Because of the novel explanations it generates for states’ security- and identity-related behavior, the concept of ontological security has been used increasingly in the International Relations (IR) literature in recent years. However, the abundance of interpretations of the concept means that it is often used in conflicting ways. To counter the risk of conceptual stretching and provide the foundation for a common research agenda, this article constructs a typology of ontological security mechanisms. Two dimensions of ontological insecurity are highlighted: the sources and the causes of anxiety. We argue that the source of anxiety can be reflexive, relational, or systemic, while the cause of anxiety can be either shame or discontinuity. These two dimensions produce six mechanisms of ontological insecurity that reflect how the concept is used in the contemporary ontological security literature in IR. By specifying these mechanisms, we argue that the typology offers IR scholars the ability to produce even more nuanced and fine-grained explanations of state behavior driven by ontological insecurity. Finally, to demonstrate the utility of this typology, the article provides an illustrative case study of Russia's engagement in the conflict in Syria in 2015–2017.

中文翻译：

---

本体论不安全机制的类型学：俄罗斯在叙利亚的军事参与

由于它对国家安全和身份相关行为产生了新颖的解释，本体安全的概念近年来在国际关系 (IR) 文献中越来越多地被使用。然而，对这个概念的大量解释意味着它经常以相互矛盾的方式使用。为了应对概念延伸的风险并为共同的研究议程奠定基础，本文构建了本体安全机制的类型学。强调了本体论不安全感的两个维度：焦虑的来源和原因。我们认为焦虑的来源可以是自反的、关系的或系统的，而焦虑的原因可以是羞耻或不连续。这两个维度产生了六种本体不安全机制，反映了该概念在 IR 的当代本体安全文献中的使用方式。通过详细说明这些机制，我们认为类型学为 IR 学者提供了对由本体论不安全感驱动的国家行为做出更细致和更细粒度解释的能力。最后，为了证明这种类型学的实用性，本文提供了一个关于俄罗斯在 2015-2017 年参与叙利亚冲突的说明性案例研究。