The Greatest Threats to Our Security in the 21st Century - Research Proposal Example

What are the greatest threats we face to our security in the 21st Century? Introduction The world has changed drastically over the past century - countries have been made, others have been taken over while others have been wiped out. From colonialism to regionalism and now globalism, the world has indeed changed in its political make up and association. The geo-political map is not merely demarcated into regional associations like Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), European Union (EU), North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), and Mediterranean countries (MEDA) etc. Most of the association and cooperation are trade related but the essence of their policies are political in nature for better understanding the needs and dynamics of the nation states. Since the development of these regions affects each country, they offer critical opportunities and threats to individuals living in these countries (Dent 1998). In fact Marsden (2004) declares the world to be one of hyper globalisation, where the individual has more power than his/her previously held status of citizenry. As a result, they raise challenges of global security and development in the 21st century. Conflict and cooperation among states therefore have deeper implications on internal structure of the state as well as on the international system. What is more interesting is the fact that traditional concept of balance of power is no longer subsumed by the same principles as during the World Wars or the Cold War. Today countries have to devise new types of principles and policies to harness their position in the world order, and to secure their interests - from issues of economic development to defence strategy (Forest 2006). The ultimate goal is to ensure that the state survives and maintain control over its resources. Any element which is thought to imbalance this status quo is considered to be a security threat. Statement In the following discussion the researcher shall explore the historical development of security threats, and pinpoint its present form in the 21st century. Security Threats in the 21st Century - Historical Development The international political order today is difficult to predict due to the social structure, domestic political order, and the political community which have developed to legalise political power for autonomy and independence. Generally, the construction of the Western nation-state according to Lawson (2002) has formed global expansion and hegemony which largely gave rise to concepts of sovereignty, territorialism and societal international relations. After World War II, the balance of power concept has been replaced by the realism theory of international relations. Realism theory can be explained as the conflict and cooperation between states inherent in its approach to security policies. This school of thought have dominated the period of the Cold War when threats were considered to be the states vulnerability to perceived military offenses. However, the emergence of a bipolar world meant that the state which possessed nuclear technology had dominance over the world (Forest 2006). The world was then divided into the haves and have nots. The balance of power no longer resided with the economically or geographically powerful but with those states which had dominant military power. The United States of America for example emerged as one of the most powerful countries after WWII which engaged in armed conflicts and established military bases in countries like South Korea, Japan, Kuwait, Philippines, Iraq and now Afghanistan. The American dominance however was replaced by China when the Chinese opened its doors to the international markets. Through international trade, China today have established strategic presence in the global schema, and inevitably tipped the balance of power (Richardson 2004). The tug of war in the relationship between China and the US have characterised other nations international relations too such as India and Pakistan, and North and South Korea. And through them emerged individual states security threats - each one strategising and establishing their own power the other. This proliferation of power struggle though was not a new concept have facilitated a new type of war - disputes at the local political level in which individuals responded to security threats according to their own perception. One example was the Tiananmen Square outrage (Chapman 2001). Moreover, the new focus in the post-Cold War era was on changing the international relations among the political community, the moral dimensions as well as perspectives on human nature. The world was now the cosmopolis or universal community of humankind, which needed to follow policies with moral purpose. These ideas gave rise to the transformations of the role of the Christian church, the Muslim ulemas, and other religious organisations in political governance. Even the diplomatic relations, also have the moral obligations to observe and comply to the environmental law as well (Lawson 2002) As Kenichi Ohmae, a leading globalist notes: "The Nation-State has become an unnatural, even dysfunctional, unit for organising human activity and managing economic endeavour in a borderless world. It represents no genuine, shared community of economic interests; it defines no meaningful flows of economic activity. In fact, it overlooks the true linkages and synergies that exist among often disparate populations by combining important measures of human activity at the wrong level of analysis... “(Lawson 2002, p.211). Since political boundaries were superimposed by political fiat, physical borders became defined by the region states which influenced trade, and other human activities. - Security Defined From international relations perspectives diplomacy referred to "influence attempts relying primarily on negotiation" (Brown 2001, p.87). Through diplomacy states were establishing economic and military statecraft’s which referred to influence attempts relying on economic and weapons resources to negotiate individual positions. From polarisation to bipolar diplomacy the face of international relations have changed to autonomous authority among states, and how they exercised their rights to influence other states. Thus the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) with the Supreme Allied Military Commander in Europe (SACEUR) could exert legitimate authority on behalf of NATO countries to influence other states which resisted control (Brown 2001). In the face of such autonomous authority and legitimacy among nation-states, security became an issue of individual perception. According to Buzan, Wæver and Wilde (1998) security can be defined as "rooted in the traditions of power politics" and "about survival". Security issue was one which "pose an existential threat to a designated reference object" which may be a state, territory, government, or society. The nature of security was such that "its threats justify the use of extraordinary measures to handle them" (Buzan, Waever and Wilde 1998, p.21). This definition was pervasive, and covered the essence of human existence, which can vary greatly over multiple dimensions - from natural existence to military survival to political constituents. Hence, if a foreign firm declared itself bankrupt in a foreign country, it will have as much legitimate right to declare itself threatened as a nation state attacked by military force. Alternately, Steele (2008) stated that pursued social actions served self-identity needs. When this was compromised, it was considered to be under threats. Steele established that nation-states may take social actions to impress their self-identity and to fulfil their requirements for structurisation with the assumption that "nation states have one driving goal in their relations with other states - their own survival." (Steele 2008, p.2) This was why security was imperative for foreign policy decisions, physical security, and social actions. - Globalisation and the International Order According to the above definition of security, the world is made up of its environment - from the natural resources to urban landscape, geographical boundaries, economic standing to trade associations and diplomatic relations. Moreover, the cascade of the globalisation has made it highly interdependent. As Giddens (1990) defines globalisation as: "... the intensification of world-wide social relations which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away, and vice versa." According to this definition, the transformative and spatial nature of social relations in the global world has deep implications on its existence. Whether through trade, social relations, communication or technology, nation-states are highly influenced by identities or events in other destinations. The fact that the global nation-states are characterised by state-centric, security blocs, neo-imperialism and hegemony dependence make them vulnerable to different types of security threats than the traditional military force of violence. Actors have changed to the form of government, laws, MNCs, economic member of association and so on. For example US MNCs have imposing position in Latin American and sub-Saharan African nation states because the US has hegemonic powers over these nations (Marsden 2004). From this interdependent state of existence, the concept of international order have emerged which can be defined as "the result of a combination of factors such as shared values and objectives; explicit or tacit rules of conduct; the size, character, power and policies of the states belonging to a given order; the domestic political systems; the nature, perception and the pursuit of common and conflicting interests; and common institutions and policies." (Hieronymi and Currat 2004, p.198). The international order thus has become the new world paradigm of existence with progresses including establishment of the market economy in communist countries; enlargement of the Eastern wing of NATO and EU, peaceful diplomatic relations between Russia and NATO, and integration of China in the WTO (World Trade Organisation), and the peaceful rule in South Africa etc. Security threats therefore are considered to be any element that displaces the balance of the status quo in the context of the international order (Hieronymi and Currat 2004). - Terrorism At the end of the 1970s, Afghanistan had become the platform for Soviet Union and US power struggle because after the Cold War these two nations became the major political forces of the world. From that point in time, through the 1980s, the Soviet and the US continued to establish their power of communism and democracy in various regions of the world. However, with the collapse of the Soviet in the 1980s and during the 1990s, the US began developing other interests (namely China) to invest its efforts in military might. Afghanistan became the breeding ground for internal conflicts which proliferated to the international arena today as terrorism (Freedman 2007; Hieronymi and Jasson 2004). However, historical studies reveal that terrorism have been the result of conflicts or aggressions affecting economic, political and social interests among nations such as Palestine, Israel, Afghanistan, Iraq, Balkans, sub-Saharan Africa, Chechnya, Kosovo, Indonesia, and Pakistan for a long time even before the Afghan debacle. Terrorist organisations emerged from these nations and have become the driving force of local and international conflicts supported by private financial organisations which have origins in the Western or Middle East world. Thus, "Terrorism by its very nature disrupts international peace and security through premeditated, political violence" (DiPerna and Baldwin 2007, p.407). Local history demonstrated that socio-economic conditions as well as political strives have led organisations within these nation states to emerge because of the lack of power politics. During the Persian Gulf War in 1991 when members of the intelligentsia became separate from the local bodies which were often sympathetic to terrorist cells gave rise to the emergence of terrorism. The events of September 11, 2001 demonstrate the results of this type of conflict. Terrorist conflicts stem from various social and economic factors - high commodity prices, dominance of oil countries, poverty, political structures and civil strife etc. These issues establishes that the worlds problems have become critical for international community to resolve collectively which otherwise would have grave consequences at the home front (Freedman 2007; Sommaruga 2004). - Environment Security threats do not only undermine the power of politics. In fact the power of conflict also has grave consequences on violating human rights, dignity, illiteracy, and poverty. One of the major concerns for the international community is human security. According to Sommaruga (2004), globalisation may have positive aspects but it also has many negative influence. Workers are often considered illegal because of migration problems. Others are considered to be too poor and illiterate to work in Western developed countries. Militarisation and marginalisation have segregated the worlds population to the under developed and the developed. Those in developed countries enjoy the luxury and protection of superior infrastructures while those in under-developed countries have to conform to the dictates of the rich countries. One major problem that has emerged from this power imbalance is the deterioration of the environment and control of resources. While biotechnological development, medical advancement and military might help the developed nations to protect its people against epidemics, bio weaponry attacks, military attacks, and natural environment disasters, the poor countries are vulnerable to the environment made insecure by developed industrial countries (Glenn and Gordon 2002; Willets 1996). Organisations like the European Council predict the future shall be filled with conflict over climate change and its impact on human survival and raise questions of security issues. Conflict over control of resources such as arable land, water sources, food and fish stocks, and agricultural production would inevitably lead to security risks, and proliferation of military force violence. Not only this, ultimately climate change would accelerate these problems and force nation states to reconsider their position in the food chain (European Council 2008). - Organised crime, financial crimes and cyber crimes Traditional criminals do not violate national borders. However, today with the emergence of the global world, transnational crime is becoming common since nation states have provided fundamental attributes to sovereignty to every country through international world order. Frauds, financial crimes, drug trafficking as well as money laundering are becoming the source for national security threats. The fact that the world is borderless put up even more challenges for security forces to curb legitimate financial and organised criminal activities (Wiener 2007). The global world allows free financial flow from one country to the other with minimal checking especially in countries like the US, UK and other G7 countries which enjoy diplomatic immunity. Since these countries have protection from international laws devised by the United Nations, European Union or the UN Conventions, the practice of drug trafficking, human trafficking, money laundering, and fraud become easy for its citizenry or those who pose as one (Wiener 2007). Moreover, similar globalisation of the online environment has given rise to the trend of cyber crimes. Since major information portals of national organisations are online nowadays as well as peoples personal information easily available, attackers are finding new ways to compromise information of legitimate citizenry. The damage is difficult to predict, nevertheless the effects and impact are manifolds ranging from disconnnectivity to loss of identity. More dangerous are attacks on military and intelligence organisations portals which leave the organisations vulnerable to sophisticated cyber attacks and may cripple the government (Lewis 2009). Conclusions From the above discussion, one understand that the world today have come a long way in terms of policies development, international order, cooperation, and collaboration. With these, nation states around the world have developed protective blocs to protect their interests which may range from food stock to military assets. Nevertheless, despite the change in the international political order, the nature of security threats has also transformed. Or rather today security threats are no longer perceived as nuclear or military weaponry offensive only. They proliferate beyond these boundaries, reflecting the nature of the globalised world. Like the borderless trade environment, security threats transcend borders and can take the form of terrorism, environment deterioration, scarcity of food stocks or decrease in natural resources. It can happen in the physical world or it can take place in the cyber world. Security threats are real but they have emerged from the new changed environment and target its vulnerability. Thus, if the US and other Western countries are information dependent, then cyber crimes may cripple its nation state. If poverty is the characteristics of an Asian country, then scarcity of food stocks and water sources can lead the nation to death. Unlike the old world, the new international order is one of interdependence. This is the reason why it is even more vulnerable to the threats posed to the nation-states. As Giddens have established, events happening at one place may affect the events in another location. If a financial crisis happens in the US, its implications can be vast across the world. Alternatively, if a treaty of peace agreement is signed among two countries like Russia and the US, peace shall prevail in countries which follow the dictums of Russia and the US. Security therefore are no longer tangible and reflect military might but the nation-states ability to affiliate itself to organisations or association which protect its interests and ensure its survival. References Baldwin, F. N. and DiPerna, T.A. (2007) The rule of law: An essential component of the financial war against organized crime and terrorism in the Americas. Journal of Financial Crime. Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 405-437 Brown, C. (2001) Understanding international relations. Palgrave Macmillan. Buzan, B., Waever, O. and Wilde, J. (1998) Security: a new framework for analysis. Lynne Rienner Publishers. Chapman, B. (2001) US-China national security relationship: a resource guide. Collection Building. Volume 20 Number 3, pp. 131±143 Dent, C. M. (1998) Regionalism in Southeast Asia: opportunities and threats for the European Union. European Business Review. Volume 98 Number 4, pp. 184–195 European Council (2008) Climate Change and International Security. Paper from the High Representative and the European Commission to the European Council. S113/08. Forest, J. J. (2006) Homeland Security: Borders and points of entry. Greenwood Publishing Group. Freedman, L. (2007) International Security in an Age of Choice. Journal of Financial Crime, Vol. 6 No. 1. Giddens, A. (1990), The Consequences of Modernity, Polity Press, Cambridge. Glenn, J. C. and Gordon, T. J. (2002) Future international environmental security issues and potential military requirements. Foresight, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 12-25. Hieronymi, O. and Currat, C. (2004) The complexity and the organizing principles of international order. foresight. Volume 6 Number 4, pp. 198-203 Hieronymi, O. and Jasson, C. (2004) The foundations of the expanding Atlantic Community. foresight. Volume 6 Number 4, pp. 232-236 Lawson, S. (2002) The new agenda for international relations. Wiley-Blackwell. Lewis, J. A. (Accessed 15 December 2009) "Fog of Cyberwar: Discouraging Deterrence" International Relations and Security Network. Available at: http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Current-Affairs/Special-Reports/The-Fog-of-Cyberwar/Deterrence/ Marsden, C. T. (2004) Hyperglobalized individuals: the Internet, globalization, freedom and terrorism. foresight. Volume 6 · Number 3, pp. 128-140 Richardons, J. (2004) Modern warfare: no foresight without foreboding. Foresight. Volume 6 Number 1, pp. 6-9 Sommaruga, C. (2004) The global challenge of human security. foresight. Volume 6 Number 4, pp. 208-211 Steele, B. (2008) Ontological security in international relations: self-identity and the IR state. Routledge. Wiener, J. (2007) Money Laundering: Transnational Criminals, Globalisation and the Forces of Redomestication. Money Laundering: Transnational Criminals. Willetts, P. (1996) "Who cares about the environment?" in The Environment and International Relations by John Vogler and Mark Imber. Routledge. Additional Readings Agathangelou, A. & Ling, L. (2004) ‘Power, Borders, Security, Wealth: Lessons of Violence and Desire from September 11’, International Studies Quarterly, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 517-538. Alexander, Y. and Swetnam, M. eds. (1999) Cyber terrorism and information warfare. Dobbs Ferry, N.Y.:Oceana Publications. Baldwin, Peter (2005), Disease and Democracy: The Industrialized World Faces AIDS. Berkeley: University of California Press. Bell, J. B. (1978) A time of terror: how democratic societies respond to revolutionary violence. New York: Basic Books. Biehl, João (2007), Will to Live: AIDS Therapies and the Politics of Survival. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Campbell, Duncan (1999) Development of Surveillance Technology and Risk of Abuse of Economic Information(AKAInterception Capabilities 2000), Luxembourg: European Parliament, Directorate General for Research, Directorate A, The STOA Programme. Cooley, J. K. (1999) Unholy wars: Afghanistan, America, and international terrorism. London ; Sterling, Va.: Pluto Press. Graham, S. and Marvin, S. (2001) Splintering Urbanism: Networked Infrastructures, Technological Mobilities and Urban Condition. Routledge, London. Yim, R. A. (2001) Combating terrorism evaluation of selected characteristics in national. DIANE Publishing. Read More