The dissertation focuses on the marginalization of violence by security studies. While the widening and deepening of security contributed positively to theoretical debates in the field, these moves led to a breakdown of the productive relationship between theory and practice that had characterized the discipline since its genesis. In this way, themes such as the new wars highlight the absence of a conceptual debate about violence in security studies, leading to a lack of explanatory capacity for understanding violence. The dissertation shows that violence becomes an end unto itself as the new wars offer incentives absent in everyday politics. The text suggests, with a view to filling this analytical lacuna within security studies, increased dialogue between the speech act approach espoused by the Copenhagen School and typologies of violence established by scholars within peace studies. Such a dialogue would bring back to security studies the important analytical focus on violence, thus reestablishing a productive relationship between theory and practice. As an illustrative example, the dissertation uses the siege of Sarajevo.