It is increasingly prevalent for states to begin securing themselves not only from external dangers, but also against threats from within. The growing polarisation of constituencies epitomises the rise in nationalistic awareness throughout the international system, indicating the pertinent need for a security theory that can encompass the conglomerate challenges for states experiencing radicalism within their borders. This essay will discern the key concepts and debates surrounding Constructivism with an analysis of the benefits and detriments of its application to real-world conflicts, elucidated through the lens of the Basque Euskadi Ta Askatasuna (ETA) Conflict (1959-2018). Constructivism in Security offers a unique theoretical framework through which beliefs, expectations, and interpretations are assessed as the cornerstone of a state's rationale. Within a collectively conceived world, the presence of patterns, interactions and states rely on the networks of interpretations and behaviours that constitute their legitimacy1. Constructivism seeks to explain why rules lack inherent power and provide the tools to understand and dissect behavioural norms. Within constructivism there is debate about the referent object of security, however, all three principal approaches acknowledge the primary referent object is the security of states. The scope of constructivism identifies that security threats are socially constructed as a result of identities, interests and interactions. Unlike traditional positivist theories, constructivism recognises that states are more than 'black boxes' and states' interests and interactions can be influenced by non-state factors. As threats are socially constructed, the relationships and interactions between states shape how interests and perceptions of threat are formed, meaning these paradigms are constantly shifting. The priority for understanding state security threats is a 1Peltonen, Hannes. "Constructivism, Cognition, and Duality." ERIS - European Review of International Studies 3, no. 3 (June 2017): 79. https://doi.org/10.3224/eris.v3i3.27344.
cognisance of ideas and human consciousness. As such, national security priorities, particularly threats, are characterised by actors' reactions to cultural factors. Countries with a typology for established systems interact differently, therefore state priorities have a diverse construction. As opposed to traditional materialistic Security theories, constructivism bears an ideational cynosure, perceiving that states do not merely pursue material power. Since the global security order and the actors within it are culturally constructed power is not simply sought on the basis of conventional, armed force, but also on the basis of values, attitudes and behaviours and developments in the identities of states. Constructivism presents the approach to securing the state as the possibility of altering world order, demonstrating that identities and interests are not static and that through alterations in the collective conscious by introducing radical norms or new institutions, a redistribution of the accepted international security order can occur. Constructivism seeks to define and evaluate the security of states through an analysis of topological context, state beliefs, expectations, and interpretations of the international security order, unequivocally providing sub-structures through which social influences on politics can be analysed and deconstructed. Through the utilisation of a constructivist framework the essence of the civil human security threat of the Basque Conflict can be observed and the security implications for