ABSTRACT
Security seems to be a straightforward concept, and therefore most of the discussion claiming to problematise it has assumed that the critical part resided in its specifications such as ‘national security’ vs. ‘common security’ or ‘human security’. Simultaneously, the ‘uncritical’ (mainstream, establishment, traditional) literature argued that there is no need to dissect the concept of security as used in international affairs, because it is a concept we know from our everyday experience, where we value it and accordingly should do so internationally (as a state) too. However, security as idea, concept or aspiration is far from stable or simple.
