74 | C H A P T E R 3
this responsibility falls to an older sibling or relative from the extended
family. M i g r a n t women often support dependent relatives beyond the
immediate family, thus sustaining "interdependent transnational ties"
i n migration (84). T h e global care chain phenomenon demonstrates viv-
idly the relational nature o f economic insecurity i n the short term and
explains how gender, racial, and class norms related to care w o r k per-
petuate inequalities w i t h i n the global economy.
As Barbara Ehrenreich and Arlie Russell Hochschild note, this pat-
tern o f female migration reflects not only systemic N o r t h - S o u t h and
gender inequality but also what could be called a "world-wide gender
revolution" (2002: 3). As discussed previously, fewer families, i n b o t h
rich and poor families, rely solely on a male breadwinner for household
income. To compound this, the numbers o f people requiring sustained
or continuous care, for example, i n f i r m , elderly, or disabled adults, has
grown (Stasiulis and Bakan 2003: 24). W h e n all adults are w o r k i n g out-
side the home and the state continues to w i t h d r a w from care areas, care
for children, the sick, and the elderly must come from somewhere. I n
the Global South, as previously explained, this care often comes from
older siblings or extended family members. I n the worst cases, it is sim-
ply not provided, and children and other dependents are left to fend for
themselves. I n the Global N o r t h , however, more and more women, w h o
must juggle paid employment w i t h domestic responsibilities, are t u r n -
ing to poorer and more vulnerable populations to help them carry out
their obligations i n the private sphere while c o n t i n u i n g to participate i n
the public sphere.
W h i l e some may choose to see this as a convenient f i t between
women needing care workers and other women needing jobs, the reality
is far more complex. First, this explanation overlooks the role o f men,
w h o have, globally, done little to increase their contribution to care
w o r k i n spite o f the increase i n paid employment o f women. Seen i n this
way, the presence o f i m m i g r a n t nannies does not enable affluent women
to enter the workforce; it enables affluent men to continue avoiding the
second shift (Ehrenreich and Hochschild 2002: 9). Second, a simple
reading o f this phenomenon overlooks the marked failure o f most states
i n the industrialized N o r t h to meet the needs created by its women's
entry into the workforce, t h r o u g h , for example, public child care or paid
care leave (9-10).
"WOMEN'S W O R K " | 75
O f course, it should go w i t h o u t saying that not all women i n the
N o r t h w h o w o r k outside the home have chosen, or indeed are able,
to employ foreign care workers. M a n y employ ethnic or racial minor-
ity women w h o are citizens or permanent residents o f that particular
nation-state; alternatively, they may be illegal immigrants, relied upon
for w o r k such as this to support the economy. Moreover, w o m e n o f color
staff most o f the institutions p r o v i d i n g care, including day cares, pre-
schools, and nursing homes. T h e intensely gendered and raced nature
o f care w o r k can be explained partly by economics; care w o r k is under-
valued and underpaid and regarded as not requiring "skills"—hence, it
perpetuates a cycle o f poverty for many women. I t is also driven, how-
ever, by widespread assumptions that this " k i n d o f w o r k " is suitable
for w o m e n — i n particular, w o m e n o f color. Thus, the failure o f gov-
ernments i n developed countries to respond to the changing nature o f
women's w o r k has resulted i n policies and programs that perpetuate the
gendered, raced, and global division o f care w o r k .
Sex Work, Security, and Morality
Sex service discourse is not so different from discourses on house-
w o r k and caring, all trying to define tasks that can be bought
and sold as well as assert a special human touch. Paid activities
may include the production o f feelings o f intimacy and reciproc-
ity, whether the individuals involved intend them or not, and
despite the fact that overall structures are patriarchal and unjust.
(Agustin 2007: 62)
"Sex t r a f f i c k i n g " is often cited as a key example o f the "new h u m a n
security threats" facing vulnerable individuals—especially vulnerable
young w o m e n — i n a globalized w o r l d . The dominant discourses o f sex
trafficking emerge from media and state representations and convey a
picture o f " v i c t i m s " as a homogenous, passive group. T h i s is i n con-
trast to the active agents o f organized crime w h o engage i n these illegal
activities for their o w n personal economic gain.
U n l i k e the global care economy, w h i c h is widely thought to be
morally unproblematic, the global "sex economy" is rife w i t h moral
discourse. Interestingly, there is little consensus as to what constitutes
76 | C H A P T E R 3
the central ethical debates surrounding these practices. This is reflected
i n the priorities o f various anti-sex-trafficking groups, w h o identify
trafficking as a problem for very different reasons and have very dif-
ferent political agendas w i t h regard to the issue (O'Connell Davidson
2006: 7). Thus, for many states, the problem w i t h sex trafficking arises
out o f issues concerning irregular i m m i g r a t i o n and transnational orga-
nized crime. For human rights N G O s , interest is often based around
labor rights and concerns about "modern slavery" (8). For feminist abo-
litionist groups, often i n coalition w i t h groups f r o m the religious Right,
prostitution and sex trafficking are condemned as a "social e v i l " that
is asserted to be " i m m o r a l " i n that i t is oppressive and exploitative o f
women and/or a threat to marriage and the family (Weitzer 2007: 450).
I t is this group that makes use o f the most explicitly " m o r a l " language
and that has constructed the fight against prostitution and sex traffick-
ing as a moral crusade. The goals o f a moral crusade, furthermore, are
twofold, as Weitzer explains: "These movements . . . see their mission
as a righteous enterprise whose goals are b o t h symbolic (attempting to
redraw or bolster normative boundaries and moral standards) and instru-
mental (providing relief to victims, punishing evildoers)" (2007: 448).
T h i s k i n d o f moral analysis—which relies on the rhetoric o f " g o o d " and
" e v i l " and makes authoritative moral prescriptions about threats to the
moral and social fabric—fails to incorporate critical moral ethnography,
w h i c h , I have argued, is a crucial feature o f feminist moral inquiry. As
Walker argues, it is a central w o r k o f feminist moral analysis to analyze
the discursive spaces that different moral views (and theories o f them)
create and to explore the positions o f agency and distributions o f respon-
sibility that these views foreground or eclipse. Importantly, moreover, it
must look at where moral views are "socially sited" and what relations o f
authority and power hold them i n place ( M . Walker 1999: 75).
T h e moral crusades against prostitution and organized crime fail
to understand prostitution and sex trafficking i n the wider social-moral
contexts o f the transnationalization o f women's sex and care w o r k and
the normative structures that uphold those processes. A combination
o f economic, social, and demographic factors has led to these devel-
opments. T h e broad structural conditions o f globalization have led to
the g r o w t h o f "alternative circuits o f survival i n developing countries."
The "growing immiseration" o f governments and whole economies i n the
"WOMEN'S W O R K " | 77
South has "promoted and enabled the proliferation o f survival and profit-
m a k i n g activities that involve the migration and trafficking o f (low-wage
and poor) w o m e n " (Sassen 2002: 255). I n spite o f discursive and policy
efforts to separate sex workers f r o m other forms o f migrant female labor,
all o f this global women's w o r k may be traced, i n large measure, to the
same broad norms and processes. As Audrey M a c k l i n argues, there is a
global demand for "women's w o r k " that can no longer be supplied by
women i n affluent, developed states. W h i l e the types and nature o f this
work differ somewhat, all these forms o f labor can be made sense o f only
when viewed through the lens o f global gendered relations o f power.
Thus, as M a c k l i n points out, sex-trade workers supply sex, live-in care-
givers perform c h i l d care and housework, and so-called mail-order brides
furnish all three. A l t h o u g h sex-trade workers are "frequently c r i m i n a l -
ized as prostitutes and 'mail-order brides' are not formally designated as
workers (insofar as their labour is unpaid), these migrations occur w i t h i n
a commercialized context where the expectation o f economic benefit (to
the women and to relatives i n the country o f origin) structures the incen-
tives for entering the process" ( M a c k l i n 2003: 4 6 4 - 4 6 5 ) .
O n e solution to the problem o f separating sex w o r k f r o m other
types o f w o r k is to address all o f this w o r k f r o m w i t h i n the framework
o f women's rights. For example, Christien Van den A n k e r points to the
lack o f integration between the discourse on migrant workers' rights
and the discourse on women's rights and argues that migrant women
"should be an important part o f the women's rights agenda" (2006:
180). She insists that, i n spite o f the fractured and legalistic nature o f
rights discourse and implementation, a rights approach is regarded as
the best way to conceptualize, and potentially to transform, the problem
o f h u m a n trafficking. T h i s is i n line w i t h the analytical and norma-
tive framework taken by many nonabolitionist feminists toward h u m a n
trafficking (see Kempadoo 2005; C h a n g and K i m 2007; Van den A n k e r
2006), and gender and h u m a n security more broadly.
Clearly, rights-based ethics, rights discourse, and h u m a n rights law
have a role to play i n addressing the issue o f sex t r a f f i c k i n g , i n b o t h aca-
demic and activist contexts. T h i s is especially the case when rights are
seen as embedded i n wider structures o f globalization and so-called root
causes; as Van den A n k e r argues, "Gender, race, nationality and ethnic-
ity are at least some o f the factors influencing w h o ends up trafficked
78 | CHAPTER 3
and under w h i c h circumstances. Universalist approaches [to rights]
therefore need to take into account that these structural and long-term
causes may need recognition before equal respect can be implemented"
(2006: 179). I n this view, rights are not seen as abstract or ahistorical
but situated i n the gendered effects o f globalization and framed by an
intersectional approach (179).
However, while this k i n d o f women's rights approach to sex traffick-
ing moves i n the right d i r e c t i o n — i n terms o f its c o m m i t m e n t to situat-
ing trafficking w i t h i n gendered globalization—it is destined always to
see trafficking as a women's rights "issue," and thus o f relevance only
to women; furthermore, i t is likely to remain plagued by debates over
universality and difference—especially among so-called first-world and
third-world women. Furthermore, a rights-based approach cannot give
us insight into why and how these abuses are licensed by d o m i n a n t social
and cultural norms or moral understandings. Finally, the methodologi-
cal and normative individualism o f rights-based approaches obscures
the relational nature o f these processes and the extent to w h i c h the
moral responsibility to maintain relations o f care can provide the basis
for a conceptualization o f h u m a n security i n this context.
Understanding the influence o f hegemonic norms o f masculinity
i n the constitution o f governance rules at global and national levels is
crucial to an analysis o f the global distribution o f b o t h care and sex
w o r k . N o r m s o f hegemonic masculinities contribute to the feminizing
o f domestic, service, and sex work; i n so doing, they serve to reify the
public-private dichotomy and mute the contradictions o f transnational
liberalism (Chang and L i n g 2000: 41). Just as the articulation o f t w o
separate spheres o f human social l i f e — t h e public and the private—
served to obfuscate the gender contradictions o f early liberal theories
o f rights, the "transnational ideology o f sexualized, racialized service"
allows the public, masculine face o f globalization to flourish (41).
K i m b e r l y A . Chang and L . H . M . L i n g call this public face o f violence
"techno-muscular capitalism." Techno-muscular capitalism ( T M C ) is
characterized by "Western capitalist masculinity" and "aggressive mar-
ket competition" i n the fields o f global finance, production, trade and
telecommunications. T h e other "face" o f globalization is the "regime o f
labour intimacy ( R L I ) — t h e explicitly sexualized, racialized and class-
based globalization which operates on a symbiotic ideology o f racism/
"WOMEN'S W O R K " | 79
sexism to institutionalize its globalized service economy" (2000: 27,
36). Labor intimacy, Chang and L i n g argue, b o t h results from and sus-
tains techno-muscular, "cosmopolitan" globalization (41).
Ironically, constructions o f masculinity are also implicated i n the
contemporary security discourses that seek to "protect" women from
" e v i l " new security threats. F r o m the "war on terror," w h i c h sucks
immense resources away f r o m caring services, to the hypermoralized
responses to the "evildoers" w h o traffic women across borders, to the
justification o f militarism i n The Responsibility to Protect—all these dis-
courses, and the policies that emanate from them, seek to dispel any
disruptions to our conventional gender categories and to shift our gaze
away from the ways neoliberal globalization, characterized by corn-
modification and massive inequalities, is fatally implicated i n all o f
these so-called security crises, as well as i n the more invisible, yet no less
threatening, crisis o f care.
Notions o f masculinity and f e m i n i n i t y are necessarily interdepen-
dent and intersect w i t h other social relations o f power, i n c l u d i n g race
and class. W h i l e the language o f care may be the "different voice" o f
women, a critical care ethics eschews gender essentialisms; instead,
it seeks to interrogate h o w and w h y hegemonic forms o f masculinity
license men's neglect o f caring responsibilities and contribute to the
manipulation o f images o f care and w o m a n h o o d into images o f female
subservience and sexual service. By challenging the public-private
dichotomy and the naturalization o f women's caring and "service"
work, a critical ethics o f care politicizes these gendered acts and links
them to ideologies that denigrate the moral values and activities associ-
ated w i t h caring. These values include attentiveness and responsiveness
to the needs o f others, as well as the development o f the patience and
trust necessary to sustain long-term commitments to particular persons.
T h e degradation and feminization o f care are related not only to the
dominance o f norms o f economic self-sufficiency but also to the social,
political, and cultural legitimation o f male domination, aggression, and
"abusive neglect."
A t the global level, b o t h neoliberalism and m i l i t a r i s m are charac-
terized by a blindness to interdependence, vulnerability, and the pub-
lic role for caring practices i n creating societies that are less prone to
conflict and less reliant on violence as a solution to social problems. As
80 | C H A P T E R 3
Colleen O ' M a n i q u e has argued, we must move beyond a focus on "male
d o m i n a t i o n " toward an examination o f a system o f extreme masculine
characteristics, w h i c h are reflected i n the valorization and celebration o f
war and violent masculinity, and the devalorization o f the labor o f social
reproduction more typically performed by women (2006: 174).
I t is again important to stress that claims about the construction o f
hegemonic forms o f masculinity are not the same as claims about the
behavior o f individual men. Indeed, essentialist arguments—about, say,
male aggression or female passivity—cannot accommodate the many
"variations that exist among b o t h men and women i n terms o f their atti-
tudes toward, and participation i n , acts o f violence" ( W h i t w o r t h 2004:
154). Moreover, to refer to "hegemonic masculinity" is not to deny the
existence o f multiple visions o f masculinity (and f e m i n i n i t y ) that may
coexist; rather, i t is to acknowledge the social practices t h r o u g h w h i c h
one vision may predominate over others to become "culturally exalted"
or hegemonic (Connell, quoted i n W h i t w o r t h 2004: 154). Finally, as a
pattern o f hegemony i n the Gramscian sense, rather than a pattern o f
simple d o m i n a t i o n based on force, socially dominant masculinities are
maintained by cultural consent, discursive centrality, institutionaliza-
tion, and the marginalization or delegitimation o f alternatives (Connell
and Messerschmidt 2005: 846). I f we are really concerned about h u m a n
security, maybe we ought to consider redirecting our attention toward
the ways i n w h i c h these forces are at w o r k today i n the global context.
The Ethics of Care, Human Security,
and "Women's Work"
The domestic and caring sector is often referred to as feudal,
involving servitude and servility. How is it that these social phe-
nomena are looked on so uncritically within Western societies?
—AGUSTIN 2003
Using a critical feminist ethics o f care as a moral framework t h r o u g h
w h i c h to view h u m a n insecurity related to transnational care w o r k and
sex w o r k shifts attention toward an examination o f the wider context i n
w h i c h these activities take place. Rather than regard female care and sex
"WOMEN'S W O R K " | 81
workers, their employers and clients, and their immediate and extended
families as autonomous individuals w h o either possess or lack agency
to make moral decisions, a critical ethics o f care regards all people as
embedded i n networks o f relationships. Relative power, degrees o f
agency, and moral responsibilities are mediated through these relation-
ships. Some o f these relationships may be n u r t u r i n g and life sustaining,
while others may be exploitative or violent; i n all cases, however, it is
the relationships that are central to determining the conditions affecting
h u m a n security and insecurity i n this context.
A feminist care ethics approach to h u m a n security facilitates a cri-
tique o f the stereotype o f care as "bottomless feminine nurturance and
self-sacrifice" ( M . Walker 1999: 108). Critics o f care ethics—including
some feminists—have argued that an ethic o f care can serve to rein-
force gender stereotypes and can " l o o k like the lamentable internaliza-
tion o f an oppressively servile social role" (108). A n ethics o f care that
is essentialist, uncritical, and " u n p o l i t i c i z e d " risks romanticizing the
activities o f care and o f using women's "natural responsibility" to care
as a justification for female servitude. T h a t care could be degraded i n
this w a y — t o legitimize sexual and domestic service and the violence
associated w i t h it—however, is a result o f the development o f particu-
lar moral understandings, i n c l u d i n g hegemonic forms o f masculinity,
that are mediated t h r o u g h gendered relations o f power. As Jan Pett-
man argues, the domestication o f women naturalizes men's sex right to
women's bodies, labor, and children. W o m e n are there to service men,
providing domestic and sexual labor, w h i c h is assumed to be a labor o f
love (Pettman 1996: 186).
W h i l e there is no essential picture o f what good caring relations
should look like, a critical ethics o f care emphasizes the benefits to all
people o f an image o f care that recognizes responsibility and responsive-
ness to particular others as positive expressions o f both masculinity and
femininity. Feminist ethics must reclaim the role o f caring values as a pos-
itive, valuable aspect o f all societies and o f caring labor as an important
practice o f contemporary citizenship. I n the context o f global politics, it
asserts that the adequate provision o f care, and equitable distribution o f
responsibilities for care, is a basic prerequisite for human security.
I n Chapter 1, I introduce and develop the relationship between
hegemonic masculinities, neoliberal globalization, and the feminization
82 | CHAPTER 3
o f care as an important normative structure c o n t r i b u t i n g to wide-
spread insecurity for people, their families, and communities around
the w o r l d . Understanding the influence o f hegemonic masculinities i n
the constitution o f governance rules at global and national levels is cru-
cial to an analysis o f the relationship between "global women's w o r k "
and h u m a n security. Indeed, this can help explain w h y these rules have
yet to give due recognition to the significance o f women's w o r k rela-
tive to men's work, and women's security needs relative to men's secu-
rity needs ( T r u o n g 2003: 32). As T h a n h - D a m T r u o n g argues, whereas
care for people who are old, sick, or young—socially defined as women's
work—tends to meet w i t h less supportive responses from state-based
and community-based entitlement systems, care for men's sexual needs
is highly responsive to market forces (32—33).
Contemporary forms o f hegemonic masculinity are constructed
through accounts o f f e m i n i n i t y as caring, docile, dependent, and self-
sacrificing. Importantly, these accounts i n the context o f the sex trade
are also raced and thus construct this type o f f e m i n i n i t y as foreign,
exotic, and " O t h e r . " 2 Here, relations o f gender and race intersect; as
Pettman argues, i n a postcolonial era, colonial relations live on i n racial-
ized power differences and intensifying relations o f dominance, subor-
dination, and exploitation (1996: 198). W h i l e the language o f care may
be the "different voice" o f women, a critical care ethics must eschew
gender essentialisms and interrogate how hegemonic forms o f masculin-
ity license are linked to the disassociation o f men and masculinity w i t h
caring values and activities, and h o w this contributes to the manipula-
t i o n o f images o f care and w o m a n h o o d into images o f female subservi-
ence and sexual service.
Toward a New Global Political Economy of Care
Consideration o f human security i n the context o f "women's w o r k " i n
the global economy—especially domestic, care, and sex work—requires
2 T h e extent to which tace is a useful concept fot analysis of trafficking in women is contested.
Laura M . Agustin argues that the fastest-growing group of migrants comes from Eastern
Europe and the former Soviet Union—women usually considered "white" and "almost"
European. T h u s , she says, although "exoticizing" may well be taking place, race is not a useful
concept for analysis at this time (2003: 378).
"WOMEN'S W O R K " | 83
engaging i n "critical moral ethnography" i n order to uncover the moral
understandings that license and legitimize the flourishing global care
and sex economies. I have suggested that such an approach to ethics
requires seeing these moral understandings as embedded i n the struc-
tures and processes o f the gendered global political economy. The
prevalence o f these forms o f labor i n the contemporary global economy
demonstrates how the values and practices o f care have been denigrated
and manipulated by unequal power relations o f gender and race and by
wider inequalities i n the global political economy.
T h e naturalized epistemology o f a feminist ethics o f care means that
there are no obvious normative or policy prescriptions that f l o w from
it. However, it does start w i t h some clear ontological arguments about
relationality and the life-sustaining significance o f caring relations and
caring responsibilities for all h u m a n flourishing. It regards these rela-
tions and responsibilities as neither simply "natural" nor "contractual"
but as fundamentally ethical. As such, they are inseparable f r o m , and
indeed constituted by, the social, economic, and political arrangements
in w h i c h they are embedded i n household, local, and global contexts.
Furthermore, arrangements for care i n particular contexts may be
judged "better" or worse"—they may be characterized by inequalities,
exploitation, and oppression or by fairness, transparency, trust, and
equity. Responsibilities for care may be gendered and raced, or they may
be distributed based on the assumption that all persons are bearers o f
responsibilities to care for others.
Current trends i n globalization—specifically, the sexualization
and commodification o f female m i g r a n t labor w i t h i n peripheral sites
and the accelerating exchange o f money for bodies—are part o f wider
trends toward neoliberal restructuring that contribute to the socioeco-
nomic and political conditions that feminize, racialize, denigrate, and
undervalue the values and activities o f care. Rather than be upheld as
a fundamental, life-sustaining activity o f citizenship, care is associated
w i t h subservience, self-sacrifice, dependence, and a lack o f agency. Care
work, domestic work, and sex work—increasingly done by migrant
women o f color—occupy the lowest rungs on the ladder o f "success"
in the global political economy. O f t e n alone and "out o f place," these
women are, ironically, highly vulnerable i n terms o f their lack o f rela-
tionship networks, family, and f o r m a l citizenship status. T h u s , these
84 | C H A P T E R 3
foreign carers are perhaps the least likely to receive good care, and many
lead lives that are perpetually insecure.
W h i l e changes i n policy at the level o f state welfare policies and
international financial institutions are crucial, some change i n local and
global notions o f masculinity and f e m i n i n i t y is necessary i f real trans-
formation to the global organization o f care, and the nature o f "women's
w o r k " more generally, is to take place. I n her analysis o f the global "sex
economy," T h a n h - D a m T r u o n g argues that cultural means must be
found to deal w i t h forms o f expression o f masculinity that are h a r m f u l
to the integrity o f women and children as social beings. Current expres-
sions o f masculinity i n the sex trade need to be countered w i t h "images
o f v i r i l i t y as the ability to care and take responsibility for the other"
(Truong 2003: 48). She argues for a n o t i o n o f "caring and responsible"
sex (as distinct from "safe sex") that seeks not only to enhance personal
safety but also to promote a cultural transformation toward nonviolence
i n sexuality. I t is through nonviolence, she argues, that m u t u a l respect
can be b u i l t and a gender-based h u m a n security achieved (48).
Attempts to define what sex should " l o o k like," however, are
problematic and may lead back to the same "moralizing" debates that
continue to dominate the ethical discussion o f prostitution and sex traf-
ficking. I w o u l d argue, i n contrast, for a broader reanalysis o f the role
o f care i n societies—both domestically and at the level o f global society.
T h i s involves understanding the neoliberal and masculinist sleight o f
hand t h r o u g h w h i c h "new geographies o f inequality" have simultane-
ously made care a more pressing concern and marginalized care from
view (Lawson 2007: 2). U n l i k e a women's rights approach, a critical
care ethics approach can help us understand why women are economi-
cally and physically exploited and subject to violence through elucidat-
ing the wide connections between f e m i n i n i t y and subservience on the
one hand, and masculinity and autonomy on the other. Shifts i n moral
understandings toward the valuing o f care and the reshaping o f visions
o f masculinity and f e m i n i n i t y must go hand i n hand w i t h the recogni-
tion o f care as the very basis o f active citizenship and human security.
4 | Humanitarian Intervention and
Global Security Governance
A care ethic provides a substantive basis for applying the ethics of
responsibility.
— T R O N T O , FORTHCOMING
W
hile most o f the literature on global governance addresses
the rules, norms, and institutions o f global economic gov-
ernance—including trade and finance—a g r o w i n g body o f
work explores security and intervention from a governance perspective
(see Griffen 2000). W h a t this means is that the interplay o f purposive
activities and strategies o f state and nonstate actors, formal and i n f o r m a l
rules and discursive practices, and wider material and ideational struc-
tures surrounding security and intervention are recognized as exercising
significant forms of authority over communities o f people around the
w o r l d today.
For analytical purposes, recent history w i t h respect to global secu-
r i t y may be divided into at least three, and possibly four, t i m e periods.
Broadly speaking, the first p e r i o d — i m m e d i a t e l y f o l l o w i n g the end o f
the C o l d W a r — s a w the g r o w t h and development o f notions o f h u m a n
security, w h i c h emphasized the i n d i v i d u a l as the p r i m a r y referent o f
security and broadened the n o t i o n o f security to include, among other
things, the exercise o f basic h u m a n rights; i t also saw the develop-
ment o f new practices and norms regarding h u m a n i t a r i a n interven-
t i o n , w h i c h emphasized the global c o m m u n i t y ' s "responsibility to