Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Security Dialogue
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jutila, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Desecuritizing Minority Rights: Against Determinism

Matti Jutila

University of Helsinki, Finland, matti.jutila{at}helsinki.fi

The article discusses Paul Roe’s argument that minority rights are always problems of (societal) security. According to Roe, a Huysmanstype deconstructivist strategy, which can be used in desecuritization of migration, is not possible in minority situations, because maintenance of a collective identity is central for minorities; therefore, the desecuritization of minority rights may be ‘logically impossible’ in certain cases. The present article focuses on Roe’s arguments and attempts to find ways to avoid his determinism. It introduces a reconstructivist strategy for the desecuritization of minority rights, based on the process and discursive aspects of identity. It is possible for the stories of ethnically defined collective identities to be told in such a way that they do not exclude other such identities from the territory of a state. With this strategy, the author tries to show that desecuritization of minority rights is always logically possible, though in some cases it might be practically impossible in the foreseeable future.

Key Words: identity • minority rights • nationalism • politics • securitization

Security Dialogue, Vol. 37, No. 2, 167-185 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0967010606066169
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 European Journal of International RelationsHome page
M. Jutila
Taming Eastern Nationalism: Tracing the Ideational Background of Double Standards of Post-Cold War Minority Protection
European Journal of International Relations, December 1, 2009; 15(4): 627 - 651.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Cooperation and ConflictHome page
K. Atland
Mikhail Gorbachev, the Murmansk Initiative, and the Desecuritization of Interstate Relations in the Arctic
Cooperation and Conflict, September 1, 2008; 43(3): 289 - 311.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Security DialogueHome page
C.A.S.E. Collective
Critical Approaches to Security in Europe: A Networked Manifesto
Security Dialogue, December 1, 2006; 37(4): 443 - 487.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Security DialogueHome page
P. Roe
Reconstructing Identities or Managing Minorities? Desecuritizing Minority Rights: A Response to Jutila
Security Dialogue, September 1, 2006; 37(3): 425 - 438.
[PDF]