Description
Climate change and the dangers from nuclear weapons are framed as two, sometimes interlinked, existential threats to humanity. Both are seen as human-made disasters that could be avoided if common sense prevailed, and as threats to human life on earth. Yet, action commensurate with such a framing is notably absent and the world is far away from eliminating the threats of climate change and nuclear war. This raises questions about the meaning, effects, and failure of the notion of “existential threat”, especially in a field like IR, whose concern is to such a large extent with security. By tracing and comparing nuclear and climate threat discourses, this article seeks to unpack the notion of “existential” in security politics. How do their conceptualizations overlap/differ and with what (un)in tended effects? How do understandings of these issues as “existential” threats inform contemporary policies? In answering these questions, this article provides insights into the conceptualization of existential threats and their limitations for security policy.
