconceptualization’s make room for a variation of ontological and methodological perspectives, which display a certain view on reality and are therefore rooted in the social constructivist approach in analysing those threats to security as an intersubjective reality (Floyd, 2011, p. 430). Such an analysis is therefore a more reflective ontological phenomenon than the traditional and often realist-orientated view on security as an objective reality (Waever, 1995, p. 56; Sjöstedt, 2013, p. 147).
These ontological differences make room for methodological more discursive ways for analysing security rather as an outcome of a social process than an objective condition (Williams, 2003, p. 512). With this, the theory of securitisation defines security as an process that can be constructed, influenced, and is therefore intersubjective and dynamic.
Constructivist scholars have emphasised the political significance in the concepts of ‘security’ and ‘threats’ in security studies (Buzan et al., 1998; Campbell, 1998; Krause & Williams, 1997; Floyd, 2011). The constructivist perspectives asks questions like when an issue can be classified as an ‘security threat’, who makes that classification and with what kind of motives. Referring to an issue as a matter of ‘security’ or in the name of a ‘security threat’, suggests a sense of urgency, of extraordinary circumstances and high politics (Stritzel, 2007, p. 358). Consequentially, applying a sense of direct urgency to an issue that is an existential threat and thus is in need of extraordinary measures, an issue becomes open to securitisation (Waever, 1995, p.51 ;Buzan et al., 1998, p.21). In this context, an issue is moved from a regular political frame into a political frame that is out of the ordinary legislative procedures. Herewith, the Copenhagen School of Security Studies argues that securitising an issue can be considered as an extension of politicising an issue (Neumann, 1998, p. 12). By means of this, an issue can be securitised when political relevant actors are starting to talk about it and different phases occur, which is illustrated as follows:
The table shows the distinctiveness of the rhetorical process of a securitising move that influences an issue to be relocated out of the politicised frame and into the securitised representation (Emmers, 2010, p. 138). Henceforth, securitisation refers to the process where a phenomenon is created or constructed as an security issue. It seeks to understand how an issue is moved into the security nexus, under what kind of conditions and by whom this process is utilized (Floyd, 2011, p. 428). The process of securitising an issue consist of four main aspects, by which an issue can be regarded as a legitimate cause of change, which means it has found acceptable (ibid.). At first, a securitising move frames a phenomenon as an existential threat, that constitutes existential when the changing phenomenon is considered to be damaging and have negative impact on a referent object (Balzacq, 2005, p.524). The referent object constitutes as an object, ideal or entity that is threatened and therefore has to be protected in order to secure its survival (ibid.). To secure or maintain the survival of the referent object by the existential threat, extraordinary measures are suggested to do make that happen (Roe, 2004, p. 281). These measures can consist of policy changes, new laws, political instruments and can be considered as extraordinary when such a measure has not been used before and is thus requested outside the regular political legislative procedures (ibid.). Securitisation can be classified as successful when an audience, the target of the securitising move, has accepted the security issue as an existential threat which legitimises the use of extraordinary measures (Buzan et al., 1998, p. 23). These four main aspect of securitisation constitutes intersubjective phases in a process where political change occurs, for each phase is open to interpretation and different perceptions, and can thus be deliberate steered.
The practice of securitisation is based on the argument that by the utterance or labelling of ‘security’ onto an issue, it can be steered into emergency politics (Taureck, 2006, p. 54). This makes securitisation an act that can be studied through language and discourse, this so called ‘speech act’ theory is what gives securitisation its theoretical basis.
‘Security is thus a self-referential practice, because it is in this practice that the issue becomes a security issue –not necessarily because a real existential threat exists but because the issue is presented as such a
threat’ (Buzan et al. 1998, p. 23).
The speech act theory signifies the direct link between the threat to security and the actor who represents it as a threat (Waever, 1995, p. 54). Consequently, the speech act theory classifies security issues as a self-referential practice, the security issue is treated as a threat when actors recognize and label it as such. Therefore, the conceptual definition of a security issue is dependable on the contemporary international political sphere and the actors who construct and represent issues unto the security agenda. This definition of the speech act theory brings about normative assumptions that there can be a three step plan to bring securitisation to a successful outcome. Namely, the classification of an existential threat, to represent the necessity of an emergency response action and by that particular justification can it move out of the regular political static rules (Buzan et al. 1998, p. 6). To represent an issue as an existential threat means to state that the issue is more pressing than others, which makes it legitimate to move beyond political regulations (Taureck, 2006, p. 56). The legitimation of the urgency and necessity of the action is to be swayed by an audience who accepts the securitising move.
The maintaining of security and the protection of it, is framed as the desirable status quo and suggests an ideal (Sjöstedt, 2013, p. 148). When an issue is securitised, the regular political process is overruled and thus shows a grey area in allowing actors to rise above the norm that would normally bind them to collective regulation. This grey area signifies normative implications of the Copenhagen School of Security Studies, for it debates the consequences of securitisation itself (Hansen, 2012, p. 526). Securitisation as an strategy or deliberate act, can have negative consequences for the sense of security as an political or societal value (ibid.). The theory of de-securitisation, an opposite process of securitisation, conceptualises a strategy that returns an issue from the urgent politicised agenda to the domain of regular public politics, a politicised issue (Waever, 1995, p. 63). The de-securitisation process strives for deconstructing an ongoing securitisation discourse and is understood as the absence of labelling a threat and the absence of extraordinary measures requests (Cuita, 2009, p. 304). A security issue can move from one phase to another and back, as an issue can both be securitised as well as de-securitised by the performance of the speech act, which depicts the power of language in political processes.
2.4 The speech act
The central claim of the securitisation theory is that the uttering and way of articulating security issues, produces a threatening state of affairs (Balzacq, 2005, p. 511) Herewith, the power is directly derived from the usage of words, thus the utterance itself constitutes an act. ‘By saying the word, something is done’ (Waever, 1995, p. 55). By verbally labelling an issue as a security threat, it becomes one and thereby creates a new social order. This means there is a choice for labelling an object or phenomenon as a matter of security, through discursive practice of labelling the choice of securitizing is a political one (Searle and Vanderveken, 1985, p. 8). Political precisely because to construct an issue through speech act is dependable on power-laden and correct use of words in conformity with the public recognised governing rules (Balzacq, 2005, p. 511). The speech act defines security as not being ‘out there’, but rather as a presentation by an actor (Waever, 1995, p. 55). So, the way in which the presentation is executed is relevant for understanding the what the ‘speaking actor’ means. For instance, the speaking actor can make a prediction, a promise, a request or an admission, all of which are ways to analyse the specifics on what the speaking actor means with his presentation (Tsohatzidis, 2010, p. 341). In it in the act of establishing those kinds of meanings that provide the operationalisation of the speech act theory. A theory based on linguistic analysis which is grounded on the notion that utterance has performative power and functions (Bach, 2014, p. 155). This performative power is based on the intentions and interpretations behind the utterance of speech acts and expose several acts at ones (ibid.). Herewith, the central concept of speech acts, the illocutionary force, analysis ‘what is meant’ by uttering and can be operationalised in five types of meanings. This operationalisation describes the ‘illocutionary acts’, by which the performative power of utterance as a speech act is defined, ‘to act in saying something’ (Habermas, 1970, p. 361). With this, speech act scholars such as John Austin (1976) and David Holdcorft (1978) explain illocutionary acts as a force of intention behind the utterance performed by an speech act (Austin, 1976, p. 40; Holdcroft, 1978, p. 157). In this regards, the notion of the illocutionary force as the main drive behind the meaning in utterance, is thus subject to analysing the intention of the utterance. This analysis of the linguistics of communication and performative speech acts, is divided into types of illocutionary force given to an utterance.
These five types of speech acts are designed by John Searle and Daniel Vanderveken (1985) and consist of the following explanations: assertive utterance of speech acts entails a speaking actor that presents a proposition as an actual true state of affairs; a directive speech act presents an clear request, order or command action to carry out a respond to the proposition given; a
commissive speech act commits to promise, a vow, guarantee and gives legitimising force for an
action in the future; an expressive speech act refers to what the speaking actors is expressing in an emotion, such as apologies, thankfulness, congratulations or disappointment; a declaration speech act refers to changing the reality in accordance with the proposition, thus statements like declaring something guilty, declaring war and therefore makes a real change happen (Searle and Vanderveken, 1985, p. 18).
The illocutionary force brings about contextual posture of the speech act and enables the speaking actor to activate a new context or heighten the existing context (Vuori, 2008, p. 88). Thereby, the speaking actor can impact the interpretation of the issue in the current state of affairs. This allows a performative speech act to create the ‘appropriate’ conditions to increase the receptiveness of the targeted audience (Buzan et al., 1998, p. 32). This receptiveness is in accordance with and dependable on the recognised security structure, the rank of the securitising actor and the historical and culture factors that facilitate the conditions on which securitisation can take place (ibid.). The theory of securitization and de-securitisation can thus not be regarded as neutral school of thoughts, for it is dependable on the context given and the receptiveness of the audience. Better yet, the Copenhagen school of thought signifies a laden political analytical tool, which usefulness and normative strands is debated among scholars
2.5 The state of the (de-)securitisation debate
The securitisation theory as a school of thought of International Relations, has been criticised and debated for it analytical and practical utility, as well for its normative implications as a theoretical framework (Cuita, 2009, p. 306). Although it is relevant to discuss the criticisms of the securitisation theory, this thesis aims to acknowledge and embrace the arguments posed below, for it will provide an explanation for the choice of the theory applied in this study.
Securitisation and the speech act analysis, is continuously criticised for its lack of practical usefulness (McSweeney, 1996; Neumann, 1998; Lupovici, 2014). These scholars argue that other schools of thought in the study of International Relations, like the liberal or realist thoughts, provide a useful framework for analysing and understanding international diplomacy. Critics argue that identifying a securitised issue or a securitising actor, does not impact the political processes itself. It is the securitisation theory that is criticised because it can observe an ongoing or finished process, but lacks the ability to be utilised as a practice for political actors or as a prediction of international political behaviour (Lupovici, 2014, p. 303). However, the study of International Relations focusses on explaining and understanding behaviour within the international political dynamics, it does not seek to predict or steer political phenomenon (Baylis
et al., 2017, p. 3) Consequently, one could argue the securitisation theory is thus an analytical
tool for better understanding a process of political behaviour and can contribute to the awareness of the use of language in the practice of international diplomacy.
Another criticisms of the securitisation theory is cited in its theoretical foundation as a speech act (Hansen, 2000; Bigo, 2002; Wilkinson; 2007; Côté, 2016). Debates on the framework of the securitisation theory have been argued on the ground of its social constructivist premises, thus the idea of constructing issue through interactions, norms and agency (Côté, 2016, p. 541). However, scholars like Adam Côté (2016) and Lene Hansen (2000) have rejected the premises of active agency participation in the securitisation theory and argue that ‘speaking security’ is constrained by defining it as an illictionary performance. By this definition, securitisation can only be accessed by those authorised to ‘speack security’ (Hansen, 2000, p. 290). It is the causal relationship between the securitising actor and the audience that brings about normative assumption of this conceptualisation of the speech act theory (Balzacq 2005; Lupovici, 2014; Cuita, 2009; McDonald 2008, Hansen, 2000). As the analytical focus of the securitisation is the supposedly shared understanding of the urgency of the action between the audience and the securitising actor ought to have (Balzacq, 2005, p. 184). Its mutual recognised idea of an threatening phenomenon to the referent object, as the main theoretical assumption is what makes the theory audience-centred (McDonald, 2008, p. 574). However, it is the audience that seems to be subjected to the securitisation process instead of participation in the process. This does make
the securitisation theory often concerned about actors instead of moving beyond the state-centric levels.
Lastly, the securitisation theory is often criticised for its dominance in European politics (Huysmans, 1998; Bigo, 2002; Balzacq, 2010). Most of the studies done on securitisation is based on political processes within the context of European policy and European political discourse, such as migration (Huysmans, 2000; Ibrahim, 2005), terrorism ( Edmunds, 2012) and climate change policies (Brzoska , 2009; Trombetta, 2010). One might argue the securitisation theory signifies a narrow framework of analysing security, namely the designation of the threat. One might argue that the studies on securitisations is mainly done within the European political discourse and is therefore best applicable for a political environment based on consultations and democratic negotiations. One might also argue securitisation as an illocutionary speech act is only done by those institutionally placed to do so. However, the securitisation theory used in this thesis signifies a practical analytical tool for analysing a policy U-turn decision by the government of Sweden in the contextual background of the European geopolitical considerations. By this, it aims to analyse the speech acts of the Swedish parliament whom voted in favour of this policy change. This means, the securitisation speech act theory is suitable for this specific case study in spite of and precisely because it embraces the criticism and utilises them to understand the process leading up to the policy turn and does not seek to expand the theory itself.
2.6 Securitisation and the case of Sweden
The securitisation theory is developed and used for the specific purpose of de-securitisation and in a the particular context of European security politics, in the explicit timeframe of the post-Cold War era (Guzzini, 2015, p. 5). This theoretical approach serves as a tool to look at security issues with a focus on politics and aspects of social, economic and environmental relations should be or should not be securitised is essential in governments running national security agenda’s. The securitisation theory focusses on the moment when political change occurs and national governments seek to manage that (Bach, 2014, p. 156). Therefore, the securitisation theory can describe the way in which the political change occurs and in which context is it justified, and in connection to which issues. Which follows the aim and purpose of this thesis, for
it aspires to examine the political change of Sweden’s defence posture with returning conscription and by which context and connected factors this can be described. Hence, the securitisation theory, and specifically the concept of securitising moves, defined by Waever, Buzan and de Wilde (1998) provide an accurate theoretical lens for this research.
3. Methodology
This thesis employs a critical discourse analysis alongside secondary data analysis to examine the mutual attractiveness between the securitisation theory and the case of Sweden’s change in national defence strategy through reinstating military conscription. Hence, this thesis implements an interpretive case-study of the policy turn of military, gender-neutral, conscription of the Swedish government. Research methods can be defined as a way to systemise and describe the analysis of the collected data, bring about focus and deploys the relevant tools (Cavaye, 1996, p. 228). Herewith, this methodology chapter provides the justification of the methodological choices for the case selection, the collected data, the chosen analytical tools and the way in which these tools are operationalised. This justification produces a clear picture of the contribution of the choices to the research, as well as the considerations of the limitations and delimitations taken into account in the process.
3.1 Critical Discourse Analysis
This thesis examines the presentations of different speech acts performed by members of the Swedish parliament in explaining and describing the defence policy turn to military conscription. This policy turn is deployed in the world of security politics and the socio-political dynamics of perceptions of threats and security (Buzan, Wæver and de Wilde, 1998, p. 53). The meaning of security is dependable on epistemology, ontology and methodology considerations and the theoretical basis it is grounded on (Floyd, 2011, p. 431). For the theory of securitisation, illocutionary speech acts look for meaning in the uttering and labelling of security (ibid). The Copenhagen School of Security Studies comprehends the concept of security on the exploratory capabilities of the social constructivist approach (McDonald, 2008, p. 577). Therefore, defining security and security phenomenon is considered to be textual laden, for which securitising practices earn political meaning and power (Wæver, 2015, p. 123). With this, the theoretical foundation of the securitisation theory offers epistemology and ontological leanings on which the methodology yields. This means, the research is ontologically grounded on the premises that reality is created by social actors, social interactions and is therefore interpretive, changeable and
dynamic (Bryman, 2012, p. 522). Epistemology, the social world produces knowledge that is open to interpretations, perceptions and subjectivity (ibid.). Based on these fundamental notions, the social constructivist approach views security as a socially constructed concepts, which can be influenced, formed and changed by language, presentations, actors and interactions (Vuori, 2008, p. 78). In so doing, the analysis of language within a social context is relevant for examining social and political linguistic influences of creating security issues, which can be critically analysed through discourse analysis.
This study considers the way in which language uttered by Sweden’s government representatives has engaged with their audience, given the assumption that the speech acts constitute interaction between the speaking actor and the audience (Bourbeau, 2014, p. 189). The speech act method structures language into actions that can influence audience perceptions and objectives (ibid.). For this reason, a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is necessary for the examination of public statement and addresses. CDA constitutes an interdisciplinary approach for studying language and discourse as a form of social and political practices (Fairclough, 1995, p. 193). CDA has been applied for analysing policy documents, political speeches, public debates and governmental bills on order to given impressions or frames presented to an audience (Guzzini, 2011; Stritzel, 2007; Balzacg, 2005).
The CDA is based on a qualitative analysis in examining contextual securitisation in the relationship between security politics and the given context. This analysis will therefore consist of the interaction between the securitisation process and the specific context, which is the policy turn of Sweden’s defence strategy. It is in the securitisation process where the social and political speech acts present the determinations of the threat, the object and the measures for actions (Buzan, Wæver and de Wilde, 1998, p. 58). This means, a CDA method structures the analysis of texts and context, to bring systematically together the meaning and socio-political implications of the speech acts done by Swedish representatives of the parliament.
This study is conducted as an interpretative case-study of Sweden’s case in reinstating conscription. An interpretive case-study can be defined as a direction within a subject matter that sees knowledge of reality as gained through social constructions and focusses on complexity of making sense of behaviour (Andrade, 2009, p. 44). Hence, the study explores a contemporary
phenomenon within the real life context and is connected to gaining ‘in-depth’ understandings of this phenomenon (Yin, 1994, p. 13). Thus, the choice for an interpretative case study is justified by the nature of the case of Sweden. For it is a case based on a contemporary political phenomenon that is explored in depth through the theoretical lens of securitisation on order to comprehend the contextual influences in the changing defence policy of Sweden. Adding to that, a case-study is the most commonly used research design in scholarly debates on the topic of securitization (Balzacq and Guzzini, 2015, p. 101), and can thus bring together the method and the theoretical framework in the analytical approach.
3.2 Case selection
The use of a case-study in research, as Darke, Shanks & Broadbent (1998) have put it, is particularly useful in contemporary less well-researched fields, especially a case where the examination involves the relevance of context (Darke, et al., 1998, p. 280). Hence, the choice for the case of Sweden is based on the argument of the uniqueness of the political phenomenon of the research topic as well as the case of the country. Sweden’s return to conscription is considered to be distinctive for the reason that it consist of a stark policy reversal, which makes for a significant change in its national defence policy as well as its foreign policy strategy. In the Swedish case, this constitutes as rare because in the study of international relations a blunt policy turns often go hand in hand with social and political resistance or strong criticism (O’Donnell, 2012, p. 4), which does not seem to be the case in Sweden.
Other Nordic or European countries who are using conscription at the moment, have not put forth such a stark policy rotation. For instance, Norway and Estonia are using a conscription model and have continuously been using some mild form of it over the last decades. Also, Lithuania and Ukraine have both reinstated conscription models over the last view years, after having abolished the model before (Breitenbauc et al. 2017:4). However, Sweden is a distinctive case because the announcement that conscription will be reinstated brought about considerable attention of news headlines and is considered to be a trigger of the conscription debate in Europe (Järvenpää, 2016, p. 8). As such, Sweden is selected as the case for this research because the
study is relevant for political and social considerations of the results the defence policy rotation will possible have for the whole of Europe.
3.3 Data collection and materials
The statement of the former Supreme Commander of the SAF, Sverker Göransson, about the fact that Sweden would only be able to defend itself for no more than a week, reached headlines in January 2013 (Nünlist, 2013, p. 2). Consequentially, the state of the SAF and its limited defence capabilities resulted in a heated public debate and political questions within the parliament (Dalsjö, 2014, p. 181; Kunz, 2015, p. 8). At the time, the renewed attention to Swedish security and defence strategy has led to the appointment of a cross-party Defence Commission by the parliament, with the task to conduct inquiries on Swedish current and future policies on security and defence matters. The Defence Commission is a medium for consultations between the government and representatives of the political parties of the parliament (The Government of Sweden, 2014). The Defence Commission is directed by the Ministry of Defence and its main task is to monitor security developments and investigate threats, risks of current and future defence policies (ibid.) Herewith, the Swedish government requested several studies on the state of the defence capabilities and ask for recommendations on boosting its strategic posture (Järvenpää, 2016, p.17). The data selected for the examination of bringing back conscription in the decision of the Swedisch government, can all be traced back to these reports. For it is stated by the government of Sweden that these reports have been de guiding principles for the architecture of the Defence Bill 2016-2020 (The government of Sweden, 2017). With the aprovement of this Defence Bill on March 2nd, 2017, the parliament formally voted in favour of changing the Swedish defence strategy by increasing defence spending and reinstating conscription. As the government cites:
“[t]he Defence Commission reports from 2013, 2014 and 2015 have served as the political basis and the Armed Forces report has been the guiding document to the Swedish Defence Bill 2016-2020” (The Government of Sweden, 2017).
As such, the collected data for the critical analysis of the political decision of the Swedish government to bring back conscription, is based on the four Defence Commission reports. Namely, the following reports: ‘Choices in a globalised world’ (2013), ‘The defence of Sweden – a stronger defence for an uncertain time’ (2014), ‘Security in a new era’ (2015), and the Armed Forces report ‘The manning system of the military workforce’ (2016) (The Government of Sweden, 2017). These reports have directly given content to the policy proposals and bills, the debates in parliament and the speeches by governmental officials in discussing the bringing back a conscription model.
Table 2: Timeline of the selected data (Based on: The Government of Sweden 2017; The Government of Sweden, 2016).
The timeline in table 2, demonstrates the scope of the collected primary data for the critical discourse analysis of Sweden’s decision. In addition to ensure important documents or new developments have not been mist, a set of unstructured exploratory interviews have been conducted. This, in order to put weight behind the justification of the documents. Because the subject of this thesis is not a well-researched one, as well as the fact that the changing political phenomenon it aims to investigate changed during the research process. Then because the in-depth single case aspect of the research, several relevant respondents have been approached for
information and knowledge about the topic of conscription in Sweden. Relevant respondents consisted of The Swedish Defence Research Agency, The Swedish Defence University and The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. These institutions are all considered to be relevant because of the direct relation to the Swedish defense and security policies or the study of those policies. Although many people have been approaches, just a view people considered themselves to have knowledge about the topic of the thesis and were available for conversations, this is outlined in appendix 2.
3.4 Analytic procedure
The aim of this study is to explore whether or not a securitising move can be identified in the political discourse of the Swedish government decision. Hereby, the political discourse documentation on the public presentation in the decision process of reinstating conscription is critically analysed through the securitisation theory and the systematic approach of the speech act theory. At first, the central variables of securitisation theory the in this research are taken into account. The dependent variable of the research consist of the central aspects that make a securitising move possible. Herewith, the concept of an existential threat, a referent object and an extraordinary threat are explored throughout the analysis (Buzan et al., 1998, p. 23). To ensure the consistence of the analysis and to ensure the analysis explores what it needs to explore, a table of the conceptual definitions is designed and has been the guiding line in the critical analysis. The table is outlined in the appendix 3.
The linguistic variables are selected as follows through the speech act theory and consist of illocutionary acts as assertive, directive, commissive, expressive and declaring acts (Searle and Vanderveken, 1985, p. 18). These acts are outlined in appendix 4 in order to ensure the consistence of the analysis and to ensure the analysis explores what it needs to explore. In order to put both levels of analysis in a systematic procedure to critically examine the documents, the following table is used for clarification:
