Security Foundations - Literature review Example

Security Foundations Name Institution Date Introduction William (2012) defines security as the situation of being free from any threat or danger. It is a condition where the designing of the systems around people are in a way that guarantees maximum security against any harm. McSweeney (1999) describes security as the display of vulnerability of the society and how easy people have the fear of attack. According to Fisher, Halibozek & Green (2008), security is a relatively predictable environment where individuals can undertake their activities without any fear of disruption of harm. Security serves the role of managing the threats that pose risk to the society. The idea of having security is all about protecting the community at all dimensions. This essay aims at reviewing the literature on the topic of security as a means of providing answers to whether security at all costs is an ethical justification to protect the community. Baldwin (1997) views security in an ethical perspective whereby people aim at promoting values essential to the society. He says that all individuals, families, states, as well as other actors, value security. Therefore, ensuring security has a low probability of damaging the acquired values within the community. It is one way that makes people consider security due to its impact on natural events. According to Burgess & Grams (2011), the majority of insecurity within a community is caused by failed states, civil conflict, natural disasters, disease, small arms, and poverty. Inter-state wars also cause of insecurity among communities. Baldwin (1997) adds that epidemics, earthquakes, droughts and floods are among the various threats to acquired values in the society such as prime values, core values, and marginal values. These are conditions that threaten the social order of people and make them live in fear. Security ensures that humans and at large the community have the vital core freedom and fulfillment (Manunta, 1998). Without social order, there can be no achievement of security. It means that promotion of social values is a must for ensuring that the safety of a community is not threatened at all. The responsibility to protect was a principle aimed at encouraging social order among communities (Global Center for the Responsibility to Protect, 2015). It is one of the normative principles that enhance political change in a nation. It has a connection the sociological theory that involves the study of groups, societies and social life (Michelle, 2014). The society requires security through the maintenance of consensus, values, and norms. These are aspects that influence what people do and why they are the way they are. Tootell (2006) was investigating the application of critical social theory to national security. His study revealed that the use of high-tech solutions is increasingly used for enhancing the safety of nations. Specifically, countries are adopting Location-Based Services (LBS) as one of the measures to protect citizens from any form of external threats. The security systems in many nations today are utilizing high-tech technology so as to protect the countries, their populations, and property. It is an indication that the primary aim of maintaining securing in a nation is to ensure the community is safe. A country like Australia is one that faces security problems that impact negatively on the lives of communities living there. Australia faces security threats such as malicious cyber activity, instability in developing as well as fragile nations, espionage and foreign interference, serious and organized crimes, terrorism and violent extremism, weapons of mass destruction proliferation, state-based conflict and coercion (Australian Government, 2014). Upholding social values is the only way that the state will maintain security for its people. Therefore, Australia is embracing a unified national security system that foresees coercion, protects the nation and shapes the world for the interest of Australia. In his study, Sjostedt (2010) analyzed the social construction of national security in Russia and the United States. The researcher revealed that there was dynamism in threat development by national decision-makers. Sjostedt states that the link between condition and risk framing should not be assumed because the construction of threat varies and is subjective to different actors. The deal with security issues in a country, it is necessary to understand the social discourse within which specific norms and identities interact. Security is a moral choice of learning the values and rules within a nation with the intention of upholding them. Karacasulu & Uzgoren (2007) describes the constructivist as well as the rational approaches to international security and how they have competing perspectives when compared to the European Security and Defense Policy. They contended that constructivist and rationalist approaches had differences in the concepts of cooperation, sovereignty, capability, anarchy, power and conflict. However, the two approaches agree that conflict is the primary cause insecurity for nations and therefore, an aspect that should need a resolution at all costs. Soltani (2012) reviewed rationalism and reflectivism as sources of danger that may increase due to international politics. Soltani adds that constructivism is a useful measure of addressing rationalism, realism liberalism, and reflectivism by closing the gap between the reflectivists and rationalists. The practice of social order improves the internal norms of a nation that work together to deter the threat posed by the enemy by compromising security in the national territory. Here, the internal rules of a country are the necessity for the maintenance of safety for the communities there to prevail. Kim (2009) says that an emphasis on the sources of insecurity both internal and external is significant for a nation. Domestic and external order depicts the stability of a country and the security for its people. Therefore, promoting economic as well as institutional capabilities, proactively considering local conditions and cultural differences are essential measures to ensure the safety for a nation. Ajodo-Adebanjoko & Walter (2014) were investigating poverty and the challenges of insecurity to development. Their study showed that poverty is one of the main causes of instability in a nation with the prone areas characterized by conflict. It means that poverty raises the chances of experiencing conflict within a country that leads to uncertainty for the communities. Poverty disrupts social order by making people violate the required norms and values of the society. Therefore, there is the need for reducing poverty as a primary measure for minimizing violence or conflict among communities that may hinder the development of a country. In a study carried out by Mochizuki (2004), similar findings were evident whereby conflict relates to increased insecurity for the nation. Increased social struggles as well as conflicts deter ethnic character and often ignore the human dimensions of movements, thus making the lives of inhabitants vulnerable to insecurity. There is the need for establishing measures so as to attain human security in the society. Smith & Brooks (2013) denotes that a stable social system is necessary for mitigating the people’s insecurity in the event of conflict. Ordinary people need mechanisms that can help them in resolving their disputes and conflicts. The place of social institutions and social relations play a significant role in meeting this security aspect of enhancing the process of conflict resolution. The reason is that these institutions are the structures as well as mechanisms that govern and promote social order and cooperation in the behavior of people within the society. In mapping contours of violence, Mbugua (2013) revealed that scarcity of resources, state fragility, and lack of social cohesion, organized armed groups, weapon proliferation and lack of national vision are among the many causes of conflict within the society. The people remain unstable with structural causes of conflict remaining eminent in these communities. The international community has a role to play in enhancing security for threatened communities in vulnerable countries. Developing professional as well as global security sector, the protection of human rights and ensuring accountability in leadership, is a measure that will work a greater distance in achieving safety in such societies. It requires consistent development of actions and plans for revitalizing peace, security and development through collaborative strategies. Social deviance is said to be the primary cause of insecurity whereby violators transgress from the established social norms. The basis of achieving security begins with preventing the drift to deviance through improved social conditions, education, community relations, and opportunities for employment among others (Smith & Brooks, 2013). Providing security for the population means minimizing any risk that may hinder their living in peace. A vulnerable community is one exposed to insecurity. When working towards achieving safety, the nation aims at managing the risk of threat for its communities. Therefore, preventing, responding, recovering and being prepared to achieve security through the reduction of vulnerability are fundamental for any nation. Fischer & Green (2004) says that a sensible, approach when applied to a complicated problem, allows the management of risk in a manner that is logical. It means that the insecurity within a nation or community being a complex issue requires a logical process to deal with to mitigate any potential losses that may occur with the associated risks. Glanvile (2012) states that collective responsibility from the international community for the protection of populations beyond borders is an important initiative. It will help keep them safe from the mass atrocities when the host countries fail. It seems that the entire goal of security is to achieve social order within the community. Therefore, at all costs, communities must be protected from any harm or fear. Garrigues (2007) denotes that the responsibility to protect is an ethical principle that demands service of humanitarian rights and policies should be implemented with the aim to balance the interests of the State as well as international solidarity. In that sense, impartiality should remain the core principle of ensuring security for the community. Insecurity violates the human rights of communities and giving security at all costs to protect the unguarded communities is ethically justified. As a way of ensuring security humanitarian intervention is morally justified because, without it, good inhabitants will perish in the hands of states that act unilaterally (Sapolsky, 2012). Conclusion Since security is all about protecting human rights, preserving the dignity of the community, it is ethical to consider the violation of these rights and needs at the center when making security decisions. Besides, the sovereignty of a country should not prevent the provision of safety for the community. Ethical obligations must override the sovereignty, and national interest of the state to protect the interest of the society. Ethics is all about ensuring a peaceful society through doing what is right, and security involves taking measures that are suitable for the purpose protecting the community. Therefore, from sociological theory, constructivism, humanitarian intervention, improved social relations, and order, security at all costs is an ethical justification to protect the community. References Ajodo-Adebanjoko, A., & Walter, U. (2014). Poverty and the Challenges of Insecurity to Development. European Scientific Journal, 10(14): 1857 – 7881 Australia Government. (2014). Guide to Australia’s National Security Capability. National Security. Baldwin, D. (1997). The concept of security. Review of International Studies, 23:5-26 Burgess, P., & Grams, J. (2011). Chapter 5: Human Security. In Snyder, C. (2011). Contemporary Security and Strategy. Palgrave Macmillan. Fischer, J.F., & Green, G. (2004). Introduction to security. 7th ed. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann. Fisher, J., F., Halibozek, E., & Green, G. (2008). Introduction to Security. Chapter 1. (8th ed.). Butterworth-Heinemann. Burlington. 3-17. Garrigues, J. (2007). The responsibility to protect: from an ethical principle to an effective policy. FRIDE’s Peace, Security and Human Rights programme. Glanvile, L. (2012). The Responsibility to Protect Beyond Borders, Human Rights Law Review. 1-32. Global Center for the Responsibility to Protect. (2015). R2P Focal Points. New York. Retrieved from http://www.globalr2p.org/our_work/r2p_focal_points Karacasulu, N. & Uzgoren, E. (2007). Explaining Social Constructivist Contributions to Security Studies. Perceptions . Kim, T. (2009). The Sources of Insecurity in the Third World: External or Internal? WIAS Discussion Paper No.2008-007. Waseda University/WIAS. McSweeney, B. (1999). Security, Identity, and Interests: A Sociology of International Relations. Cambridge University Press. Manunta, G. (1998). Security an Introduction. Section 1: what is Security. Cranfield University. 11-36. Mbugua, J. (2013). Drivers of Insecurity in Somalia: Mapping Contours of Violence. Occasional Paper, Series, 4. No.3. The International Peace Support Training Centre. Michelle., D. (2014). Introduction to Sociological Theory. Chapter 2: Social facts and the nature of society. 84-97. Mochizuki, K. (2004). Chapter 10 Conflict and Peoples’ Insecurity: An Insight from the Experiences of Nigeria. IPSHU English Research Report Series No.19. Conflict and Human Security: A Search for New Approaches of Peace-building. Sapolsky, H. (2012). Is Humanitarian Intervention Ever Morally Justified? International Relations. Sjostedt, R. (2010). Talking Threats. The Social Construction of National Security in Russia and the United States. Acta Universities Upsaliensis. Report/Department of Peace and Conflict Research, 91: 47-77. Smith, C., & Brooks, D. (2013). Security Science: The theory and practice of security. Chapter 1. Elsevier. Oxford. 1-21. Soltani, F. (2012). The Concept of Security in the Theoretical Approaches Research Journal of International Studies, 1:7-17. Tootell, H. (2006). The Application of Critical Social Theory to National Security Research. Prometheus: Critical Studies in Innovation, 24(4): 405-411. Williams, P. (2012). Security studies. Chapter 1: What is Security. (2nd ed.). Taylor and Francis group. New York. 6-11. Read More

His study revealed that the use of high-tech solutions is increasingly used for enhancing the safety of nations. Specifically, countries are adopting Location-Based Services (LBS) as one of the measures to protect citizens from any form of external threats. The security systems in many nations today are utilizing high-tech technology so as to protect the countries, their populations, and property. It is an indication that the primary aim of maintaining securing in a nation is to ensure the community is safe.

A country like Australia is one that faces security problems that impact negatively on the lives of communities living there. Australia faces security threats such as malicious cyber activity, instability in developing as well as fragile nations, espionage and foreign interference, serious and organized crimes, terrorism and violent extremism, weapons of mass destruction proliferation, state-based conflict and coercion (Australian Government, 2014). Upholding social values is the only way that the state will maintain security for its people.

Therefore, Australia is embracing a unified national security system that foresees coercion, protects the nation and shapes the world for the interest of Australia. In his study, Sjostedt (2010) analyzed the social construction of national security in Russia and the United States. The researcher revealed that there was dynamism in threat development by national decision-makers. Sjostedt states that the link between condition and risk framing should not be assumed because the construction of threat varies and is subjective to different actors.

The deal with security issues in a country, it is necessary to understand the social discourse within which specific norms and identities interact. Security is a moral choice of learning the values and rules within a nation with the intention of upholding them. Karacasulu & Uzgoren (2007) describes the constructivist as well as the rational approaches to international security and how they have competing perspectives when compared to the European Security and Defense Policy. They contended that constructivist and rationalist approaches had differences in the concepts of cooperation, sovereignty, capability, anarchy, power and conflict.

However, the two approaches agree that conflict is the primary cause insecurity for nations and therefore, an aspect that should need a resolution at all costs. Soltani (2012) reviewed rationalism and reflectivism as sources of danger that may increase due to international politics. Soltani adds that constructivism is a useful measure of addressing rationalism, realism liberalism, and reflectivism by closing the gap between the reflectivists and rationalists. The practice of social order improves the internal norms of a nation that work together to deter the threat posed by the enemy by compromising security in the national territory.

Here, the internal rules of a country are the necessity for the maintenance of safety for the communities there to prevail. Kim (2009) says that an emphasis on the sources of insecurity both internal and external is significant for a nation. Domestic and external order depicts the stability of a country and the security for its people. Therefore, promoting economic as well as institutional capabilities, proactively considering local conditions and cultural differences are essential measures to ensure the safety for a nation.

Ajodo-Adebanjoko & Walter (2014) were investigating poverty and the challenges of insecurity to development. Their study showed that poverty is one of the main causes of instability in a nation with the prone areas characterized by conflict. It means that poverty raises the chances of experiencing conflict within a country that leads to uncertainty for the communities. Poverty disrupts social order by making people violate the required norms and values of the society. Therefore, there is the need for reducing poverty as a primary measure for minimizing violence or conflict among communities that may hinder the development of a country.

Read More