Securitisation and its extensions: a framework for analysis of Russia’s war on Ukraine

This analysis aims to address certain shortcomings found within securitisation theory and its practical usage. Russia’s aggression against Ukraine necessitates a profound transformation of the research vocabulary of security studies, as well as an expansion of its scholarly instruments. This article investigates the potential modifications and adjustments of the concept of securitisation, which due to its broad explanatory scope could be recalibrated to reflect the radically altered security landscape in Europe. In this context, three ancillary concepts are introduced as extensions to the original terminology of the Copenhagen School: primary self-securitisation, secondary securitisation and counter-securitisation. The analysis seeks to move beyond the theory’s traditional emphasis on speech acts, to more precisely define the interplay between securitisation and the agency, and to expand the role of the audience beyond merely affirming or disputing securitising moves.