Legitimate Security? Understanding the Contingencies of Security and Deliberation

Abstract

Comprehensive security politics and policy build on the development of the societal security field in Europe and especially in the Nordic countries. Societal security has clear consequences for society and its functioning, social institutions, civil society and democracy. The purpose of the article is to critically analyse the consequences of security policy, societal security processes and governing practices, in order to understand the limitations of democratic security policymaking, citizen participation and deliberation. By legitimate security, we mean societal security that is based on principles of deliberative democracy and citizen participation. The point of departure in this analysis of the limitations of democratic security policymaking and deliberation is the contingent nature of both security and deliberation. Contingency refers to possibility, unexpectability, unpredictability and risk. This article argues that the objective of contemporary policy of comprehensive security and its implementation is to tame contingencies rather that to support genuine political deliberation. We argue that the source of legitimacy is not the government-driven democratization of community safety and resilience, and predetermined will of citizens, but rather the process of its formation—that is, genuine political deliberation itself. 1