The Human Security Paradigm Shift

Introduction:

The topic of human security has caused much debate across the international stage. Some have championed its ideals while others have scoffed at its broad, ill-defined criteria and expectations. Regardless, the concept of human security is here to stay, though what exactly falls under its umbrella of qualifications, expectations, rules, and responsibilities continues to take form. The purpose of this paper is not to argue what should or shouldn't be considered a human security issue, but rather to address the topic of human security as a paradigm shift. It by no means serves as an in-depth investigation but skims the surface of the paradigm debate. This paper argues, through examples in globalization, agroterrorism, and climate change, that the recent movement toward human security isn't a true paradigm shift at all. Rather, human security is an extension of classic state security principles.

Globalization:

In his article, Critical Human Security Studies, Edward Newman described the most perilous of security threats as those arising out of "internal conflicts, disease, hunger, environmental contamination or criminal violence" and in some cases from the "state itself, rather than from an 'external' adversary" (2010, 78). He goes on to underscore that traditional concepts of state security through "territorial integrity" continue to be essential but no longer serve as stand-alone solutions to human prosperity (Newman 2010, 79). On the surface, this might look like a dramatic shift in security expectations. Many have argued that such a change erodes state sovereignty. However, Newman highlights that human security simply flips the equation, "the state – and state sovereignty – must serve and support the people from which it (in theory) draws its legitimacy" (2010, 79). But in the matter of state sovereignty, globalization seems more of a conduit to the blurring of state authority than does the concept of human security. 

The modern-day world is smaller and more connected than ever before. Not only through technological advancements in communications and travel, but also through the global economy. In her article Human Security, Mary Kaldor describes globalization as a major factor in "the erosion of the nation-state" and details that today, human lives are influenced, to a large degree, more at an international level than by the nation-state (2011, 444). Today, states are intricately intertwined with one another through the global market. A disrupted supply chain or failing economy in one country can directly impact the security of another. Kaldor underscores that such a globalized world calls for an institutional adaptation to meet modern realities (Kaldor 2011, 444-45). She highlights that the "war-based security" of the past, and the traditional state-sovereignty ideals that support it, should be extended to include human security ideals in the face of changing needs (Kaldor 2011, 446). Such adjustments don't imply a paradigm shift, but a paradigm upgrade.

Agroterrorism:

Food security is an important tier of human security, and agroterrorism is an excellent example of how traditional state security and human security are connected. Joseph Foxell, Jr. underscored, in his article Current Trends in Agroterrorism. . . and Their Potential Impact on Food Security, just how connected and how vulnerable a state, even one as powerful as the United States, is when it comes to foreign attacks on its food supply (2010, 110). Further, he eluded to "a transformation in the nature of terrorism itself" away from "Marxist-Leninist ideology" toward more "religious or ethnic inter-communal violence" (2010, 120). This conjunction of agroterrorism vulnerability and a shift in the nature of terrorism doesn't bode well for traditional state security or human security if security methods remain stagnant. But it does highlight how intertwined the two are. 

Foxell, Jr. himself points to the transformation of terrorism as a paradigm shift (2010, 120), and that may be so. But security principles, in the case of agroterrorism, seem to be taking on more of a comprehensive approach or inclusion, rather than an outright methodological change. In this case, a foreign enemy can attack a state directly through its food supply, thereby impacting its citizens' human security and the state's military. Attacks in the form of agroterrorism directly impact both the traditional security of a state and the human element. Such transitions in potential attack strategies must be met with modern-day approaches, not the war-based security principles of old if the government hopes to come out on the winning side. That by no means is a call to abandon traditional security doctrine but to add additional layers to it with human security in mind.

Climate Change:

Climate change poses a significant challenge to another important tier of human security: environmental security. It's also another excellent example of how interconnected traditional state security and human security are. As seen in the previous agroterrorism example, climate-induced crises to environmental security highlight how state security principles would benefit by expanding their strategies to include human security. Again, this is not an outright paradigm shift, but rather a modification to put security at the forefront of modern-day challenges and realities. 

Nicole Detraz, in her article Threats or Vulnerabilities? Assessing the Link between Climate Change and Security speaks to the connectedness of climate change, environmental degradation, and vulnerability at an individual level (2011, 106). Additionally, she describes how climate change can directly negatively impact individuals, state stability, and create a conducive environment for international conflict (2011, 108). States ripe with internal instability at the hand of natural disasters or diminished food supply are not in a position to adequately protect and defend their borders. Further, as shown in the case of agroterrorism, a state's food supply directly impacts its military. Further still, internal or external disruptions in the form of climate-induced crises can disrupt supply chains and economies across the globalized world. That underscores the importance of equipping traditional state security methods with modern-day human security concepts to meet changing needs head-on. 

Conclusion:

In conclusion, while human security has been argued "too broad and vague a concept" to demand change in policymakers' eyes (Paris 2001, 92), it is a more related and interconnected concept than it's given credit. Further, rather than being a full-on paradigm shift in security ideals, human security is more of an upgrade to traditional state security––a critical and required upgrade if states hope to remain secure in the face of modern-day realities. Traditional state sovereignty has been blurred by globalization. A smaller, more connected world means new security approaches are needed because what happens at an individual level on one side of the globe can directly impact state security in another part of the world. Terrorism strategies have shifted, and wars are no longer limited to guns and brawn, but go after food security, as seen with agroterrorism. And climate change may very well impact the safety and wellbeing of not only individuals but states themselves. State security strategies must adjust to accommodate and to include human security if they hope to survive.

References:

Detraz, Nicole. 2011. “Threats or Vulnerabilities? Assessing the Link between Climate Change and Security.” Global Environmental Politics 11, no. 3 (August 2011): 104–20. doi:10.1162/GLEP_a_00071.

Foxell Jr., Joseph. 2010. “Current Trends in Agroterrorism (Antilivestock, Anticrop, and Antisoil Bioagricultural Terrorism) and Their Potential Impact on Food Security.” (2010). Studies in Conflict & Terrorism. https://doi.org/10.1080/10576100151101623

Kaldor, Mary. 2011. "Human security." Society and Economy 33, no. 3: 441-448, https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/docview/1032960449?accountid=8289.

Newman, Edward. 2010. "Critical human security studies." Review of International Studies 36, no. 1: 77-94, https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/docview/204923618?accountid=8289.

Paris, Roland. 2001. "Human Security: Paradigm Shift or Hot Air?" International Security 26, no. 2 (2001): 87-102. Accessed August 3, 2020. www.jstor.org/stable/3092123.

#humansecurity #paradigmshift #writing #writer