Undergraduate /
"Towards a Comprehensive Understanding of Global Security" [5]
"Towards a Comprehensive Understanding of Global Security"Since the mid 1990s, there has been a raging debate as to the proper vantage point from which global peace and security should be looked at and studied. At the center of this debate is the question: what is the appropriate referent variable for global peace and security? Currently, two schools of thought are vying for a hearing. On one side of the debate is a school which identifies the security of the state as the focal variable for the study of global peace and security. This school is often referred to as the traditional view or the "National Security" perspective on global peace and security. On the other side of this debate is an emerging school that considers individual level indicators as better indicators of reference for global peace and security. This school is known as the "Human Security" perspective on global peace and security.
Over the last few centuries, since the Westphalia treaty of 1648, the national security school has been the dominant influence on the thinking and practice on global peace and security. According to this view, global security is primarily a reflection of the spirit of relation between states. Hostilities and conflicts between states, especially armed conflicts are thought to pose the most danger for global peace and security. Consequently, efforts at bolstering global peace and security should primarily focus on creating conditions that minimize the possibility of conflict between nations. The core of such a system is the universal adoption of the principle of national sovereignty. The Charter of UN as well and the institutional arrangements of global governance formed under the UN Security Council (UNSEC) are highly reflective of this philosophy. The prominence of the principle of national sovereignty in international law and diplomacy is a product of the historic events out of which the current system of global governance was borne.
The human security school, on the other hand, is a product of a different era and experiences of different nature: the post cold war period and the ensuing humanitarian crisis. To a large extent, this school draws its influences mostly from the fields of development theory, human rights, and humanitarian assistance. The core of this school is a belief that global peace and security, is reflected more in the conditions under which human beings live rather than the security of the state per se. The access that people have to fundamental rights and necessities is thought to have more bearing on global peace and security. Proponents of this view, Human security as measured by food security, economic security, political security, security of the individual and the community, health security and environmental security is a more appropriate measure of global peace and security than any other variable.
In my opinion, a complete understanding of the influences on global peace and security requires an approach that encompasses both the security of the state as well as that of individual human beings. Such an inclusive approach is warranted at least on two grounds. First and foremost, both of these variables are capable of affecting global peace and security individually. Neither the security of the state nor that of its citizens is by itself a sufficient condition for global peace and security. Global peace and security require that both the security of the state as well as the security of individuals be satisfied. A picture of global peace and security that ignores either one of these variables captures just half the story. Regardless of the security of the state, human security compromised by natural disaster, ethnic conflict, or other major upheavals can cascade into events that can challenge global peace and security. on the flip side, threats to the security of the state, such as military aggression by other states can easily compromise global peace and security.
Second, there exists a complex relationship between state security and human security. These two variables often have a complex and mutually complimentary relationship. They fit within the continuum of global peace and security as reinforcing elements. This continuum does not necessarily follow a linear flow. Human security can have ramifications for national security as can national security on human security. Although the state is the party responsible for ensuring the security of people living within its territorial jurisdiction, in many cases it either is incapable or unwilling to discharge this obligation. A secured state does not necessarily uphold human security while human security might not preclude threats to the security of the state.
An integrated approach towards global security that incorporates the security needs of both the state and the people will have an added significance especially in light of the greatest threats to global peace and security in the post cold war era: international terrorism. In what seems to be recognition of the strategic values of such an approach, the Global War on Terror (GWT) is often referred to as the war to "win hearts and minds". Putting issues that have direct bearing on the lives of individuals and communities is the most practical way to win hearts and minds. Individuals and communities are not only sympathetic to causes that highlight their needs but are more likely to work on their behalf.
Beyond rhetoric, the impact of the GWT on human security has been two sided. On the one hand significant resources have been dedicated to improving human security. Global efforts at eradicating poverty, improving access to education, health care and provide other essential services are all parts of the effort to stave off the threats for global peace and security posed by international terrorism. On the other hand, there is ample evidence indicating the GWT has been used as a pretext to usurp on the legitimate rights and demands of individuals and groups. Human rights- Understood as protection against torture, freedom of speech, association, religion, the right to earn a livelihood, has been a particular concern in this regard.
Albeit gradual and uncertain, human security concerns are finding their way into the discussion on global peace and security. Emerging theories and norms such as the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) are results of the theoretical success to elevate human security to the front page of the agenda on global security. By contrast, reforming the institutional mandate of the global governance structure to reflect this thinking has proven very difficult. For a super majority of states, sovereignty is a subject not open for discussion. Without the engagement of states, reforming the institutional structure and mandate of global governance is sure to stay illusive. From all indications so far, it is going to take a long fight and quite a bit of time before human security concerns are given their rightful place in global security studies.
I am planning to apply for a fellowship in security studies. I am required to write an essay on a relevant topic or controversy in the field and argue my perspective. English is not my first language and i am not confident of the quality of my work. I am thankful for any suggestions i can get on how to;
1. Improve the overall writing quality;
2. Shorten it to 1000 words (currently it is about 1100 words)
I am really thankful for all the comments and help i can get.