 |
|
|
 |
Background Information on the Global Themes
> Human security |
Human security
|
|
|
"The
meaning of human security is synonymous with that of `the security
of people' ... The objective of human security is the safety and
survival of people."
Dr. Sverre Lodgaard |
|
The concept of human security
emerged on the world scene only towards the end of the twentieth
century. Before that, for over three hundred years, the idea of
state security was a familiar and accepted concept. States were
entitled, indeed expected, to defend their territorial integrity
against external threats, and special measures were even permissible
towards such an end, but the notion of security, at least at the
international level, stopped at the borders of the state.
The discourse on security changed in the 1990s, and the international
community began to accept the importance of special measures to
defend not just states but people from threats to their security,
even where this went against the wishes of the government in question.
Of course, even before that, there was a common use of the word
"security" which applied to people, but the radical
change in the 1990s lay in international discourse: for the first
time, the defence of a people, which had formerly been regarded
as the sovereign business of individual nation states, became
potentially the business of the international community.
The language changed, and so did the actions
Collective security actions, involving coalitions of nations
and under the guidance of the United Nations, were taken not necessarily
with the aim of enhancing the security of states, but primarily
in the name of the security of people(s). Events that had previously
been referred to only in such terms as humanitarian disasters
came to be redefined in terms of peace and security. This was
used to justify international enforcement measures, one of the
first examples of which was the humanitarian enforcement programme
in Somalia (1992-93), where the United Nations Security Council
determined that
"the magnitude of the human tragedy ... constitutes
a threat to international peace and security".
The United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM) was established
in 1992 to monitor the cease-fire in Mogadishu and escort deliveries
of humanitarian supplies to distribution centres in the city.
The mission's mandate and strength were later enlarged to enable
it to protect humanitarian convoys and distribution centres throughout
Somalia. |
|
|
| "The Security Council,
|
Bearing in mind the
purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,
and the primary responsibility of the Security Council for
the maintenance of international peace and security,
Determined to resolve
the grave humanitarian situation in Kosovo, Federal Republic
of Yugoslavia, and to provide for the safe and free return
of all refugees and displaced persons to their homes,
Determining that the
situation in the region continues to constitute a threat
to international peace and security ... and acting for these
purposes under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United
Nations,
...Decides that the responsibilities
of the international security presence to be deployed and
acting in Kosovo will include:
- Deterring renewed hostilities ... ;
- Demilitarising the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) ...
;
- Establishing a secure environment in which refugees
and displaced persons can return home in safety ... and
humanitarian
aid can be delivered;
Ensuring public safety and order
..."
Extracts from Resolution 1244
(1999). Adopted by the UN Security Council at its 4011th
meeting, on 10 June 1999. |
|
|
|
|
|
Two aspects
of change:
The above extract from the United Nations resolution on Kosovo
illustrates the two fundamental changes that had come about in
the classification of issues as posing a threat to international
security:
- the types of events that came to be seen as a threat to security;
- the extension of security concerns to cover intra-state events
as well as conflicts between nation states.
What led to the change?
There were a number of influences which prompted this movement
away from a definition of security that focused on states to one
that focused on people. One such influence was undoubtedly the
end of the cold war, which allowed the interests of governments
and peoples that had previously been hidden to come to the surface.
One result was an outburst of complex and vicious conflicts, often
intra-state, where the cost in terms of civilian casualties required
a new type of response.
However, there was perhaps a more important influence than merely
the realisation that the defence of peoples sometimes required
an international response. This realisation had, after all, been
there for many years, but "interfering" in what were
seen as purely domestic affairs had not been considered a possible
or acceptable course of action. Now, however, the increasing profile
of human rights concerns in the world led to a form of justification
which was, if not universally, then at least very widely acceptable:
human rights, after all, are concerned precisely with people rather
than states, and all countries in the world express their agreement
at least in principle with these norms.
 To
what extent should the domestic policies of nations be subject
to scrutiny by the international community?
|
|
|
"Security
is a condition in which other things become possible."
Emma Rothschild |
|
Individual or
state interests?
The central idea behind human rights is that there is a certain
level of human dignity which cannot be infringed by any government
or individual. Thus, it is an inevitable consequence of embracing
human rights that states relinquish some of their sovereignty,
in the old sense of that term. In signing up to internationally
agreed human rights norms, they have thereby agreed to put the
individual at the forefront of all their actions, and they therefore
relinquish their ability to do absolutely anything in the name
of the interests of the state.
It is this idea that has gained ground in the last ten years
in the field of international relations. It has resulted not only
in an increasing number of United Nations missions with a much
broader mandate than previously but also in the pressure to set
up a permanent international criminal court, where violators of
human rights can be tried outside the borders of any particular
state. |
|
|
| The International Criminal
Court |
The international community
met in Rome, Italy, from 15 June to 17 July 1998 to finalise
a draft statute which, when ratified by a minimum of 60
countries, will establish an International Criminal Court
(ICC). This will be a permanent court for trying individuals
accused of committing genocide, war crimes and crimes against
humanity. |
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing debates:
freedom from "want"
The origins of the new focus on human security are often traced
to the publication of an Agenda for Peace by United Nations Secretary-General
Boutros Boutros-Ghali in 1992. This document suggested that threats
to global security were not only military in nature:
"A porous ozone shield could pose a greater threat to
an exposed population than a hostile army. Drought and disease
can decimate no less mercilessly than the weapons of war."
It was suggested that not only were environmental instability,
poverty, famine and oppression critical security issues in and
of themselves, they were also both sources and consequences of
conflict.
The United Nations Development Programme Human Development Report
of 1994 followed up this idea of a broader interpretation of the
concept of security, suggesting that the concept of human security
can be broken down into two component factors:
- "protection from sudden and hurtful disruptions in the
pattern of our daily lives," (known as freedom from
fear); and
- "safety from the constant threats of hunger, disease,
crime and repression," (known as freedom from want).
The report elaborated these concepts further and went on to
identify seven separate components of human security:
- economic security (assured basic income);
- food security (physical and economic access to food);
- health security (relative freedom from disease and
infection);
- environmental security (access to sanitary water supply,
clean air and a non-degraded land system);
- personal security (security from physical violence
and threats);
- community security (security of cultural identity);
- political security (protection of basic human rights
and freedoms).
|
|
|
Youth and human security
Youth organisations working in programmes
and activities that promote peace, human rights education, environmental
issues or hunger relief, for example, can all be said to be working
for greater human security: they are aiming to develop conditions
where people can have more freedom from want and
freedom from fear. |
|
However, this very broad conception of human security has been criticised by
many who believe that the more components we include within the
concept, the less useful it becomes as a policy tool. In particular,
one of the founding members of the international "Human Security
Partnership", the Canadian Department for Foreign Affairs
and International Trade (DFAIT), proposes a much narrower definition:
"Human security means safety for people from both violent
and non-violent threats. It is a condition or state of being characterised
by freedom from pervasive threats to people's rights, their safety,
or even their lives ... The litmus test for determining if it
is useful to frame an issue in human security terms is the degree
to which the safety of people is at risk."
What are the advantages and disadvantages of extending the concept
of security to include freedom from `want' as well as freedom
from fear?
The Human Security Agenda
Despite the different interpretations, definitions and emphases,
the different concepts of human security do have common elements.
The following characteristics are emerging as central to a human
security agenda.
- There is a shift of emphasis from the security of states
to the security of people. This is considered one of the primary
contributions of the concept of human security. As mentioned
previously, for centuries, security has been seen primarily
as national or state security; now, the notion of human security
brings people into international discussions and raises concerns
around the security and safety of people, not just States.
|
|
|
"... decent people cannot sit back and watch systematic, state-directed
massacres of other people. Decent people simply cannot tolerate
this and cannot fail to come to the rescue, if a rescue action
is within their power."
Vaclav Havel |
|
- This implies and re-emphasises the obligations of states
to ensure the security of their citizens. The focus on people's
security raises the profile of states to provide for and protect
their citizens.
- It recognises the inter-relatedness of people and the fact
that many issues cross state borders and other boundaries. A
human security position highlights the inter-dependent nature
of people in today's world, reminding us that many problems
do not have "passports" and cannot be stopped at political
borders. Women and men in industrialised countries, for example,
are not isolated from poverty in developing countries, as is
evidenced by migration patterns and diseases that do not respect
borders; and people in developing countries are at risk from
the industrial pollution produced by northern factories.
- It recognises the importance of non-state actors. The international
campaign against landmines is often cited as an effective initiative
spearheaded by non-governmental organisations. "Civil society
organisations are seeking greater opportunity and greater responsibility
in promoting human security. In many cases, non-governmental
organisations have proven to be extremely effective partners
in advocating the security of people."33
- It requires that those responsible for violations of human
rights and humanitarian law are held accountable. The creation
of the International Criminal Court as well as the International
Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda are
seen as important advances in the pursuit of a human security
agenda.
- It highlights the complexity of security issues reinforcing
the need for multi-faceted responses. Among the different uses
of human security, there is agreement that it is a multi-faceted
concept that requires co-ordination and collaboration among
a wide range of actors. One response given prominence is an
increased reliance on "soft power" or persuasion rather
total focus on military might and hardware ("powerful ideas
rather than powerful weapons").34
Personal security and the ECHR
The right to liberty and security of person is protected under
Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and the
importance of Article 5 was soon apparent in some of the early
cases coming to Strasbourg. Of the first 10000 cases, nearly a
third came from individuals deprived of their liberty.
This article concerns the protection of physical liberty and
in particular freedom from arbitrary arrest or detention. It guarantees
certain basic procedural rights such as the right to be informed
promptly of the reason for arrest, the right to be brought promptly
before a judicial officer and the right to take proceedings by
which the lawfulness of the detention, or continuing detention,
may be decided speedily by a court.
Examples of cases under Article 5 that have been tried before
the European Court of Human Rights include:
- Bozano v. France, 1986
The Court found that the circumstances surrounding the arrest
and deportation of the applicant from France to Switzerland
were neither lawful nor compatible with the right to security
of person.
- Brogan and Others v. the United Kingdom, 1988
The Court found that the holding of the applicants under prevention
of terrorism legislation for periods exceeding four days, without
having the legality of their detention decided upon, violated
their right to be brought promptly before a judicial officer.
- De Wilde, Ooms and Versyp v. Belgium, 1970/71
The Court held that the procedures open to the applicants to
challenge the lawfulness of their detention under vagrancy legislation
did not give them access to a remedy with the necessary guarantees
to contest their long deprivation of liberty, ranging from seven
months to one year and nine months.
References
Endnotes
|
|
|
