The Rise of 'Big Security': How Global Politics Prioritizes Control Over Solutions

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s rejection of Donald Trump’s Gaza peace proposal reflects broader shifts in global security politics, where leaders increasingly prioritize control over conflict resolution. Analysts suggest Netanyahu’s stance aligns with Israeli public opinion, which demands the total dismantling of Hamas before any peace negotiations. However, experts warn that Israel’s security-first approach extends beyond its current leadership, as seen in the policies of potential successor Gadi Eisenkot, former Israeli Army chief and leader of the Yashar Party.

Eisenkot, a key figure in Netanyahu’s war cabinet during the first nine months of the Gaza conflict, oversaw a military response that resulted in over 30,000 Palestinian deaths, predominantly women and children. His continued influence underscores how Israeli politics remain entrenched in a security paradigm, prioritizing force and surveillance over diplomacy. Anthropologist Ruben Andersson explores this global trend in his new book, *Age of Security: The Rise of a Global Obsession*, where he introduces the concept of “liddism” to describe governments’ tendency to suppress symptoms of insecurity rather than addressing root causes.

Andersson highlights Israel’s “smart fence” around Gaza—a $1 billion surveillance and barrier system—as a prime example of this approach. Inaugurated in December 2021, the fence was intended to provide “total security” for Israel but failed to prevent Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attack. The miscalculation reflects a broader global phenomenon Andersson calls “Big Security,” where governments worldwide prioritize control through surveillance, authoritarianism, and militarization, often at the expense of marginalized groups.

From El Salvador’s crackdown on gangs to China’s surveillance state and Russia’s centralized control under Vladimir Putin, Andersson demonstrates how leaders across diverse regions exploit perceived threats to justify expansion of security apparatuses. In the United States, Trump’s administration has accelerated this trend, with reports indicating extensive surveillance of left-wing groups opposing immigration enforcement. Trump’s second term has further entrenched this approach, including the use of National Guard units in Democrat-led cities and the dismissal of climate change as a federal priority.

The military-industrial complex plays a critical role in reinforcing Big Security, as defense budgets surge amid escalating global tensions. Fossil fuel lobbies further complicate efforts to address climate change, a crisis that requires international cooperation rather than militarized responses. Despite the challenges, Andersson remains cautiously optimistic, noting that rapid decarbonization is possible and that grassroots resistance can challenge the dominance of security-first policies.

Yet, the power of the arms trade and security industries poses a formidable obstacle, demanding urgent, coordinated opposition from policymakers and civil society alike.

#BigSecurity #Netanyahu #GazaConflict #IsraelPalestine #DonaldTrump #SurveillanceState #MilitaryIndustrialComplex