This paper provides a theoretical explanation of what causes historical issues to impact bilateral relations between two states. The case which was chosen for analysis – popularly known as the Katyń issue – involves changes in Polish foreign policy towards the Russian Federation due to the remembrance of the Katyń Massacre. The main assumptions are based on the concept of securitization and its analytical framework, particularly the societal portion, which is proposed by the Copenhagen School of security study. The process of European integration can be seen as the main causal factor leading to a complex of vertical and horizontal competition between Poland, the EU, and Russia over the construction of their historical identities with a referent object of securitization in Poland. The main conclusion of this paper suggests that significant differences in the understanding of various nations’ roles in WW2 between the EU and Russia have led to the securitization of the Polish historical image of WW2. The Polish audience considered it important to accept the historical truth. The Katyń issue in Polish–Russian relations has become a case that reflects the process which leads to securitization of disputes between historical victims and victimizers on a state–to–state level. 

Analyzing Poland’s current activity regarding the influx of refugees and the formulated attitude towards action in the field of restriction and control of the influx undertaken by European and international institutions, one should notice increasing reluctance to accept immigrants. What is more, there is a growing trend in the public debate in Poland to identify (to correlate) the influx of refugees with the problem of security. Although Poland is neither located on the main transit routes nor a destination for immigrants (including refugees), there is a process of systematically including this issue in the public discourse and analyzing the consequences of the potential increase in the influx of immigrants in the context of state security. Relationships that arise at the interface between migration and security point to the process of securitization of immigration, which involves integrating migration issues into a catalogue of state security threats and considering them through the lens of possible threats to the receiving societies.

Securitization of Islam in Central Asia

The aim of the article is to analyse mechanisms of constructing Islam in the discourse and practices of undemocratic Central Asian countries. This objective will be accomplished through the references to securitization theory located within the framework of the constructivist paradigm. The major argument of the paper is that the discursive transformation of various dimensions of Islam’s existence into a homogeneous threat to the security was an important securitizing move. Its relevance is related to the national and international level of legitimacy. The strength of the securitizing move results from the amount of resources of the authoritarian Central Asian elites as the dominant securitizing actors. In the first part, the text critically discusses the radicalization of Muslims in Central Asia thesis and the practices of the state structures towards Islam. In the next part it will present various manifestations and dimensions of the securitization of Islam in the discourse and practice of the incumbent elites in Central Asia countries.

The aim of the article is to analyze security in the Persian Gulf through the prism of the theory of regional security complex. The Middle East is a conflict formation that refers to the model of security interdependence between the countries of the region, which is shaped by the fear of war and expectancy of violence. Distrust and ubiquitous threat prevail in the relations of the Gulf States. In response, these countries form alliances, which creates a security dilemma. In the article I will try to answer the questions: what determinants affect the security of the Gulf States and what role the U.S. play in security issues in the Persian Gulf?

While the crises of 2015 and 2022, albeit with different burdens and responsibilities, were pan- European, the crisis on the Polish-Belarusian and Polish-Lithuanian borders can be considered as a regional crisis in which the countries directly affected are involved. For this reason, this crisis is the least studied and recognized outside the country. The aim of the article is to present the genesis, course, and consequences of the crisis on the Polish-Belarusian border in the context of European law. The Polish government has challenged the basic regulations regarding the right to apply for international protection, citing issues of national security protection, as well as using a sovereign narrative. The research hypothesis assumes that the previously Europeanised migration and asylum policy has been nationalised in Poland in connection with the actions of the Polish authorities in response to the crisis. The analysis will be conducted through the prism of the theory of Europeanization, using elements of securitization theory.

Health security as a dimension of international security

Health security is a dimension of international security, resulting from the securitization of its threats. The article proposes to include health security in the second generation of non-military dimensions of security (the first generation being those proposed by the Copenhagen school). The aim of the article is to analyze the specificity, i.e., autonomization, of health security in relation to: 1) the specificity of threats; 2) securitization of these threats; 3) determination of the referent object; 4) ensuring health security. The focus was on the structure of the phenomenon and the structure of each of its elements. Firstly, the specificity of securitization of health threats by a political entity such as the United States was analyzed in particular. Secondly, the human individual was taken into account as susceptible to health hazards. Thirdly, actions for health security were analyzed at the level of the international system and at the level of national health care systems.

Central Asia is revealing itself as an area where the problem of access to water and its current regional dynamics are almost at a radically critical level, where the potential risk of water disputes is still one of the highest in the world. Therefore, water scarcity issues and challenges triggered by the Aral Sea syndrome, the existing water mismanagement system, infrastructural and investment projects of dams and water reservoirs (Rogun, Naryn, Kambarata, Toktogul, etc.) and their transformation towards an existential threat will be analyzed within the securitization prism through the selected speech acts. This article will contribute to developing a new analytical framework of Regional Security Complex Theory (RSCT) and the securitization theory in water stress. The efforts undertaken in this article will ultimately lead to the development of a new approach to issues of water security and hydro politics within the concept of the Regional Water Security Complex (RWSC) on the example of the Central Asian region. The main research question will be to what extent water, as an immanent feature of this complex, is politicized and securitized. An important question will also be how the formulated security language indicates the existential nature of water as a security problem in the region.

The article aims to identify some of the misrepresentations of Ukraine that originated in Russia and led to distorted perceptions of Ukraine in the English-speaking academia. Apart from that, the article aims to expose the reasons behind the emergence of such misrepresentations, the way to counter them, and the pitfalls of using them in security analysis. The article hypothesizes that the traditional colonial perception of Ukraine prevents Western scholars and policy-makers, whom these scholars consult, from adequately interpreting and securitizing the acuteness of the contemporary Russian threat. To complete the research, the article draws from decolonial and securitization theories. The article argues that the centuries-long othering and denial of agency of Ukraine, combined with the lack of specific expertise on the country and the colonial tradition of knowledge production, led to a comparatively inconsistent response of Western academia to the post-2014 Russian aggression against a sovereign nation. To address the existing inadequacy, Western scholars should become more open to the opinions of their Ukrainian colleagues, accept the merit of unconventional perspectives, and revise Russo-centrism in research frameworks and teaching curricula.