Securitization and Unlawful Interferences in Civil Aviation

Öz

The industry of civil aviation has suffered from international politics since almost the beginning. Although the necessary amendments, conventions and agreements were realized by participants of the international civil aviation system, the impacts of unlawful interferences never found an end. The political, economic and technological structure of civil aviation is suitable for the development of unlawful interferences. This research aims to shed more light on the relationship between international politics and civil aviation by utilising securitization and current comprehension of the theory of securitization. The research findings show that securitization is used in the civil aviation industry by aviational intellectuals in specific matters such as race and gender discrimination. Moreover and more importantly, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), national, regional and international institutions utilized securitization. At the end of the research, it is concluded that unlawful interferences such as complex terrorist actions and hijacking activities should be subjects of daily and structured speeches, conversations and rhetoric of aviational intellectuals to create a more secure sphere or context

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Security
• Civil Aviation
• The theory of securitization
• Unlawful Interferences

Sivil Havacılığa Yönelik Güvenlikleştirme ve Hukuka Aykırı Müdahaleler

Öz

Sivil havacılık sektörü, neredeyse başlangıcından bu yana uluslararası politikalardan zarar görmüştür. Uluslararası sivil havacılık sisteminin katılımcıları tarafından gerekli değişiklikler, sözleşmeler ve anlaşmalar yapılmış olsa da, hukuka aykırı müdahalelerin etkileri hiçbir zaman sona ermemiştir. Sivil havacılığın politik, ekonomik ve teknolojik yapısı hukuka aykırı müdahalelerin gelişmesine uygundur. Bu araştırma, güvenlikleştirme ve güvenlikleştirme teorisinin güncel anlayışını kullanarak uluslararası politika ve sivil havacılık arasındaki ilişkiye daha fazla ışık tutmayı amaçlamaktadır. Araştırma bulguları, güvenlikleştirmenin havacılık sektöründeki entelektüeller tarafından ırk ve cinsiyet ayrımcılığı gibi belirli konularda kullanıldığını göstermektedir. Dahası ve daha da önemlisi, Uluslararası Sivil Havacılık Örgütü (ICAO), ulusal, bölgesel ve uluslararası kuruluşlar güvenlikleştirmeden yararlanmıştır. Araştırmanın sonunda, karmaşık terör eylemleri ve uçak kaçırma faaliyetleri gibi hukuka aykırı müdahalelerin, daha güvenli bir alan veya bağlam yaratmak için havacılık entelektüellerinin günlük ve yapılandırılmış konuşmalarına, sohbetlerine ve söylemlerine konu edilmesi gerektiği sonucuna varılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Güvenlik
• Sivil Havacılık
• Güvenlikleştirme teorisi
• Hukuka aykırı müdahaleler.

Kaynakça

1. Abeyratne, R. (2011). Cyber terrorism and aviation—national and international responses. Journal of Transportation Security, 4, 337-349.
2. Arasly, J. (2005). Terrorism and civil aviation security: Problems and trends. Connections, 4(1), 75-90.
3. Baysal, B., & Lüleci, Ç. (2015). Kopenhag okulu ve güvenlikleştirme teorisi. Güvenlik Stratejileri Dergisi, 11(22), 61-96.
4. Bertrand, S. (2018). Can the subaltern securitize? Postcolonial perspectives on securitization theory and its critics. European journal of international security, 3(3), 281-299.
5. Buzan, B. (1991) People, States and Fear: An Agenda for Security Analysis in the Post-Cold War Era. Brighton: Weatsheaf.
6. Buzan, B., Waever, O., & de Wilde, J. (1998). Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Lynne Rienner Pub. https://books.google.com.tr/books?id=j4BGr-Elsp8C,
7. EASA Gender Equality Plan 2024-2027 - European Union, Access time: 27.07.2024.
8. Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, M. (2022). Ordering global governance complexes: The evolution of the governance complex for international civil aviation. The Review of International Organizations, 17(2), 293-322.

9. Ejdus, F. (2009). Dangerous liaisons: securitization theory and Schmittian legacy. Western Balkans Security Observer-English Edition, (13), 9-16.
10. Elisov, L., Ovchenkov, N., & Gorbachenko, V. (2021). The paradoxes of aviation security and some approaches to their formal description. Transportation Research Procedia, 54, 726-732.
11. Forest, J. J. (2007). The modern terrorist threat to aviation security. Perspectives on Terrorism, 1(6), 10-13.
12. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. London: Penguin.
13. Foucault, M. (1981). The will to knowledge: The history of sexuality, Vol. 1. London: Penguin.
14. Foucault, M. (1985). The use of pleasure: The history of sexuality, Vol. 1. New York: Vintage books.
15. Foucault, M. (1988). Politics, philosophy, culture: Interviews and other writings, 1977– 1984. London: Routledge.
16. Foucault, M. (1997). The politics of truth. New York: Semiotext(e).
17. Foucault, M. (2000). The subject and power. In J. D. Faubion (Ed.), Power: The essential works of foucault, Vol.3 (pp. 326–348). New York: The Free Press.
18. Fox, S. J. (2019). POLICING AVIATION AND KEEPING PEACE. International Journal on World Peace, 36(1), 61-90.
19. Frederickson, H. G., & LaPorte, T. R. (2002). Airport security, high reliability, and the problem of rationality. Public Administration Review, 62, 33-43.
20. Gad, U. P., & Petersen, K. L. (2011). Concepts of politics in securitization studies. Security Dialogue, 315-328.
21. Gillen, D. (2008, October). Airport governance and regulation: The evolution over three decades of aviation system reform. In Workshop on Transport Economics,‘Models of Airport Ownership and Governance’, FEDEA-Abertis.
22. GreenPope, R. A., Beaton, E. K., Boiney, L. G., Drury, J. L., Henriques, R. D., Howland, M., & Klein, G. L. (2010, May). Aviation security collaboration stakeholder governance review. In 2010 Integrated Communications, Navigation, and Surveillance Conference Proceedings (pp. N4-1). IEEE.
23. Grygorov, O., Basysta, A., Yedeliev, R., Paziuk, A., & Tropin, Z. (2021). International cyber security strategy as a tool for comprehensive security assurance of civil aviation security: methodological considerations. International Journal of Computer Science & Network Security, 21(9), 332-338.
24. Hainmüller, J., & Lemnitzer, J. M. (2003). Why do Europeans fly safer? The politics of airport security in Europe and the US. Terrorism and political violence, 15(4), 1-36.
25. Heng, L. (2019). ‘Research on civil aviation security management system in dealing with air security threats. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Information Science and Electronic Technology (ISET 2019) (pp. 32-37).
26. Heng, Y. K., & McDonagh, K. (2011). After the ‘war on terror’: Regulatory states, risk bureaucracies and the risk-based governance of terror. International Relations, 25(3), 313-329.
27. https://blog.aci.aero/is-gender-still-holding-women-back-in-the-aviation-industry/, Access time: 27.07.2024.
28. https://www.ecac-ceac.org/images/news/ecac-news/ECAC_News_80-Diversity.pdf, Access time: 27.07.2024.
29. https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/acr/external-discrimination-complaints, Access time: 27.07.2024.
30. https://www.icao.int/Meetings/atconf6/Documents/Doc%209587_en.pdf, Access time: 27.07.2024.
31. https://www.icao.int/Newsroom/Pages/ICAO-Condemns-Ataturk-Airport-Attacks.aspx, Access time: 27.07.2024.
32. https://www.icao.int/Newsroom/Pages/ICAO-releases-survey-data-on-status-of-global-aviation-gender-equality.aspx, Access time: 27.07.2024.
33. Inan, T. T. (2021). The Historical Development Of Civil Aviation Security With Applications Of Time Series Modelling. The Collegiate Aviation Review International, 39(1).
34. Juvan, J., Prezelj, I., & Kopač, E. (2021). Public dilemmas about security measures in the field of civil aviation. Security Journal, 34, 410-428.
35. Klauser, F. (2009). Interacting forms of expertise in security governance: The example of CCTV surveillance at Geneva International Airport 1. The British journal of sociology, 60(2), 279-297.
36. Klenka, M. (2021). Aviation cyber security: legal aspects of cyber threats. Journal of Transportation Security, 14(3), 177-195.
37. Laleau, R., Vignes, S., Ledru, Y., Lemoine, M., Bert, D., Donzeau‐Gouge, V., ... & Peureux, F. (2006). Adopting a situational requirements engineering approach for the analysis of civil aviation security standards. Software Process: Improvement and Practice, 11(5), 487-503.
38. Lippert, R., & O'Connor, D. (2003). Security assemblages: Airport security, flexible work, and liberal governance. Alternatives, 28(3), 331-358.
39. Lupovici, A. (2019). Toward a securitization theory of deterrence. International Studies Quarterly, 63(1), 177-186.
40. Marchiafava, G. (2016). The Montreal Protocol 2014 and Current International Regulation Issues on Aviation Security. Rivista di Studi Politici Internazionali, 235-262.
41. McFarlane, P., & Hills, M. (2013). Developing immunity to flight security risk: prospective benefits from considering aviation security as a socio-technical ecosystem. Journal of Transportation Security, 6, 221-234.
42. Mirmina, S. A. (1997). Aviation Safety and Security-Legal Developments. J. Air L. & Com., 63, 547.
43. Miş, N. (2011). Güvenlikleştirme teorisi ve siyasal olanın güvenlikleştirilmesi. Akademik İncelemeler Dergisi, 6(2), 345-381.
44. Mustapha, I. A. (2020). Machine-Readable Travel Documents in Aviation Security and Information Privacy: An Islamic Law Perspective. IIUMLJ, 28, 139.
45. Nobles, C., Burrell, D., & Waller, T. (2022). The need for a global aviation cybersecurity defence policy. Land Forces Academy Review, 27(1), 19-26.
46. Nowak, J., Ogonowski, K., & Kustra, M. (2019). Selected aspects of civil aviation security. Zeszyty Naukowe. Transport/Politechnika Śląska, (104), 137-146.
47. Patomäki, H. (2015). Absenting the absence of future dangers and structural transformations in securitization theory. International Relations, 29(1), 128-136.
48. Pawlak, P. (2010). Transatlantic homeland security cooperation: the promise of new modes of governance in global affairs. Journal of transatlantic studies, 8(2), 139-157.
49. Pettersen, K. A., & Bjørnskau, T. (2015). Organizational contradictions between safety and security–Perceived challenges and ways of integrating critical infrastructure protection in civil aviation. Safety Science, 71, 167-177.
50. Schóber, T., Koblen, I., & Szabo, S. (2012). Present and potential security threats posed to civil aviation. Incas bulletin, 4(2), 169.
51. Tamasi, G., & Demichela, M. (2011). Risk assessment techniques for civil aviation security. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 96(8), 892-899.
52. Taneja, N. K. (1990). Introduction to Civil Aviation. Journal of Aviation/Aerospace Education & Research, 1(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.58940/2329-258X.1002.
53. Virissimo, M. C. G., & Vaz-Ferreira, L. (2023). Synergies and Tensions Between Safety and Security in Civil Aviation. Campos Neutrais-Revista Latino-Americana de Relações Internacionais, 5(3), 76-88.
54. Vladimir, S. (2010). Meaning of Security and Theory of Securitization. Belgrade Center for Security Studies, 1-7.
55. Wilhelmsen, J. (2017). How does war become a legitimate undertaking? Re-engaging the post-structuralist foundation of securitization theory. Cooperation and Conflict, 52(2), 166-183.
56. Williams, M. C. (2015). Securitization as political theory: The politics of the extraordinary. International Relations, 29(1), 114-120.