Main Content

More information on panels and presentations

Keynotes

Plenary Panel

  • Opening yet another Pandora’s box: the impact of just war theories on rules applicable in armed conflict

    Chair
    Farnaz Desfouli Asl

    Panel Abstract
    Throughout history, humans have conducted wars and continue to do so. In hindsight, the prohibition of the use of force in the UN charter (1945) and minimizing impacts of the armed conflicts (first modern codification in Lieber code of 1863) are relatively new in the mankind´s story. However, violating both the rules governing the use of force and the applicable framework to armed conflicts in the contemporary conflicts is a recurring phenomenon. News and media are fueled with horrifying images: wars of aggression to indiscriminate attacks and shelling in Ukraine, siege warfare in Yemen, inhuman and degrading treatment in governmental detention facilities in Syria and prolonged occupation of Gaza. Different and detailed bodies of international law have been designed and agreed upon by states to regulate not only the use of force but also its impact. This panel will offer a historical, practical and legal perspective on the reasons for the distinction of different bodies of law governing armed conflicts.
    The jus ad bellum criteria governing the legality of use of force became fixed in the UN Charter, allowing states to merely engage in war for individual or collective self-defense or to avert threats to peace with the condition of a UN Security Council mandate. The Hague and Geneva Conventions enshrined the jus in bello principles into written law governing the law of armed conflicts. Such international law standards have developed over time to apply equally to the different parties. That is the central distinction between jus ad bellum (governing the use of force) and jus in bello (IHL) regulations. This distinction-sometimes blurred- is necessary to protect the civilian population and those not taking active part in hostilities. This phenomenon is evident by the rhetoric employed in some conflict in conveying a broader acceptance of potential violations of IHL as long as the “right” side commits them. Jus ad bellum arguments have been used by parties to the conflict to justify the violations of IHL with the most recent example being the Russia´s war of aggression in Ukraine. On the Ukrainian side, it has been argued that the unjust aggression necessitates the fight for the survival of their country in defense and with whatever means necessary. The Russian narrative has framed the conflict as a conspiracy and alleges that a planned genocide against Russians living on the territory of Ukraine merits acts against the Ukrainian state.
    In a discussion with world renowned experts, the session will shed light on some critical questions 1) what are the potential impacts and dangers of blurring the lines between jus ad bellum and other bodies of law? (Including jus in bello but also the law of neutrality or arms control? 2) What does the drafting history of the Geneva Conventions illustrate as the historical and political reasons behind the distinct development of these bodies of law? 3) What would be the practical implications in merging these bodies of law in terms of protection in contemporary armed conflicts?

    Presentations
    Boyd Van Dijk: Historicizing jus in bello - jus ad bellum Distinctions and the Geneva Conventions
    Heike Spieker: Navigating between blurred lines: what can we afford?
    Thilo Marauhn

Parallel Panels I

  • Contested Security/ies: temporal, spatial, and epistemological perspectives

    Chair
    Richard Herzog
    Discussant
    Lena Frewer

    Panel Abstract
    Similar to its neighboring discipline of IR, historical security studies scholarship has increasingly worked to decenter its linear and Eurocentric foundations and open the way for a more pluralistic and complex set of knowledge(s). Amidst this epistemological widening a growing body of research has been seeking to uncover and understand 'local' and 'everyday' voices and more counter-perspectives on what constitutes security and how it can be ‘done’ or maintained. While this has produced a host of research exploring the contextually bound experience of peace, violence or political order, notions of security and securitization are less widely understood within this vein. This format will endeavor to further unpack the social, political and performative construction of security and the practical implications thereof for political strategy and interventions in diverse historical and geospatial settings. In addition, the contributions share a focus on power structures and racial hierarchies as they relate to the making and unmaking of security. The panel thus combines perspectives from colonial Central America and the Caribbean with a 20th-century perspective on pacifism and its marginal role as security knowledge. A first contribution (organized by Richard Herzog) illustrates the ways in which racialization was tied up with spatial control in colonial-era Spanish America, specifically through colonial policies of concentration. These affected material structures and bodies in space, with long-lasting consequences on hierarchies between ethnic groups and their distinct knowledge systems. The second input examines how Jamaica's and Saint-Domingue's colonial elites experienced insecurity in light of aspirations for autonomy, war, slave rebellions and especially abolitionism in their societies and thus turned to, among other things, racist knowledge to justify cooperation among themselves while widening the epistemological and moral gap with France and Britain. The third contribution organized by Aidan Gnoth assesses the subjugation of pacifist and nonviolent discourses within understandings of peace and IR more broadly and contrasts this experience with that of wider social and subaltern movements operating outside of academia between the 1950s and 1990s.

    Presentations
    Aidan Gnoth: Swinging back to the 60s? Assessing pacifism’s rebirth and prospects within Peace Studies
    Norman Ingram: Putative Pacifists: the First World War as a transition point from the nineteenth to the twentieth century
    Florian Neiske: (In-)Security in the wake of disaster - The 1866 Famine of Orissa and its lessons for colonial rule in British-India

  • Hat Sicherheit ein Geschlecht?

    Chair
    Martin Göllnitz, Sabine Mecking

    Panel Abstract
    Bereits vor über 20 Jahren verwies die dänische Politikwissenschaftlerin Lene Hansen auf die fehlende Thematisierung von Geschlecht in der Kritischen Sicherheitsforschung.[1] Insbesondere setzt sie sich kritisch mit der 1998 publizierten Studie „Security: A New Framework for Analysis“ auseinander, in der die Autoren der Kopenhagener Schule dafür plädierten, „Versicherheitlichung“ als einen von Akteuren gesteuerten kommunikativen Prozess zu verstehen und zu analysieren. Hansen argumentiert, ein solches Konzept von „Versicherheitlichung“ impliziere, dass Situationen, in denen Kommunikation eingeschränkt oder unmöglich ist, nicht als Sicherheitsprobleme wahrgenommen würden. Dadurch schließe es eine vergeschlechtliche Perspektive von Sicherheit fast gänzlich aus, da Frauen – historisch betrachtet – oft nicht als Akteure in sicherheitsrelevante Kommunikationsprozesse eingebunden waren. Mittlerweile hat sich der Ansatz der „Versicherheitlichung“ ausdifferenziert und weiterentwickelt und auch das Verhältnis von Sicherheit und Geschlecht ist verschiedentlich untersucht worden, vor allem im Kontext des SFB/TRR 138 „Dynamiken der Sicherheit“. In der einschlägigen Literatur zu klassischen Sicherheitsfeldern wie Militär, Geheimdienst oder Polizei fehlt meist jedoch noch eine genderfokussierte Perspektive auf sicherheitspolitische Diskurse und Praktiken. Somit bleiben phänomenologische und praxeologische Erkenntnisse von weiblichen Sicherheitsakteuren ein Desiderat. Das Panel richtet daher den Fokus auf die Trias Polizei – Geschlecht – Sicherheit, um neue Zugänge zur Thematik zu eröffnen. Am Beispiel der Polizeien in den beiden deutschen Nachfolgestaaten, v.a. anhand ihrer weiblichen Angehörigen im Vollzugsdienst, will es vergeschlechtliche Codierungen von Sicherheitsheuristiken und -repertoires in einem männlich konnotierten Berufsfeld diskutieren.

    Presentations
    Bettina Blum: "Geschlecht und staatliche Autorität. Aufgaben, Rolle und (Selbst)Warhnehmungen von Polizistinnen in Ost- und Westdeutschland, 1945-1970"
    Sarah Frenking: Zum Schutz vor 'internationalem Mädchenhandel'. Die polizeiliche Bekämpfung devianter Mobilität im Nationalsozialismus
    Marcel Schmeer: Wespen, Politessen, Ordnungshüterinnen: Polizei, Sicherheit und Geschlecht in West-Berlin

Parallel Panels II

  • False Securities? Conceptions of the Eroding and (Re-) Establishing of Peace Orders from the Early Modern Period to Modernity

    Chair
    Heidi Hein-Kircher

    Panel Abstract
    Since the beginning of the Russian war against Ukraine, there has been an intensive discus-sion about false hopes and expectations, not least shaped by wishful thinking, regarding the supposed security of a pan-European peace order, which has proven to be a fragile construct. Demands for a fundamental paradigm shift do not only concern the political sphere, but are also raised in the relevant scientific discussions and communities. Thus, controversial de-bates emerged dealing with question if a change of academic perspectives on peace orders, peace and international security is necessary, in which constructivist and cultural-historical concepts are put to the test and questioned. The proposed section ties in with these current academic debates. It deliberately wants to take up culturalist historical approaches and discuss their applicability in a comparative way. In order to be able to classify the scholarly debates, it aims at a trans-epochal comparative perspective on the erosion and (re-) establishment of European peace orders and thus pursues a double interest in knowledge: First, what processes, patterns of interpretation, and debates were associated with the erosion of peace orders, and how did historical actors dis-cuss and handle the supposed security of a peace order at the moment of its disintegration? Second, what practices and instruments were used to (re)establish peace orders, and what role did notions of "false security" play as a horizon of experience and a frame of reference? Since we are planning to compile an international edited volume, we want to continue debates that we will have discussed the topic during the CES 2023 and the German Historians’ Gathering in 2023. For the proposed panel, we would like invite colleagues who would have not been part of the two panels before but who we want to invite as authors.

    Presentations
    Patrick Milton: Preventive Congresses: Cambrai and Soissons and the fragile European peace order of the 1720s
    Peter Schröder Limits of security – the ambiguity of the post Westphalian international order
    Arno Barth: “Nothing should be left to chance“ – Regulatory Models for the Paris Peace Order and Their (Non-)Application

  • Mediating Disease Control: Sensing the International in Global Health Security

    Chair
    Franziska Zirker
    Discussant
    Leon Wolf

    Panel Abstract
    The statement that “diseases know no borders” has become a truism. The spatial imaginary of disease as a de-territorialized threat has given rise to an apparatus of global health security since about three decades. This governmental dispositive, how-ever, has always relied on an international political landscape that knew its borders all-too well. The tension between the attempt at governing a de-territorialized globe and the aim of re-territorializing processes of circulation materialized in many forms during the most recent pandemic: sanitary border controls with its attendant proto-cols of documentation, preparedness indicators ascribed to local administrative bodies, or the political geographies embedded in digital technologies such as dash-boards or pandemic simulations all instantiate the (inter-)national as part of global health security.
    To examine how this tension unfolds, this panel focusses on the media technologies involved in governing health security. Far from being an ahistorical given, the constitution of global health as a phenomenon that is legible and thus governable is achieved through a rich ecology of mediators: epidemiological maps and diagrams, indicators and metrics, simulation models and databases, checklists and health certificates. Following the notion of mediation developed in Actor-Network-Theory and Science and Technology Studies, these technologies are performative devices that enact situations of (in)security in specific ways. Of course, vital statistics have long been understood as intrinsic to the biopolitics of health. But the contemporary statistical apparatus has been transformed by a new “media-technological apriori” (Friedrich Kittler), posing the question of how biopolitics and its objects are reformatted through the globalization, digitalization, and datafication indicative of new media.
    Investigating the mediation of health security puts into focus the aesthetic dimension of security. Rendering objects of global health security perceptible means giving them a sensorial quality. Through mediation security becomes a matter of collective experience. As such, media of health security can be examined for their aesthetic politics. This opens up avenues to investigate how human sensorial capacity and the affective charge of aesthetics are constitutive elements of security repertoires. Furthermore, as is well-known in the study of representational practices, rendering something visible always comes at the expense of rendering something other invisible. Thus, examining its media-technological enactment draws attention to the exclusions and invisibilities of global public health.
    The panel seeks to address the following questions: How is the tension between the global and the (inter-)national, which is characteristic of global health security, situationally mediated? How are biopolitics reconfigured by increasingly global and digital mediators? How are threats and objects of global health security aesthetically constituted and how do aesthetic choices impact the definition of the situation, specifically with regard to territorial and scalar conceptions?

    Presentations
    Stefan Elbe: Emergency Operations Centres (EOCs): The Sited Mediation of Global Health Security
    Stefania Milan: Technologies of in/exclusion? The role of health technology in the (in)visibility game

Parallel Panels III

  • How security takes shape. The Nato and its Symbols.

    Chair
    Godehard Janzing
    Panelists
    Juul Hondius, Godehard Janzing

    Panel Abstract
    Actors of national security normally use traditional visual signs to represent their corporate identity, whose single elements are handed down over generations. The establishment and institutionalization of international alliances therefore has to be accompanied by the search for new, unifying emblems. The familiar military emblems (flags and colors) of the regional and national partners should neither be replaced nor questioned, but a new, overarching visual framework must be invented that points beyond national interests to international horizons, meanings and values.
    From a visual studies and art-historical perspective, the panel will examine the genesis and reception of the emblems of multilateral alliances in security policy and its possible frictions with the (competing) national coat of arms and sign systems of the participating allies.
    The re-foundation of symbols and emblems reflects the struggle for a new understanding of collective security in a particularly revealing way: Diverging interests must be contained and convincingly transformed into an overarching unity. The fact that the pathos of the new is necessarily accompanied by a multitude of exclusions, fade-outs and fade-ins becomes particularly clear in historical retrospect.
    The focus of the analysis will be NATO's image policy, whose transnational symbolism was developed under the sign of the Cold War. In comparison with the emblems and symbols of the Warsaw Pact, the Helsinki Accords or the UN Security Council, the historical origin of the emnblems become clear. If one asks about the future of international alliances, the binding capacity of these "imagined communities" also proves itself in the validity and sustainability of the chosen forms of their corporate identity.
    The introductory lecture on the genesis of NATO symbols by Godehard Janzing (SFB 138) discusses how initial ideas for a coat of arms-like shield were eventually replaced by the image of a compass needle, which is supposed to point the way to peace and security. Often interpreted as a "NATO star," the monumental entrance sculpture by architect Raymond Huyberechts (1970/71) in front of NATO headquarters in Brussels became an important site for the staging of security and memory politics. The documentary film "To Unveil a Star" (2021) by Juul Hondius (artist, NL) offers very impressive and largely unknown footage and will be partly presented for discussion.

  • Infrastructural Security: Material and Imaginary Intersections of the International

    Chair
    Sven Opitz
    Discussant
    Andreas Langenohl

    Panel Abstract
    Infrastructures have become urgent matters of security. Programs of critical infrastructure protection are a key component of what has been conceived as “vital systems security” (Collier and Lakoff); bottlenecks and resilience are main formulas of problematization of security in realms as diverse as energy, finance, health, transportation, and military preparedness. In our panel, we will look at infrastructures as intersections of the international. Infrastructures are the very means that establish the international by allowing for interconnectivity across borders. As such, they are at the same time matters of public dissent and of technocratic control, laden with geopolitical strategies or with cosmopolitical hopes. Understood as intersections of the international they produce friction and require constant care. The panel elaborates these different aspects: How were and are infrastructures and their security dimensions implied in the historical and contemporary constitution of the 'international' in security agendas and perceptions, and how do their materialities and the imaginaries connected with their functionality and disruption negotiate international with other (national, regional, etc.) understandings of security?

    Presentations
    Adam Ferhani

Parallel Panels IV

  • European imperial rule around 1800 and the transcolonial situation

    Chair
    Benedikt Stuchtey

    Panel Abstract
    How ideas of order crystallised in the "age of revolutions" under the impression of the security priorities of the European empires is the subject of this panel. Using the example of French, Spanish and British imperial rule in Latin America, as well as the sedentary research of European arm-chair scholars, the panel will explore the tensions between practice and theory in the perception and interpretation of the non-European world around 1800, in order to address security risks and aspects of securitisation against the backdrop of universal historiography and the social models associated with it. Eurocentric isolationism on the one hand, and awareness of the transnational and transimperial spillover of revolutionary ideas in the colonial world on the other, played an important role in identifying security problems and controlling complex situations under colonial conditions. Mobility, immigration and integration, central statehood and localism, the need for reform and the structural inability to reform were in a constant process of negotiation. The complexity of the colonial situation underlined the multiplicity of structures and procedures of long-term change, but also the multiplicity of individuals involved, both as actors in the colonies and as parochial scholars in Europe, who were constantly exploring the broad framework of the colonial world with its numerous uncertainties. The panel will pay particular attention to this transimperial aspect under the impression of the „Sattelzeit“.

    Presentations
    Martin Biersack: The Logic of Suspicion. Security Politics in Late Spanish Empire
    Julian zur Lage: On Proximity and Distance: Order and Security in Sedentary Scholarship of the Enlightenment
    Thomas Szymczyk: The Le Jeune Affair. Competing notions of security in pre-revolutionary Saint-Domingue

  • Energy Security in the Cold War Era (1945-1989)

    Chair
    Christian Kleinschmidt

    Panel Abstract
    Energy supply is a central issue of economic, political and social stability. The planned panel will examine the topic of energy supply and energy security in the Cold War era (1945-1989) with a view to the development of the early Federal Republic and its international integration, in terms of European and global or geostrategic dimensions.
    The securing and securitization of energy supply was reflected in the early Federal Republic through discussions of socialization and reorganization during the occupation, in the wake of the Korean War and the “Investitionshilfegesetz” (Investment Assistance Act, 1950-1952), and with regard to European integration and the coal crisis in the second half of the 1950s. Aspects of economic, social as well as military security of the early Federal Republic were at stake.
    As a reaction to the oil price crisis of the 1970s, the International Energy Agency (IEA) came into being in 1974 as an international organization that was to facilitate a reliable and secure energy supply for the OECD countries on the basis of promoting technical development, research and innovation. In view of the associated claim of economic cooperation, the question of national interests and strategies arises at the same time, which will be examined, for example, on the basis of the German and British energy policies within the framework of the IEA.
    At the latest since the oil price crisis of the 1970s and the increasing power position of OPEC, energy supply turned out to be a considerable factor of global insecurity and referred to different global and geostrategic perspectives also with regard to the energy security of the states of the so-called "Third World" in the course of the decolonization of the 1960s and 1970s. What significance did energy security play for them, what national, global and geostrategic interests and aspects of securitization were associated with it among different actors? This will be discussed on the basis of a case study

    Presentations
    Christian Kleinschmidt: Energiesicherheit in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland – zwischen Wiederaufbau und Ölpreiskrise (1945-1973)
    Henning Türk: Energiesicherheit in der „Dekade der Energiepolitik“: Die Internationale Energie-Agentur zwischen 1974 und 1985
    Jonas Kreienbaum: Versorgungssicherheit oder Preiskrise? Unterschiedliche Wahrnehmungen der Ölkrise von 1973/74 in Nord und Süd

Panelists’ bionotes (in alphabetical order)

Jutta Bakonyi
Jutta Bakonyi is Professor in Development and Conflict at Durham University in the UK. Her main research interests are on the causes, actors and dynamics of violence, orders of violence beyond the state, state dynamics and international interventions. More recently, she shifted her focus to the material and emotive side of politics and am conducting research on the nexus of urbanisation and displacement (securityonthemove.co.uk) and on the politics of infrastructures (https://more.bham.ac.uk/port-infrastructure/). In particular, she explores how infrastructures relate to global relations of power, impact state dynamics and shape (urban) lifeworlds.

Arno Barth
Dr. Arno Barth works as a lecturer for Duisburg-Essen University and Policy Program Manager at the German Federal Agency for Civic Education. Barth is alumnus of the Graduate School "Precaution, Prevision, Prediction: Managing Contingency", funded by the German Research Community (DFG). His doctoral thesis is about the "Long First World War" (1912-1923). It deals with the planning and implementation of population policy as part of the Paris Peace Order and analyses regional adjustems thereafter. Recent publications of Arno Barth concentrate on international history of the early 20th Century and regional developement in the Rhine-Meuse area.

Martin Biersack
Martin Biersack is research assistant at the Department of History of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich. He currently holds a substitute professorship for Modern History at the Seminar for Modern History at the University of Tübingen. His main research interests are migration history, humanism, cultural transfer and scientific expeditions in the 18th and 19th centuries, as well as the history of security

Bettina Blum
Bettina Blum ist Historikerin und Ausstellungskuratorin. Sie hat zu verschiedenen Fragen der Polizeigeschichte geforscht und 2012 ihre Promotion zum Thema "Polizistinnen im geteilten Deutschland. Geschlechterdifferenz und polizeilicher Auftrag vom Kriegsende bis in die 70er Jahre" an der Universität Münster abgeschlossen. Ihr aktueller Forschungsschwerpunkt liegt auf der Geschichte der britischen Besatzung und Truppenstationierung in Deutschland. Hierzu hat sie Ausstellungen in Paderborn und im Landtag Nordrhein-Westfalen in Düsseldorf kuratiert und arbeitet aktuell an einem von der DFG geförderten Forschungsprojekt an der Universität Paderborn. Eine Buchveröffentlichung ist für 2025 bei Routledge geplant. Außerdem arbeitet sie mit japanischen und australischen Kolleg*innen an einem Vergleich der alliierten Besatzungen in Japan und Deutschland.

Stefan Elbe
Stefan Elbe is Professor of International Relations and Director of the Centre for Global Health Policy at the University of Sussex. He has published widely on the international politics of his health, including Pandemics, Pills and Politics: Governing Global Health Security (Johns Hopkins University Press), Security and Global Health: Towards the Medicalization of Insecurity (Polity Press), Virus Alert: Security, Governmentality and the AIDS Pandemic (Columbia University Press) and Strategic Implications of HIV/AIDS (Oxford University Press).

Adam Ferhani
Dr Adam Ferhani is Associate Lecturer at the School of International Relations. Prior to this, he was an ESRC Postdoctoral Fellow in the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Sheffield, where he had also completed his PhD in 2021. in the (2017). He also holds a MA in Social Research from the Sheffield Methods Institute and a MA in International Relations from the University of York, and a BA in International Relations from the University of Leicester. Adams current research focuses on the politics of security, with particular interest in health security, and is broadly situated in the fields of critical security studies, International Political Sociology, and Border Studies. He is especially interested in the interplay between health security and border security.

Sarah Frenking
Sarah Frenking ist wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin im Freigeist-Projekt The Other Global Germany. Transnational Criminality and Deviant Globalization in the 20th Century an der Universität Erfurt und assoziierte Forscherin am Centre Marc Bloch, Berlin. Ihre Monografie Zwischenfälle im Reichsland. Überschreiten, Polizieren, Nationalisieren der deutsch-französischen Grenze, 1887-1914 erschien 2021 im Campus Verlag. Ihr aktuelles Forschungsprojekt behandelt Sex, Mobilität, Moral. „Mädchenhandel“ zwischen Deutschland, Frankreich und Nordafrika, 1900-1960. Ihre Forschungsschwerpunkte sind Polizei-, Kriminalitäts-, Sexualitäts- und Geschlechtergeschichte, border studies, die Geschichte des nation building sowie transnationale Geschichte des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts.

Aidan Gnoth
Aidan Gnoth is postdoctoral researcher at the Collaborative Research Center “Dynamics of Security” in the Subproject “Securitization and Desecuritization in International Trusteeship Administrations”. Aidan’s research traces the continuities of these processes into contemporary peacebuilding efforts, exploring how political contestation shaped and defined both positive and problematic understandings of international governance. Aidan Gnoth has a background in Peace and Conflict Studies and his work specialises in how knowledge on peace and international peacebuilding is contested and transmitted into policy and practice. He has published on the role of pacifism and nonviolence in peace processes and international relations and takes a keen interest in contesting the boundaries of utopian thinking within current peace discourses. His doctoral research drew on his experience in disaster relief coordination and the political sphere to explore how attempts to radically transform the objectives and processes of international peace processes are co-opted and reappropriated by mainstream actors and interests.

Toni Haastrup
Prof. Toni Haastrup is Chair in Global Politics at the University of Manchester since September 2023. Prior to this she was a professor in the Faculty of Arts and Humanities at the University of Stirling. Her research interrogates the manifestation of power hierarchies in global politics, with research interests encompassing a wide range of topics within international studies, including peace and security in Africa, feminist, postcolonial and decolonial approaches to international relations, and regional and global governance – she has published extensively in these areas. In her research she is interested in how gendered hierachies are reinforced by ostensibly progressive interventions in regional and global governance. Additionally, her interests include: regional security institutions; feminist peace research; the Women, Peace and Security agenda; Feminist Foreign Policy; Africa-EU relations; decolonial thinking; interpretive methodologies

Norman Ingram
Norman Ingram is Professor of Modern French History at Concordia University in Montreal and presently visiting professor at the Universität Marburg. He is the author inter alia of The Politics of Dissent: Pacifism in France, 1919-1939 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991 and 2011) and more recently of The War Guilt Problem and the Ligue des droits de l’homme, 1914-1944 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019). He has been a Visiting Fellow at Magdalen College, Oxford, the University of Edinburgh, and the University of St Andrews. He is a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society and has served as President of the Society for French Historical Studies.

Christian Kleinschmidt
Christian Kleinschmidt hat seit 2009 die Professur für Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeschichte an der Philipps-Universität Marburg inne. Seine Forschungsschwerpunkte sind Unternehmensgeschichte, Konsumgeschichte und die Geschichte der internationalen Wirtschaftsbeziehungen.

Jonas Kreienbaum
PD Dr. Jonas Kreienbaum leitet das von der DFG geförderte Forschungsprojekt „Neoliberale Globalisierung oder ‚global disconnect‘?“ am Arbeitsbereich Globalgeschichte der Freien Universität Berlin. Er studierte Neuere und Neueste Geschichte, Philosophie und Politikwissenschaft an der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, wo er 2013 promoviert wurde. 2020 folgte die Habilitation an der Universität Rostock. In seinen Forschungen beschäftigt er sich mit der Geschichte von Kolonialismus, Dekolonisierung, Massengewalt und Wirtschaftskrisen.

Anna Leander
Anna Leander is Professor of International Relations at the Geneva Graduate Institute. Prior to this she has been Professor of International Relations at the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro. She also held positions at Central European University in Budapest, the Copenhagen Peace Research Institute, the University of Southern Denmark, the Copenhagen Business School, the Hanse-Wissenschaftskolleg, the Collegio Carlo Alberto and the Judith Reppy Institute for Peace and Conflict Studies at Cornell University. Her research is in International Political Sociology. She has worked extensively with practice theoretical approaches and she has a longstanding interest in the commercialisation of military/security matters. She is co-editor of the Routledge Handbook of Private Security Studies.

Stefania Milan
Stefania Milan is Professor of Critical Data Studies at the University of Amsterdam’s Department of Media Studies. She is also Faculty Associate at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, Harvard University, and Research Associate, Chair “Artificial Intelligence & Democracy” at the School of Transnational Governance, European University Institute. She is curious about the interplay between Seite 14 von 16 technology and society. She is interested in the possibilities of self organization, emancipation, and autonomy that digital infrastructure opens up. A social scientist by formation, she values interdisciplinary research, and feels at home at the intersection of a variety of fields, including critical data studies, political sociology, and science and technology studies.

Patrick Milton
Patrick Milton is a British-German historian who was born in Zimbabwe. He is the co-author of Towards a Westphalia for the Middle East (Hurst, 2018) and the author of Intervention and State Sovereignty in Central Europe, 1500-1780 (Cambridge, 2022). He has taught and researched at Cambridge, Warwick, Mainz, Vienna, and Berlin. He currently lives in Bangkok.

Florian Neiske
Florian Neiske is a PhD-student at the University of Marburg. He previously worked as a research assistant in the SFB/TRR 138 "Dynamics of Security" sub-project C08 "Security and Empire”. His research examines the nexus between different natural phenomena like cyclonic storms, droughts and diseases, and the structures, mechanisms and imaginations of British colonial rule in Bengal in the latter half of the 19th Century.

Amina Nolte
Amina Nolte is a researcher at the Collaborative Research Center "Dynamics of Security". Her research focuses on the topic of political security and economized infrastructures. She is also a research associate at the Institute of Sociology at Justus Liebig University in Giessen. She graduated in political science, among others with a focus on gender studies, and her previous research interests were mainly in the field of infrastructures, critical security research and urban research. She is also an educational consultant at the Kreuzberger Initiative gegen Antisemitismus e.V. in Berlin, where she works in adult education on the topics of anti-Semitism and anti-racism.

Marcel Schmeer
Marcel Schmeer ist wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter am Center for Intelligence and Security Studies (CISS) an der Universität der Bundeswehr München. Er studierte Geschichte sowie Politikwissenschaft, Soziologie und Sozialökonomie in Bochum und Krakau. Er war Visiting Scholar an der New York University, dem Graduate Center der City University of New York und Gastwissenschaftler am Sonderforschungsbereich/Transregio 138 „Dynamiken der Sicherheit´“ in Marburg und Gießen. In seinem Promotionsprojekt beschäftigt er sich mit dem konflikthaften Verhältnis von Polizei und Gesellschaft in West-Berlin zur Zeit des Kalten Krieges. Weitere Forschungsinteressen umfassen die Intelligence History sowie die Organisationsgeschichte.

Peter Schröder
Peter Schröder is Professor of the History of Political Thought at University College London. He was visiting professor at universities in Seoul, Rome and Paris and held numerous senior research fellowships. Recent publications include a monograph on Trust in Early Modern International Political Thought, 1598-1713 (Ideas in Context 116) Cambridge University Press 2017 (paperback 2019), as well as four edited volumes: Two German editions (both Meiner Verlag) of R. Filmer, Patriarcha, Hamburg 2019 and of T. Hobbes, Dialog zwischen einem Philosophen und einem Juristen über das Common Law, Hamburg 2021 and two collections of essays: Der Staat als Genossenschaft. Zum rechtshistorischen und politischen Seite 15 von 16 Werk Otto von Gierkes, Nomos Verlag Baden-Baden 2021 and Concepts and Contexts of Vattel’s Political and Legal Thought, Cambridge University Press 2021.

Heike Spieker
Heike Spieker is Director of the German Red Cross – German Federal Office for Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance. Prior to this she was Assistant Professor, Ruhr-Universität of Bochum (Germany) and
Adjunct Lecturer and Member of the Advisory Board at the University College Dublin, Dublin (Ireland). She holds various memberships in international law institutions and (non-)governmental delegations. Her research interests are in International Humanitarian Law, legal regime of humanitarian action; implementation and enforcement mechanisms in the law of armed conflict; forms of development of IHL, legal protection of cultural property in armed conflict; legal protection of the natural environment in armed conflict; legal frameworks of civil defence and civil protection under IHL and under German Constitutional Law; legal status and framework of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement.

Thomas Szymczyk
Thomas Martin Szymczyk is a PhD candidate at the Collaborative Research Center "Dynamics of Security". He is research assistant in the sub-project C08 "Security and Empire”. His work examines the reactions of Jamaica’s and Saint-Domingue’s colonial elites to perceived insecurities caused by aspirations for autonomy, war, slave rebellions, and abolitionism during the Age of Revolutions.

Henning Türk
PD Dr. Henning Türk ist Spezialist für internationale Geschichte des 20. Jahrhunderts. Nach Gastprofessuren in Mainz und Bonn ist er derzeit am Leibniz-Zentrum für Zeithistorische Forschung in Potsdam tätig. Er hat gerade ein Buch über " Energy Security after the oil crisis. The International Energy Agency 1974-1985" als Endergebnis eines DFG-geförderten Projekts veröffentlicht. Weitere Veröffentlichungen sind: Treibstoff der Systeme.

Boyd van Dijk
Boyd van Dijk is a research associate and Historian of the international legal orders in faculty of history, university of Oxford. He taught previously at the London School of Economics, King's College London, Queen Mary, and the University of Amsterdam. His recent book “preparing for war: the Making of the Geneva Conventions”, oxford university press provides a comprehensive historical account of the Geneva conventions through archival research and unique materials never previously accessed.

Moshe Zimmermann
Moshe Zimmermann is one of Israel's leading historians and one of the most renowned experts on the history of nationalism, anti-Semitism, and German-Jewish and German-Israeli relations. Until his retirement in 2012, he was professor of German history at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and director of the Richard Koebner Center for German History there. Visiting professorships have taken Moshe Zimmermann to Germany many times, as well as to the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton and to the University of Krakow. He has received several awards for his research, e.g., the Rudolf Küstermeier Award of the Israeli-German Society in 1990, the Humboldt Research Award in 1993, the Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm Award of the DAAD in 1997, the Dr. Leopold Lucas Award of the University of Tübingen in 2002, and the Lessing Award for Criticism of the Wolfenbüttel Academy in 2006.

Julian zur Lage
Dr. Julian zur Lage is a research associate at the University of Hamburg’s research center ‘Hamburg’s (Post-)Colonial Legacy/Hamburg and Early Globalization’. He graduated with a bachelor’s and master’s degree in history from Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München and received his PhD for a thesis on sedentary scholarship and global circulation of knowledge in the 18th and 19th century, completed in a joint research program of the University of Osnabrück and the Herzog August Bibliothek Wolfenbüttel. His research is located at the intersection of colonial and global history with the history of knowledge and cultures of memory as well as economic history.

Cooperation Partners