International

Security
 Security, like peace, identity and other terminologies in
that fold of international political theory has attracted
many definitions. Unfortunately, many contributors
approach these concepts from their own ideologies.
Hence, broad areas of description of the term “security”
exist. If defining security is that elusive, there is little
wonder why operating within its coverage is so fluid. In
the name of security, people and governments have
taken actions where intended and unintended outcomes
have become difficult to handle.
 Because of its seeming lack of conceptual
boundary, security, as a concept, is used to entice
and whip up patronage for many political projects
both at the state and international levels of
politicking. Hence, Paul D. Williams argued that
“security is therefore a powerful political tool in
claiming attention for priority items in the
competition for government attention.
 Samuel Makinda’s definition of security as “the preservation
of the norms, rules, institutions and values of society”  appears
to be useful. He further argues that all the institutions,
principles and structures associated with society, including its
people are to be protected from “military and non-military
threats”. The term “preservation”, as an important component
of this definition, presupposes conscious, deliberate and
definite steps and actions. Hence, the perception of the
leadership of a society determines its actions and guides its
efforts, which becomes evident in the width and depth of the
security agenda of that society
 In many forums on the topic of security, there has been an
attempt to establish a divide between national and global
security. Although, in theory, a boundary exists between
these two conceptual frameworks, such a boundary is not
sufficient to maintain a clear-cut delimitation between
them. Rather, they have a symbiotic relationship, although
limited to the local security sphere, which states lack the
capacity to handle unilaterally.  Equivalently, there are
issues at the international sphere that will require a
domestic security apparatus to deal with.
 National security has been described as the ability of a state to
cater for the protection and defence of its citizenry. Makinda’s
definition of security fits into this confine of national security.
Global security, on the other hand, evolved from the necessity that
nature and many other activities, particularly globalization, have
placed on states. These are demands that no national security
apparatus has the capacity to handle on its own and, as such, call
for the cooperation of states. The global interconnection and
interdependence among states that the world has experienced and
continues to experience since the end of the cold war, makes it
necessary for states to cooperate more and work together
 One of the major challenges that the field of global
security has to contend with is the concept of security
complex, a situation in which the security concerns of
states are deeply interconnected to the point that one
state’s security needs cannot be realistically considered
without taking into consideration the security needs of
the other states. The fear or threat content of security
complex breeds rivalry among states. The remedy for
such rivalry lies in cooperation which can only be
found in global security initiatives among states
 With the advocacy of the United Nations Office for the
Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) human
security elements have acquired a wider dimension,
for they go beyond military protection and engage
threats to human dignity. Accordingly, it has become
necessary for states to make conscious efforts towards
building links with other states and to consciously
engage in global security initiatives. OCHA’s
expanded definition of security calls for a wide range
of security areas:
 1.    Economic: creation of employment and measures against poverty.
 2.     Food: measures against hunger and famine.
 3.    Health: measures against disease, unsafe food, malnutrition and lack
of access to basic health care.
 4.    Environmental: measures against environmental degradation,
resource depletion, natural disasters and pollution.
 5.    Personal: measures against physical violence, crime, terrorism,
domestic violence and child labor.
 6.    Community: measures against inter-ethnic, religious and other
identity tensions.
 7.    Political: measures against political repression and human rights
abuses.
 Health care poses a challenge in varying
dimensions at different levels in many states. As a
result of globalization, people from different parts
of the world crisscross between geographical
boundaries. As much as this has claimed to bring
economic prosperity, it is also replete with
challenges, particularly in regard to the spread of
communicable diseases, crime and terrorism.
 Asidefrom spillouts resulting from deliberate
human activities, another area of concern is the
consequences of internal conflicts, which include
refugee problems and which transcend
geographical contiguity. Environmental and
climate change issues are other areas that call for
more cooperation among states, especially when
dealing with the aftermath of an earthquake or a
tsunami
 Disarmament and non-proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction are other areas that make global
collaboration and cooperation necessary. The
acquisition of nuclear weapons and similar armaments,
which started as a national security option, has become
today a major threat to national and global security. The
seemingly hard-line posture of many state actors
towards disarmament requires the development of a
moral consciousness that can only be reinforced by
cooperation and collaboration at the international level.