In the post-national constellation of statehood, private actors and international organizations are increasingly involved in the provision of external security. With regard to the normative goods whose provision had been monopolized by the "golden age" nation state, this transition is ambivalent in several respects: On the one hand, the partial privatization and internationalization of security policy allows for more effectiveness, efficiency and flexibility when dealing with the new challenges that have shaped the security agenda of Western states since the 1990s and 9/11, thus contributing to both national and human security. On the other hand, denationalization may negatively affect the normative goods 'rule of law' and 'democratic legitimacy' by hampering legal control and democratic oversight of authority within the realm of security. Privatization and Internationalization also have an ambivalent effect on the normative good 'security' itself: These processes present national security policy with more options – a blessing, however, that might turn out to be a curse by producing dependencies and curtailing autonomy at the expense of security.

We analyze how political, judicial and societal actors on the national and international level respond to these trade-offs and to what extent they induce the principals and agents of post-national security policy to change their behavior. The study thus prepares the ground for an empirically informed assessment of the potential future configuration of statehood in security policy. From a normative standpoint, we further seek to identify realistic options for institutional reform on the national and international level which might help temper the trade-offs in post-national security policy.

Download
Final report 2015 in German
Project application 2011-2014 in German