Caught between pretension and substantiveness–ambiguities of human security as a political leitmotif (original) (raw)
Related papers
In K. O’Brien, A. L. St. Clair, B. Kristoffersen (eds.), Climate Change, Ethics and Human Security, Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, pp.23-46. , 2010
Although the language of 'human security' that became prominent in the 1990s has encountered criticism from many sides, it has continued to gain momentum. One encounters it frequently now in discussions of environment, migration, socioeconomic rights, culture, gender and more, not only of physical security. Werthes and Debiel propose that: 'human security provides a powerful "political leitmotif" for particular states and multilateral actors by fulfilling selected functions in the process of agendasetting, decision-making and implementation ' (2006:8). I suggest that in order to understand human security discourse and its spread this specification of actors and functions should be broadened. The relevant actors include more than states and multilateral agencies. What was primarily a language in United Nations circles is now far more. Like the sister idea of human rights, human security could be becoming an idiom that plays important roles in motivating and directing attention, and in problem recognition, diagnosis, evaluation and response.
In Defense of the Broad View of Human Security
Routledge Handbook of Human Security
Almost two decades after its mainstream outing in the 1994 UNDP Human Development Report (HDR), the concept of human security continues to be a point of contention between those who favor a broad definition, those who prefer a narrow version and those who reject the notion altogether. What was supposed to be a simple, noble and obvious idea soon became engulfed in a cacophony of political and academic debates centered on its definitions, their advantages and weak points, and on its theoretical and practical applicability. 1 Can human security be considered a paradigm shift, or is it simply an advocacy agenda, a 'glue that holds together a jumbled coalition' 2 of middle powers and development agencies that want to exist on the international scene? It is oft described as a vague concept with no analytical or practical utility; so broad that it includes everything, and therefore, nothing; and a new nemesis from Northern countries, wrapped in an excuse to launch 'just wars' and interventions in weak states. This chapter sets out to defend the broad approach that defines human security as freedom from want, from fear and from indignities as universal and indivisible components. It argues that as a normative concept, human security embodies a number of added values to the fields of security studies, human development and human rights, and is not a mere attempt to 'securitize' issues in order to solicit interventions in the name of 'enlightened self interest' and 'Responsibility to Protect' (R2P). Scopes and definitions As Peter Stoett advances, 'Defining words is a fundamental act ... When definitions are constructed in a closed and limited fashion, alternative thinking can be stifled and orthodoxy reinforced.' 3 Defining the concept of human security serves to delineate reality, framework and priorities for the policy agenda. For the academic one, however, it can also be 'a robust pedagogical process … pushing academic discourse farther along its path of self-discovery.' 4 Defining is after all an act, performed by an actor, and never something neutral or objective. It is therefore important to bear in mind how the definition of human security emerged from or against past theories, who is defining, for what purposes, and what consequences such an act entails for policy and academic debates.
Human Security Concepts, Approaches and Debates in
2004
The end of the Cold War not only has resulted in many non-traditional security issues becoming a focus in international relations, but it also set the stage for a comprehensive re-evaluation of the whole concept of security. Although the long-held Realist and Neorealist view has been that the overarching goal of security is the survival of the state, it has become clear that most victims of both traditional and non-traditional security threats are the individual people who live in a given country. The UN took the lead in spotlighting this view in their 1994 Annual Human Development Report. The concept of human security acknowledges that basic human needs and human rights, along with social equity--with strong support from the state’s governing systems, policies, and laws- is essential for stability and security at any level of society, from local to global. In this paper I will present a summary of how this idea of human security has evolved so far within Southeast Asia, especially ...
The Journal of Security Strategies, 2017
The state-centered and hard-power-oriented security notion, which was dominant perspective in the international conjuncture, has been redefined after the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). In this work, " human security " notion as a primary challenge to the traditional security conception will be examined with the respect of widening international security agenda and expanding actors of security. Within this framework, a normative understanding of human security, which reflects the security requests of individuals and non-governmental organizations (NGO) in security implementations, will be investigated by analyzing the Canadian and Japanese governments' normative initiatives in the security field. This article stresses the Canadian and Japanese governments' contributions to supra-national organizations such as the United Nation (UN) and International Criminal Court (ICC) in respect of institutionalizing the normative actions towards human security approach. Thus, it aims to highlight the shifting security conception and contribute to the security studies literature in Turkey through applying text and discourse analysis on Canadian and Japanese policymakers’ arguments.
Human Security, Universality, and National Interest: A Critical Inquiry
2007
Poverty and other issues associated with development are commonly found in many Asian and African countries. These problems are interwoven with ethnic, religious and political issues, and often lead to incessant conflicts with violence. In order to find an appropriate framework for the conflict resolution, we need to develop a perspective which will fully take into account the wisdom of relevant disciplines such as economics, politics and international relations, as well as that fostered in area studies. Building on the following expertise and networks that have been accumulated in Ryukoku University in the past, the Centre organises research projects to tackle with new and emerging issues in the age of globalisation. It aims to disseminate the results of our research internationally, through academic publications and engagement in public discourse.
Human Security in Contemporary International Politics : Limitations and Challenges
2017
Since the Post-Cold War, human security studies have become attracted in the international community and in the security studies. From the human security standpoint, individual security is more significant than the security of the state. At the core of this study is one essential question: To what extent do you agree that Human Security offers a radical and progressive agenda for thinking about and ‘doing’ security? In order to answer of the main question, the purpose of this article is to examine human security assumptions. The thesis, therefore will argue that human security does not ultimately offer a radical and progressive agenda for international security policy. Thus, this study concludes that human security statements are likely to be unsuccessful in practice.