Human Security in World Politics Professor Keith Krause Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva June 2008

Outline I Changing conceptions of security: the context II Human security: origins and development III Practicing human security IV Conclusion: dilemmas and tensions

I Changing conceptions of security The traditional concept of security Why it erodes Broadening and deepening security Two examples: environmental and societal security “Constructing” and “securitizing”

The “traditional” conception of “national” security “Safeguarding the population and core values of a nation”: Securing the nation-state Against external threats Of a military/forceful nature

Why it erodes: three changes Shift from inter-state to internal or intra- state wars Fragmentation: few global or common threats Decline of a state-centred vision: security threats above and below the state level

Deepening global regional Broadening economicenvironment military energy food health. state societal human

Environmental security: three meanings Does environmental change or degradation cause conflict? Does environmental change threaten the well-being or survival or communities? How does human activity threaten the environment?

Societal security Threats – not to “sovereignty” – but to the “identity” of a social group Whatever challenges “we feeling” Example: ethno-national conflicts (Kurds, Basques, Tamils, Kosovars, Hutu vs. Tutsi) Explanations: Primordialist Constructivist Institutionalist

Constructing security What is “constructivism? A method for studying social phenomena …that focuses on the role of ideas in shaping our identities …and the meanings we give to the world around us

Key tenets the actors in world politics — states — are constructed through historical processes that include social, political, material and ideational dimensions the security identities and interests of these actors are constructed (and reconstructed) through political practices that create shared understandings identities and interests can change the structure of world politics (anarchy) does not determine outcomes since it is also socially constructed

Constructing security interests The threats that weapons pose: Banning anti-personnel land mines/cluster munitions, and the “civilization” discourse Identifying the enemy: Why North Korea and Iran are a threat; why the UK and Israel are not From Pyongyang to Harare – authoritarianism as threat Humanitarian intervention: Kosovo, Somalia, Darfur?

Securitization: from “challenge” to “threat” What is “securitization? The identification of an existential threat that takes an issue beyond the usual rules of politics and calls for urgent or extreme measures to respond Threats are socially constructed through “securitization” by powerful actors Examples: “war on drugs,” “war on terror” “HIV/AIDS is a threat to international peace and security” “securitization is a double-edged sword”

IIHuman security: concept and context What is the concept? How did it emerge: immediate context Why did it emerge – deep roots Why did it emerge: recent developments “Broad” versus “narrow” visions How is it situated vis-à-vis other concepts

What is human security? “protecting individuals from existential and pervasive threats to their personal safety and physical well-being.” …the protection of the vital core of all human lives from critical and pervasive environmental, economic, food, health, personal and political threats” Human Security Commission A people-centred security concept Includes threats from a state against its citizens conceptual evolution of security

Human security: catalysts and roots Catalysts: UNDP 1994 Human Development Report 1995: Copenhagen Social summit Seven elements: economic, food, health, environmental, personal, community and political security. Roots: ICRC and IHL, civilian protection Human Rights versus state sovereignty

Human security: background conditions changing nature of conflict crisis of development policy the post-conflict “relief-development” gap emphasis on good governance: WB and IFIs changing nature of UN activity: “deep multilateralism” security sector reform (SSR) agenda

Two visions of human security “Freedom from Want” Elements: “safety from chronic threats such as hunger, disease and repression”; economic, food, health, environmental, personal, community and political dimensions Agents: UNDP, Commission on Human Security, Japan “Freedom from Fear” Elements: physical security violent threats, conflict and crime, post-conflict peacebuilding, small arms, land mines, women in conflict, etc. Agents: Norway, Canada, Switzerland, Human Security Network, UN peace operations

Human security and the functions of the modern state From state to human security From national toFrom sovereignty to human developmenthuman rights

III Practicing human security New forms of multilateral action New issues New “interventions”

New Forms of Multilateralism The “Human Security Network” (HSN) Regional responses to human security “Geneva Declaration” on armed violence and development

Regional Expressions of Human Security WhereUnderstanding of Human Security Mode Western Europe (plus Canada) Outward projection of European experience of evacuating violence from the public sphere; freedom from fear concept, fused to the needs of European foreign and security policy imperatives Externalizing Middle East Little resonance for either freedom from want or freedom from fear; human security as « tolerance », « education, » dialogue; no challenge to state society relations and statist conceptions of security Subverting Southeast and East Asia Grafted onto ideas of comprehensive and cooperative security (state-centric), oriented towards freedom from want and economic development needs, silent on state-citizen relations Appropriating Latin America Grafted onto notions of citizen security, public security (and democratic security) freedom from fear, violence reduction and security sector reform Embracing

The Geneva Declaration on armed violence and development Objectives: Raise global awareness of the negative impact of armed violence on development: 92 states adhere to it Support the reduction of armed violence within a development perspective Strengthen efforts to achieve “a measurable reduction in the global burden of armed violence and tangible improvements in human security by 2015” Three implementation pillars: Advocacy, dissemination, coordination Measurability and monitoring Programming

A spectrum of armed violence Armed violence: “The intentional use of illegitimate force (actual or threatened) with arms or explosives, against a person, group, community or state, which undermines people-centred security and/or sustainable development” About 700,000 deaths annually ~40-50,000 direct conflict deaths ~490,000 homicides ~200,000 indirect conflict deaths

New issues on the security agenda Landmines, cluster munitions, small arms and light weapons Child soldiers Civilian protection in conflict (including women and children: SC Resolution 1325, 2000) Conflict “goods” (diamonds, timber, etc.)

Spotlight on small arms: key initiatives UN Programme of Action (2001) UN Firearms Protocol (2001, 2005) UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement OAS Firearms Convention/Model Regulations European Union initiatives OSCE Document on SALW ECOWAS Convention, SADC and Nairobi Protocols

First generation (supply) measures Marking, record-keeping and tracing of arms Export control initiatives Stockpile management and security Weapons destruction, both surplus and post-conflict Ammunition (in all its dimensions) Portable air-defense missile systems End-user certification Brokering (including transport/financial agents)

Second generation (demand) measures Demand for small arms (state and non-state) Small arms and development Small arms and armed violence reduction Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration Small arms and Security Sector Reform Victim assistance

Human security’s new “interventionism” “Responsibility to protect” (R2P) and ICISS - under what conditions should the world act? International Criminal Court - who can be held responsible for international crimes? Post-conflict peacebuilding and fragile states - how can fragile states be strengthened and made legitimate?

Conclusion: four challenges State-centrism and the top-down promotion of human security Does the “new multilateralism” represent a genuine civil society engagement? Does the practice of human security make a different Striking a balance: the difficult relationship between individuals and the state