Introduction

Ontological security is not, as we have seen, a condition enjoyed by all individuals. And the denial of identity structures to particular groups may be a root of the ontological insecurity of some individuals, or at least might significantly increase their sense of dread. That is, the securitization of identities is a crucial issue for the understanding of ontological security. The securitization of identity leads to the securitization of subjectivity – the intensified search for and/or attribution of a single, stable identity, ‘regardless of its actual existence’. How are identities securitized, leading to the construction of ontological insecurity for some individuals?

This chapter seeks to establish the new mainstream in non-American security studies work produced in the English language, not in order to follow securitization theory slavishly, but rather to establish it as the new grammar for security studies. That grammar is then redeployed in different ways: that is, the four key elements of securitization theory are amended to produce a ‘post-Copenhagen securitization theory’. However, this is not sufficient in and of itself, because there are three elements that need to be developed in the context of this ‘post-Copenhagen’ project, elements that are not privileged in the Copenhagen School’s framework. In turn, these elements focus on the roles of identity, spatiality and temporality. Securitizations reconstitute all three elements, and this is accounted for in this new ‘post-Copenhagen securitization theory’, which enables us to understand more fully dread and ontological insecurity.