SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Uluslararası Toplumsal Bilimler Dergisi / 2025 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 4

TRANSFORMATION AND SECURITIZATION OF NATIONAL SECURITY POLICIES IN THE FACE OF NEW SECURITY THREATS: AN ASSESSMENT OF CYBERSECURITY, CLIMATE CRISIS, AND THE PANDEMIC EXPERIENCE

YENİ GÜVENLİK TEHDİTLERİ KARŞISINDA ULUSAL GÜVENLİK POLİTİKALARININ DÖNÜŞÜMÜ VE GÜVENLİKLEŞTİRME: SİBER GÜVENLİK, İKLİM KRİZİ VE PANDEMİ DENEYİMİ ÜZERİNE BİR DEĞERLENDİRME

Abdullah Çelik(POLİS AKADEMİSİ)0000-0002-3912-3724
Pages
155–174
Publication Date
2025-12-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

This transformation must encompass not only a conceptual shift but also a transformation of institutional and societal mindsets.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This article thoroughly analyzes the impact of the emerging new security threats of the 21st century, such as cybersecurity, the climate crisis, and pandemics, on national security policies.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Cybersecurity threats also have significant impacts on digital infrastructures, individual privacy, freedom of expression, and the state's understanding of sovereignty.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This transformation must encompass not only a conceptual shift but also a transformation of institutional and societal mindsets.
🔬Design:Derleme
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Ulusal Güvenlik · Siber Güvenlik · İklim Krizi

Abstract

This article thoroughly analyzes the impact of the emerging new security threats of the 21st century, such as cybersecurity, the climate crisis, and pandemics, on national security policies. The traditional state-centric and military-based understanding of security is inadequate to grasp these threats, which are now impacting globally and shaped by multi-actor structures. In particular, the process of globalization, digitalization, the influence of non-state actors, and interdependence have necessitated a redefinition of the concept of security. In this context, the study reveals how new threats are constructed discursively and institutionally within the framework of the Copenhagen School's securitization theory. Cybersecurity threats also have significant impacts on digital infrastructures, individual privacy, freedom of expression, and the state's understanding of sovereignty. While the climate crisis is integrated into the security agenda through consequences such as water and food scarcity, migration, and social instability, pandemics have highlighted the vital importance of human security and societal resilience. The article's analysis, using the Turkish example, demonstrates that policies developed to address these threats remain largely reactive, sectoral, and fragmented. Consequently, it emphasizes the need to redesign the understanding of national security through holistic governance, resilience-focused planning, an approach prioritizing human security, and strategies based on international cooperation. This transformation must encompass not only a conceptual shift but also a transformation of institutional and societal mindsets.

Özet

İklim krizi, su ve gıda kıtlığı, göç ve toplumsal istikrarsızlık gibi sonuçlar üzerinden güvenlik gündemine dâhil edilirken, pandemiler insan güvenliğinin ve toplumsal dirençliliğin ne denli hayati olduğunu gözler önüne sermiştir. Makalede Türkiye örneği üzerinden yapılan değerlendirme, bu tehditlere karşı geliştirilen politikaların çoğunlukla tepkisel, sektörel ve parçalı kaldığını göstermektedir. Sonuç olarak, ulusal güvenlik anlayışının, bütüncül yönetişim, dirençlilik odaklı planlama, insan güvenliğini önceleyen bir yaklaşım ve uluslararası iş birliği temelli stratejilerle yeniden tasarlanması gerekliliği vurgulanmaktadır. Bu dönüşüm, kavramsal bir değişimle beraber, kurumsal ve toplumsal zihniyet dönüşümünü de içermelidir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Çelik, A. (2025). TRANSFORMATION AND SECURITIZATION OF NATIONAL SECURITY POLICIES IN THE FACE OF NEW SECURITY THREATS: AN ASSESSMENT OF CYBERSECURITY, CLIMATE CRISIS, AND THE PANDEMIC EXPERIENCE. Uluslararası Toplumsal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 4, 155–174. https://ajindex.com/articles/1606381

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (40)

  1. Ahmed, F., Ahmed, N. E., Pissarides, C., ve Stiglitz, J. (2020). Why inequality could spread COVID-19. The Lancet Public Health, 5(5), e240.
  2. Boas, I., Farbotko, C., Adams, H., Sterly, H., Bush, S., Van der Geest, K.,. ve Hulme, M. (2019). Climate migration myths. Nature Climate Change, 9(12), 901-903.
  3. Burwell, S. M. (2021). Improving pandemic preparedness: lessons from COVID-19. Council on Foreign Relations.
  4. Buzan, B., Wæver, O., ve De Wilde, J. (1998). Security: A new framework for analysis. Lynne Rienner Publishers.
  5. Cavelty, M. D. (2007). Cyber-security and threat politics: US efforts to secure the information age. Routledge.
  6. Centeno, M. A., Nag, M., Patterson, T. S., Shaver, A., ve Windawi, A. J. (2015). The emergence of global systemic risk. Annual Review of Sociology, 41(1), 65-85. Waltz
  7. Chiozza, G., ve King, J. (2022). The state of human rights in a (post) COVID-19 world. Journal of Human Rights, 21(3), 246-262.
  8. Cinelli, M., Quattrociocchi, W., Galeazzi, A., Valensise, C. M., Brugnoli, E., Schmidt, A. L.,. ve Scala, A. (2020). The COVID-19 social media infodemic. Scientific reports, 10(1), 16598.
  9. Daoudi, S. (2020). The war on covid-19: the 9/11 of health security. Policy Paper, (20-06).
  10. Demchak, C., Kerben, J., McArdle, J., ve Spidalieri, F. (2015). Cyber readiness index 2.0. Potomac Institute for Policy Studies.
  11. Demirbaş, M., Çelik, A. ve Akıncıoğlu, N. U. (2023). Suç korkusuna teorik bir yaklaşım. Külliye Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 4(2), 224–241. https://doi.org/10.48139/aybukulliye.1339633
  12. DeNardis, L. (2014). The global war for internet governance. Yale University Press.
  13. Dimari, G., ve Papadakis, N. (2023). The securitization of the Covid-19 pandemic in Greece: a just or unjust securitization?. Quality ve Quantity, 57(Suppl 1), 77-97.
  14. Floyd, R. (2010). Security and the environment: Securitisation theory and US environmental security policy. Cambridge University Press.
  15. Floyd, R. (2011). Can securitization theory be used in normative analysis? Towards a just securitization theory. Security Dialogue, 42(4-5), 427-439.
  16. Floyd, R. (2019). The morality of security: A theory of just securitization. Cambridge University Press.
  17. Gereffi, G. (2020). What does the COVID-19 pandemic teach us about global value chains? The case of medical supplies. Journal of International Business Policy, 3(3), 287.
  18. Gleick, P. H. (2014). Water, drought, climate change, and conflict in Syria. Weather, climate, and society, 6(3), 331-340.
  19. Greer, S. L., King, E. J., da Fonseca, E. M., ve Peralta-Santos, A. (2020). The comparative politics of COVID-19: The need to understand government responses. Global public health, 15(9), 1413-1416.
  20. Hansen, L., ve Nissenbaum, H. (2009). Digital disaster, cyber security, and the Copenhagen School. International studies quarterly, 53(4), 1155-1175.
  21. Homer-Dixon, T. F. (2010). Environment, scarcity, and violence. Princeton University Press.
  22. Kaldor, M. (2013). New and old wars: Organised violence in a global era. John Wiley ve Sons.
  23. Kanyako, V. (2024). Civil Society and Peacebuilding in Sierra Leone: Donors, Government, and Human Security. Routledge.
  24. Kavsıracı, O. (2019). Türkiye'nin iç güvenlik algısı ve politikaları (19801990). OPUS–Uluslararası Toplum Araştırmaları Dergisi, 14(20), 2074-2097. DOI: 10.26466/opus.605112.
  25. Kavsıracı, O. (2020). Klasik Realizm-Güvenlik İlişkisi Çerçevesinde Türkiye’nin İç Güvenlik Politikaları (1923-1960). Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 18(Armağan Sayısı), 117-128.
  26. Kavsıracı, O., ve Demirbaş, M. (2020). İstihbarat Faaliyetlerinin Devlet Güvenliği Açısından İncelenmesi. Anadolu Strateji Dergisi, 2(1), 49-64.
  27. Morley, J., Cowls, J., Taddeo, M., ve Floridi, L. (2020). Ethical guidelines for COVID-19 tracing apps. Nature, 582(7810), 29-31.
  28. Newman, E. (2001). Human security and constructivism. International studies perspectives, 2(3), 239-251.
  29. Osthagen, A. (2020). Coast guards and ocean politics in the Arctic. Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan.
  30. Overhaus, M. (2014). Quadrennial Defense Review 2014: Entwicklungstrends US-amerikanischer Verteidigungspolitik und Konsequenzen für die Nato.
  31. Parmet, W. E., ve Sinha, M. S. (2020). Covid-19—the law and limits of quarantine. New England Journal of Medicine, 382(15), e28.
  32. Singer, P. W., ve Friedman, A. (2014). Cybersecurity and Cyberwar: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press.
  33. Such, L. (2022). CLIMATE CHANGE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (Doctoral dissertation).
  34. Trombetta, M. J. (2008). Environmental security and climate change: analysing the discourse. Cambridge review of international affairs, 21(4), 585-602.
  35. UNDP, U. (1994). Human development report 1994: New dimensions of human security. New York. Retrieved December, 12, 2022.
  36. Vuori, J. A. (2008). Illocutionary logic and strands of securitization: Applying the theory of securitization to the study of non-democratic political orders. European journal of international relations, 14(1), 65-99.
  37. Walt, S. M. (1991). The renaissance of security studies. International studies quarterly, 35(2), 211-239.
  38. Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of international relations (pp. 111–114). Reading, MA: Addison-Webley.
  39. Boas, I., Farbotko, C., Adams, H., Sterly, H., Bush, S., Van der Geest, K.,. ve Hulme, M. (2019). Climate migration myths. Nature Climate Change, 9(12), 901-903.
  40. Cinelli, M., Quattrociocchi, W., Galeazzi, A., Valensise, C. M., Brugnoli, E., Schmidt, A. L.,. ve Scala, A. (2020). The COVID-19 social media infodemic. Scientific reports, 10(1), 16598.