International Security and Peace Changed Nature of Intl Security, Human Security, and Securitization Jaechun Kim

Changed Nature of International Security Today… How can we define “security”? Freedom from threats… freedom from wants? Traditional concept of (intl’) security Focus was on the security at the national level Focus was on the “national security” largely defined in “military” terms… That is, focus was on the military capabilities that states need to deal with the threats coming from outside… Why??

Because of high frequency of interstate wars… Enemy states had been the primary source of security threats… But is it still true in contemporary era? Security threats are not coming from other states… Now many pundits claim that wars between major industrialized countries are becoming a relic of the past…

Frequency of interstate war has decreased dramatically… one of the key characteristics of international security in contemporary era – decreased frequency of interstate wars However, domestic armed conflicts and civil wars continue to increase… increased frequency of intrastate wars

Decline of civil wars that are classified as “ideological” or “class-based”… and the concomitant rise of conflicts classified as ethnic…tribal… Warfare is becoming increasingly communalized… Individuals and groups are making wars e.g., Al Qaeda Wars = Crimes… e.g., tribal wars in sub-Saharan African states… read Robert Kaplan’s Coming Anarchy

Income and Civil War Risk Inverse relationship… Per capita income is the single best predictor of a country’s odds of civil war outbreak This is a better indicator than ethnic or religious diversity  need to build viable statehood and to provide developmental aids to failed states… Failed statehood is the primary source of all the bad things…

Absence of War between Leading Powers Get back to the issue of decreasing interstate wars… The US, Japan, and Western Europe have formed “security community.” The major concern of IR has been war and the possibility of war among the great powers  greatest discontinuity But do you agree with this claim? This does not mean that there won’t be any conflicts between these leading countries… Churchill: “People talked a lot of nonsense when they said nothing was ever settled by war. Nothing in history was ever settled except by war.”

Explaining the Obsolescence of Major Wars Realist Explanation Skeptical of this claim… American Hegemony (HST) Nuclear Weapons Liberalism Democracy Economic Interdependence Cobden: “Free Trade is God’s diplomacy and there is no other certain way of uniting people in bonds of peace.” Frederick Bastiat: “If goods cannot cross borders, armies will.” International Organization and International Law

Constructivism Role of ideas and changed identity… Through interactions and processes – socialization – they came to adopt norms relating to sovereignty, territory, borders, and conquest…. It became their inter-subjective (shared) understanding….

Human Security Growing obsolescence of interstate wars… rather, people feel insecure because of other reasons… Now people feel insecure because of new types of threats such as… The process of Globalization brings in new risks and dangers. As globalization accelerates in the 21st century, such threats are internationalized…. Such threats are transnational in nature…

These threats to security are largely outside the control of nation-states. They are not being sufficiently addressed through the traditional framework of national security.

The origin of the concept goes back to the publication of the Human Development Report, issued by UNDP 1994, which argued that “ human security is not a concern with weapons, it is a concern with human life and dignity”. Since then, the concept has provoked intellectual debates as to what purpose it should serve and how… The concept underwent quite a few modifications…

Environmental Degradation Under- Development; Failed Statehood Intl Terrorism Environmental Degradation Under- Development; Failed Statehood New patterns of security threats of 21st century Natural Disasters Refugee Problem Transnational Disease Intra-state Wars Drug Trafficking Organized Crime

Several Characteristics of Human Security According to 1994 UNDP Report… Focus has to be on the individual human beings, not on nation states… referent object is individual or group… Are we secure? Human Security has the characteristic of universality just like Human Rights: it is applicable to individuals everywhere…equally…

Very overarching concept! The concept is not limited to human survival; it includes the right of people to exercise choices safely and freely… and that they can be fairly confident that the opportunities they have today will not be lost tomorrow. Safety from such chronic threats as hunger, disease and repression. Protection from sudden and hurtful disruptions in the patterns of daily life - whether in homes, in jobs or communities. Such threats exist at all levels of national income and development. Very overarching concept! States may well continue to invest in traditional defense, but they are not able to deal with new problems properly…

Tensions between the Schools of Human Security The Narrow School HS – ‘the protection of individuals and communities from war and other forms of violence’ (Human Security Center: 2005) Freedom from Fear vs. Freedom from Want (cf. UNDP) The role of state is still very important… The Broad School Freedom from Want (1994 UNDP Report)

Underdevelopment is real threat! Alkiri (2004: 360) – HS is “to protect the vital core of all human lives in ways that advance human freedoms and human fulfillment.” Underdevelopment is real threat! Underdevelopment is source of violence Skeptical about the role of state…

Evolution of HS (Human Security) Concept HS expanded the traditional concept of security horizontally and vertically… Horizontal dimension – issue areas: not just military security, but non military security as well… economic, environmental, educational,… etc. Vertical dimension – referent objects: no longer state, but groups, individuals, etc.

UNDP – the broadest… Human Development Report 1994 Horizontal dimension – All the threats – freedom from want! Vertical dimension – all the people in the world Means – non state actors!

CHS (Commission on Human Security) Human Security Now: Protecting and Empowering People, 2003 UNDP Report is too radical and unrealistic… impractical… Certain threats - Freedom from Violence! Referent Objects - Not all humans equally, but the priority should be given to some people… It should be given to people in under-developed parts of the world

Means - State should provide human security… cf Means - State should provide human security… cf. UNDP – skeptical of states’ role, calling for new global governance Offers a more realistic solution to HS problem…

UNESCO Human Security: Approaches and Challenges, 2008 Similar to CHS’s notion of HS… Referent Objects – people with extreme poverty in under-developed countries

Human Security: Report of the Secretary-General, 2010, 2012 Concept - HS supplements traditional concept of security, not replacing it… Referent object – all humans Means - Only state can provide HS…

Commission on Human Security UNDP Commission on Human Security UNESCO Report of the Secretary -General Referent Objects All Humans People in under-developed countries People with extreme poverty in under-developed countries Security Provider Non-state actors State actors, IOs, NGOs, Civil Society State Sovereignty No Provisional Absolute Role of the State Source of Threat Security Provider & Source of Threat Security Provider & Sources of Threat

Commission on Human Security UNDP Commission on Human Security UNESCO Report of the Secretary -General Means New Forms of Global Governance Under the existing sovereign state system Only under the sovereign state system Priority Economic Security-Food Security-Environment Security-Civil Security-Political Security Political Security-Civil Security-Environmental Security-Institutional Security-Economic Security-Health Security Civil Security-Economic Security-Political Security-Institutional Security-Cultural Security-Environmental Security Unnecessary

Can “human security” be an alternative (that is, alternative to traditional conception of national security) way of conceptualizing international security in the 21st century?

Securitization The Copenhagen School invented this concept Wideners (Broad School): the definition of security should encompass five different sectors – military, political, societal, economic and environmental security Allows for non-military matters to be included in security studies, but it also seeks a coherent concept of security...Coherent analytic tool…

Any specific matter can be non-politicized, politicized, or securitized… An issue is non-politicized when it is not a matter for state action, and when it is not included in public debate An issue is politicized when it is a “part of public policy, requiring government decision and resource allocations…” (Buzan, Waevaer, De Wilde 1998: 23). A politicized issue is managed within the standard political system (or processes)…. An issue is securitized when it requires emergency actions beyond the state’s standard political procedures…

Securitizing process An issue can be securitized; it can be framed as a security issue and moved from the politicized to the securitized end of the spectrum, through an act of securitization. A securitizing actors (usually elites in gov., military, civil society, etc.) claim that an issue constitutes an existential threat to a referent objects (state, groups, individuals, or to sovereignty, ideology, economy, etc.)

To deal with the existential nature of the threat, the securitizing actors assert that it has to adopt extraordinary means, means that go beyond the ordinary norms of the standard political process. Securitization is the “move that takes issue beyond routine politics, beyond the established rule of the game…” (Buzan, Waevaer, De Wilde 1998: 23)

Non-politicized Politicized Securitized the state doesn’t cope with the issue. the issue is not included in public debate. the issue is managed within the standard political system. the issue is framed as a security problem through securitization. the issue is understood as constituting external threat.

Speech Act Securitizing actors use speech act to articulate a problem in security terms… to articulate it as an existential threat to security… Discursive representation of a certain issue as an existential threat to security… * Fiscal crisis can be articulated as national security crisis! (Read Robert Kagan’s piece)

Desecuritization Securitizing actors reconstitute an issue as no longer an existential threat, then the issue moves from the securitized realm into the ordinary public arena. Desecuritization is the reverse process of securitization. It shifts the issue from emergency mode into the normal political sphere…

Some thoughts on securitization Security is a socially constructed concept! It is a shared understanding of what constitutes a threat to a society… What constitutes security to a given society depends on intersubjective understanding between securitizing actors and referent objects (it has to be accepted by referent objects!!!) as to what constitutes existential security threats! It’s not predetermined!!! It cannot be imposed!!!

Security threats do not exist independently from the discourse Security shouldn’t be idealized… Securitization process can be abused by securitizing actors… in the name of providing security! It does seem to provide a coherent logic as to what constitutes security… how one issue becomes a security issue…