Controversy Surrounding Security - Essay Example

Controversy Surrounding Security Introduction Security is the freedom from danger, or as a sense of safety. Security acts to instil protection against attacks and ensure certainty. Security also is the organisation whose mandate is to provide safety. The field of security is debated globally because it is fundamental in shaping International and domestic associations. A contested concept is one that is understood differently by diverse people. This means that the concept exists, but there is no distinct agreement on the significance of the concept. Security is vital for states, families, individual people and others. All the actors who value security have to sacrifice other values for them to enjoy their necessities for security. It is important to imagine a life without security. Security is the most important determinant in the accessibility of other considerable values such as freedom and opulence. The argument that security is a critical requirement is flawed in equivalent measures. There is no clear validation implying that security is attainable. It does not mean that all sacrifices made in the quest for security always end up in finding the comfort attributed to the security. People argue that they forgo the security at the top of high mountains an instead live in places with abundant food or water (Peou, 2010). Three levels of security are considered. These levels are national, international and global security. The national security differs depending on the state’s political culture. In the 17th century, national security was the liability of a state to protect itself against external attacks. After the cold war, the state ceased to be the only player in the security issue. There was emergence of individual security, environmental and economic security. After the Cold War, states inclined towards diplomacy in order to gain security. There was emergence of religious and cultural related security problems (Peou, 2010). The issue of minority groups also emerged, bringing into consideration of the violation of human rights. Globalization transformed the study of international security. Global security and threats were conceptualised after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States. This attack exposed the definition of war and redefined insecurity (Reidy, 2005). The role of a state in the protection of her borders has been questioned. The use of advanced technology emerged after the attacks. Various nations such as China have found their security by strengthening the economic base. It has achieved more domestic and international stability on the international scene. It is impossible to protect the state from advanced forms of insecurity such as disease and environmental risks (Nagel, 2002). Resource allotment is a crisis that defines security as a contested concept. Globally, there is a dispute on what security should focus on. Different nations hold diverse views on security focusing on individuals, the state, or the globe at large. Historically, the security concept emphasizes on National security and strengthening of a state’s military capacity. After the end of the cold war, security focal point has broadened. Legislators are encouraged to focus more on the surfacing of international security and human security acts. Human security essentially focuses the concept of security of the citizens who live within a state. Threats face the human security, which suggest that it should be part of the International Relations discipline (Reidy, 2005). Environmental change is as a security concern. In international systems, states are units that struggle for power alongside other states. Nations achieve power by fortifying their military to secure their land from the threats from other states (The Security Council, 2012). A state makes decisions rationally, because her main basis of international relations is to achieve that which is best for the state. This argument is based on the realist theory, which highlights the disorder existing in the international system. Nations that assess their power by military muscle power are known as realists. In the Cold War, the USA and the USSR were realists who administered nuclear weapons. They used their realism to maintain a status quo. It is just since then that state governments have prioritised security. With the emergence of International politics, states have to attain power and at the same time have the capability of shielding attacks from other nations (Nagel, 2002). This means states have to form alliances that will permit them to benefit from better economic ties because of the wider resource pool available amongst the alliance member states. This is referred to as external balancing. Apart from being in alliances with other states, individual states need advanced military forces to be in charge of the protection against external attacks. The state has to balance her economic strength with the formation of the military size. This is Internal Balancing. A security dilemma comes about due to the competition between states. There is a tendency of some nations in alliances to cheat, hence limiting the cooperation. Realist nations believe that the possibility of cheating is more likely than the possibility of honest engagement (The Security Council, 2012). States majorly centre on their own gains and relative gains but they do not focus on absolute gains. Relative gains are higher on the side of a single state than that of the state they are cooperating with. Absolute gains are gains that set to inculcate cooperation and support amongst states. Absolute gains are not the preserve of realist nations, because states aim at maximising their own benefits from cooperation. This often causes mistrust. States are political entities that do not engage in long-term collaboration. According to the presumption of realism, states employ the notion of self-help to struggle for power and survival. This survival and power for states is in the international system, but it is a narrow concept that does not regard security as an issue that is addressed from within the state. This means that this concept does not consider security for a people within the boundaries of a state. Human security acts to safeguard the lives of all humans. These vital cores of human lives ensure that people enjoy their freedoms and fulfilment. Human security emerged as an essential concept after the Cold war (Harper, 2011). This concept engages the entire security agenda. The Cold War encouraged the international community to put more emphasis on human rights. This means that any state that violates human rights could attract the intervention of the international community (Harper, 2011). Human rights are those rights that any human being is entitled to by virtue of their human nature. These rights grant each human being the right to treatment with equality. Human rights are enjoyed by every human being, which makes them inalienable (Burke, 2007). Human rights are not divisible. Human rights are interdependent. This means that a harmonizing framework is in place to ensure human beings enjoy these rights. Abuse of human rights means a person is treated in a manner to imply that he or she is not a human being. Human rights also bar those people claiming their rights from infringing on the rights of other people. The core debate surrounding the issues of human right is the division of the freedom from fear and the freedom from want. Freedom of fear refers to the more ancient types of insecurity like the armed conflicts. Insecurity due to the freedom of fear includes that of child soldiers and landmines. On the other hand, freedom of want defines a threat that is non-military in nature. Such threats are poverty, disease and the degradation of the environment. Development is a key condition for the realisation of the human security. For human development to be achieved, there has to security. Freedom of fear engages armed conflict, which results in either injury or death or both. The credibility of human security associated with the freedom from fear is questioned when the victims of armed conflicts are majorly civilians (Dempsey, 2012). The engagement of child soldiers in war is an issue in armed conflicts in the modern day world. The fear of landmines instils insecurity. A large number of 80 million people perish due to stepping into landmines. Eighty percent of those killed or injured by landmines are civilians. This threatens civilians and exposes the population living in panic of conflicts. Wars affect women who are the apparent victims of sexual slavery, rape and torture. Conflicting states use rape and torture in recent conflicts as a gauge of fear and control. Rape is considered a crime against humanity (Dempsey, 2012). Women also face human trafficking and forceful recruitment into sexual trade. This degrades the comfort of the women and is a violation of fundamental human rights. Armed conflicts cause harm on individuals whenever violence is applied. Such conflicts also create a non-violent peril to the security of citizens. When armed conflict is engaged, the civilians suffer due to poverty. This is because the economic activities within a region of conflict fail to progress due to the conflict (Murk, 2009). Disease and hunger also strike, making it even harder to provide the essential right to medical treatment, food and water. These consequences have indirect implications on the livelihoods of people. Poor public health and nutrition hinder the economic prosperity of a state that is in armed conflict. Wars also cause major effects on the environment. This creates conditions that pollute land and air. This links diseases to the conflict. Even after a conflict has ended, the effects of environmental degradation are felt for many years that follow. The poor state of the environment leads to scarcity of water and food. This in itself leads to a conflict. Human security contains a number of concepts. It is impossible to ensure that all people are secure, but there is a necessity to identify the most vulnerable people and secure them. Liberalist nations, unlike their realist counterparts, focus more on the coordination of international ties. The liberalists believe that international relations are shaped more by cooperation rather than competition (Ahmed, 2005). Wide range of political participation and knowledge have emerged and weakened the views of the realist nations. Non-state organisations play a relatively huge role in the security of the state. Behaviourists utilize the objectives employed by biologists to study the reactions of humans towards peace and war. The behaviourists put more emphasis on the behaviours of main players in the intimidation or maintenance of security (Murk, 2009). Constructivists study the human nature to help them in interpreting international security. The constructivists maintain a positive perception in studying the global security. The United Nations Security Council is the formal organisation that is tasked with overseeing the security of the world. The Security Council has of five permanent members. This council dispatches operations related to the military. It imposes sanctions, and is in charge of deployment of elections monitors (White, 2011). The presidency of the council rotates amongst the five countries. The council operates as a parliament, and as a secret diplomatic union. The council conducts its businesses in secrecy (Grant, 2008). The council visits regions that are conflict strife, and produces the panellists who release the United Nations’ revealing reports. The United Nations Security Council resolves International conflicts by imposing sanctions. Sanctions are limitations that ban the involvement of a state in various activities. The UNSC is capable of imposing sanctions on trade, travel or supplies of arms. Sanctions that are imposed by this council consider the humanity and legality of the proposals (Ahmed, 2005). The council deploys missions that represent the international community in peacekeeping. These missions bring armed forces and troops to the conflict areas directly. This is the largest activity that the United Nation undertakes, and is the most costly. The operation of a mission is often questioned especially when there is massive appliance of force. The UNSC reviews the information of natural resources that fuel conflicts (White, 2011). Such resources as timber, water, oil and minerals can be a basis of conflict. The council examines the accessibility and use of small arms and weapons in conflict. The contested concept on the United Nation Security Council is its membership. Many states sustain the actions of the UNSC reform programme that will look deeply into the membership (Grant, 2008). The reforms will also iron out the transparency of the claims by certain states against others claiming to acquire the permanent status. Conclusion. Security is a contested concept depending on the perceptive from which you look at it. For the realists, it entails national security, gain of power and self-help for survival in the international structure. For human and environmental security, the concept is between armed conflicts that cause harm and danger to human security. In turn, the human insecurity causes environmental degradation, which ends up affecting the individuals again (Burke, 2007). The planet faces escalating security problems. The only way to secure the future generations from future security risks, we have to reform the security issues as technology develops with time. Bibliography  Ahmed, N. (2005). The war on truth: 9/11, disinformation, and the anatomy of terrorism. Northampton, Mass.: Olive Branch Press. Burke, A. (2007). What security makes possible some thoughts on critical security studies? Canberra: Dept. of International Relations, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University. Dempsey, M. (2012). Joint operational access concept (JOAC) (Version 1.0. Ed.). Washington, D.C.: Dept. of Defence.   Grant, R. (2008). The Cold War. Mankato, Minn.: Arcturus Pub. Harper, J. (2011). The Cold War. Oxford: Oxford University Press.  Murk, J. (2009). Islam rising: The never-ending jihad against America and the West. Nagel, W. (2002). The law enforcement approach to combating terrorism: An analysis of US policy. Monterey, Calif.: Naval Postgraduate School.ngfield, Mo.: 21st Century Press. Peou, S. (2010). Peace and security in the Asia-Pacific theory and practice. Westport, CT: Praeger Security International. Reidy, D., & Sellers, M. (2005). Universal Human Rights Moral Order in a Divided World. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. The Security Council: Working methods handbook. (2012). New York: United Nations. United Nations seminar on implementing UN Security Council Resolution 1540 in Africa 9-10 November 2006 Accra, Ghana. (2007). New York: United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs. White, G. (2011). Climate change and migration: Security and borders in a warming world. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Read More