Given that security issues are among the most significant challenges facing various nations, defining the concepts associated with them is a crucial achievement that can help alleviate the intensity of tensions present in today’s international landscape. The security dilemma is one of the fundamental concepts linked to the phenomena of conflict in international relations. This is because the interactions between states occur in an environment devoid of a central authority. Consequently, each state constantly finds itself at risk from one or more other states that may resort to the use of military force against it. In other words, international relations unfold in a context characterized by a state of readiness for war, where every state must rely solely on itself to ensure its security. This is what is referred to as the security dilemma in international relations.
Definition of the Security Dilemma
The term “security dilemma” is commonly used in both traditional and new realist thought. It refers to a situation in which governments face security-related problems, where the choice is between two equally undesirable options. This creates a scenario where decision-making becomes challenging because both alternatives can harm the state. Military preparations foster a sense of insecurity that cannot be easily removed from the perceptions of other states regarding the intentions of the state in question.
The security dilemma indicates that any state within a system characterized by anarchy—analogous to a state of war in realist theory—operates under the principle of “self-help.” To safeguard itself from the dangers posed by potential attacks from other states, a state may seek to enhance its power to protect itself from possible aggression and reduce its vulnerability to the influence of others. However, this action increases the insecurity of other parties, prompting them to prepare for the worst. Since it is impossible for any party to feel entirely secure in a world composed of competing units, and since states cannot trust or feel assured about the intentions of others, the quest for power continues. Thus, the struggle for power remains paramount.
Robert Jervis offers another definition of the security dilemma, describing it as a situation in which “many means that a state employs to enhance its security diminish the security of others.” John Hertz defines the security dilemma as a structural concept where attempts by states to safeguard their security—motivated by self-reliance, irrespective of their intentions—result in increased danger for other states. Each side interprets its actions as defensive while perceiving the actions of others as potential threats.
Phases of the Security Dilemma
The security dilemma can be divided into two phases:
First Phase: Interpretation
In this initial phase, the security dilemma arises when a state’s military preparations create doubt in the minds of other states regarding whether these actions are purely defensive measures intended to enhance its security or whether they serve offensive purposes that threaten the security of other nations.
Second Phase: Response
The second phase of the security dilemma involves the responses and reactions of other states, particularly regarding political, economic, and military preparations.
Basic Assumptions of the Security Dilemma:
The security dilemma is based on several fundamental assumptions. First, it rests on the premise that security is a state that nations compete to achieve. In a chaotic global system where no authority exists to ensure order, states must focus on their own efforts to secure protection. In their quest for security, nations increasingly accumulate power to avoid the impacts of other states’ strength. This accumulation of power, in turn, makes others feel less secure, prompting them to prepare for the worst. Since no state can feel completely secure in a world of competing nations, rivalry becomes inevitable, leading to a spiraling cycle of insecurity among states.
The security dilemma does not arise solely between warring or conflicting states; it encompasses all units within the anarchic international system.
Causes of the Security Dilemma:
The bipolar structure that emerged during the Cold War exacerbated the dilemma, intensifying the security issues faced during that period. Fear and mistrust are central to the security dilemma; even when a state is believed to harbor good intentions, there remains a sense that those intentions could change.
Moreover, the concept of the security dilemma extends beyond military concerns to encompass economic and political measures taken by a state that other nations perceive as directed against them, thereby threatening their national security. This is particularly evident in situations where there is a history of conflict between two or more states. The dilemma lies in the choice between increasing military strength—which may have negative economic repercussions—and fostering economic development while reducing armaments. The first option raises concerns among neighboring countries and could weaken the economy, while the second may strengthen the economy but signal weakness to neighbors. Consequently, states often find themselves compelled to enhance their military power, prompting others to do the same, leading to increased external threats and further military build-up.
The security dilemma describes a situation where efforts to enhance national security are perceived as threatening to other states, resulting in counter-military measures and an overall decline in security for all involved.
Ways to Overcome the Security Dilemma:
To navigate this dilemma, realist perspectives are divided into two main approaches.
The first approach views the security dilemma as a chronic condition of international politics, suggesting that a self-help system inherently generates a balance of power even in the absence of policies aimed at maintaining it. It argues that power balances emerge regardless of the intentions of any particular state.
The second approach contends that the effects of the security dilemma can be mitigated within a self-help system through the activation of a balance of power mechanism. Historically, the concept of the balance of power has been seen as essential for preserving the freedom of states. Thus, maintaining the balance of power is a fundamental objective of foreign policy for great powers.
In summary, the security dilemma illustrates that any state in a chaotic international system, characterized by the absence of central authority, feels threatened and thus seeks to increase its power to safeguard against potential aggression and the influence of others. However, this quest for power makes other states feel less secure, prompting them to prepare for adverse outcomes. Since it is impossible for any party to feel completely secure in a world of competing units, and because states cannot fully trust each other’s intentions, the pursuit of power continues. Consequently, the struggle for power remains the dominant theme.
References
- The article “The Security Dilemma: A Conceptual Analysis” by Shiping Tang in Security Studies provides a comprehensive overview and analysis of the security dilemma concept. It critically examines the original formulations by Butterfield, Herz, and Jervis and offers a more rigorous definition.
- The book chapter “The Security Dilemma” by Ben Buchanan in “The Cybersecurity Dilemma: Hacking, Trust and Fear Between Nations” traces the history of the concept from Thucydides through its formal articulation by Herz, Butterfield, and Jervis.
- Robert Jervis’s 1978 article “Cooperation under the Security Dilemma” in World Politics is considered a seminal work that developed the concept in detail, including introducing the offense-defense balance as a key variable.
- The article “Is the Security Dilemma Still Relevant in International Relations?” on E-International Relations provides a good overview of the concept and examines its continued relevance.
- The book “People, States and Fear: An Agenda for International Security Studies in the Post-Cold War Era” by Barry Buzan is cited as an important work that expanded on the concept of security.
- For a critical re-examination, the article “The Security Dilemma Revisited” by Charles L. Glaser in World Politics offers an updated analysis of the concept.
- John Herz’s 1950 article “Idealist Internationalism and the Security Dilemma” in World Politics is credited with first coining the term, though it did not develop the concept extensively.
- Herbert Butterfield’s 1951 book “History and Human Relations” is another early source that helped develop the concept of the security dilemma.
