Conceptualization of Security in The Twenty-First Century

Outline
• Introduction
• Concept of security
• Security in three Theories
i. Realist
ii. Neoliberalist
iii. Constructivist
• Three notions of security
• Security in Post-cold War Period
• Conclusion
 Introduction
• Security is a core value of life and has always
been a high-priority issue for both nations and
people.
• Without security, humans can grow but cannot
flourish.
• Security implies state monopoly over the use
of force, eliminating domestic threats, and
firmly dealing with non-state actors.
 Introduction
• As the 17th century English philosopher,
Thomas Hobbes, reminds us:
• In the absence of security, “there is place for
industry because the fruit thereof is
uncertain… no arts, no letters, no society; and
which is worst of all, continual fear, and
danger of violent death; and the life man,
solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”
 Introduction
• Human life in many countries of the Western
world is not as brutish as it was in the
Hobbesian ‘state of nature’.
• Thus their citizens tend to take their security
for granted unless it is directly threatened by
events like the September 11, 2001 attacks on
the World Trade Center or the July London,
2005 bombings.
 Introduction
• Sadly, for more than half of the world’s
population, life is not fair.
• For them, deep insecurity is a fact of everyday
life and a fundamental preoccupation with
daily survival is the foundation upon which
they build their collective lives.
 Introduction
• Recall for a moment television images we see
about life in places like Baghdad, Gaza,
Damascus, Kabul etc.
• Unfortunately, human history bears witness to
the fact that there will always be some
individuals and states that will be seen as threats
by other states.
• The truth is that the problem of security will
never go away.
 Concept of security in IR
• It is due to its fundamental importance that
security constitutes the most important
scholarly question in many academic
disciplines.
• Many scholars of international politics has
been preoccupied with the idea of collective
security for the past several years.
 Concept of security in IR
• The desire for security is so overwhelming that
for many leading international relations
experts, the anarchic structure of the
international system was the key to
understanding world politics.
• Consequently, the debate on military and non-
military means to security relative to other
states has held a central place in IR scholarship
for much of the 20th century.
 Concept of security in IR
• There are four principal assumptions which
underlie the security concept:
• Security of what,
• Security for what,
• Security from what, and
• Security by what means?
 Concept of security in IR
• These assumptions further lead to divergent
views regarding the nature and scope of
security.
• The reason being that there has never been a
clear consensus on how to define security.
• Rather it has become a contested concept
between peace-and power-research.
 Security in three Theories
• Security is a diverse concept and has to be studied
from different angles before it can be properly
understood.
• Yet, scholarly views on the concept of security are
tied to three major theoretical paradigms in the IR
literature:
i. Realism,
ii. Neoliberalism, and
iii. Constructivism.
 i. Realist view of security
• Realist scholars maintain a traditional view of
security, focusing on the nation state and
national interests.
• Stressing the importance of military
capabilities, realists consider states to be the
principal actors in the international arena.
• This points to an important difference
concerning the role of states.
 i. Realist view of security
• Defensive realists like Kenneth Waltz assert
that the anarchical structure of the
international system encourages states to
undertake defensive and reserved policies to
maintain global order.
• Offensive realists, in contrast, such as John J
Mearsheimer, regard states as security or
power maximisers.
 i. Realist view of security
• According to John Mearsheimer, “uncertainty
about the intentions of other states is unavoidable,
which means that states can never be sure that
other states do not have offensive intentions to go
along with their offensive capabilities.”
• Having a pessimistic worldview, for realists, the
world is condemned to a state of perpetual
competition and there is no such thing as status
quo.
 i. Realist view of security
• Yet, both defensive and offensive realists think
of power in terms of military strength.
• Realism has been a predominant player in the
study of international relations during the cold-
war period.
• But the realist school of thought makes a
problematic assumption that states are
undifferentiated units seeking to optimise their
utility.
 ii. Neoliberal view of security
• Neoliberal international relations theorists allow a
broader understanding of security, going beyond
military issues and states as primary actors.
• They stress the importance of free markets in
economic growth and worldwide
interconnectedness in the economic sphere.
• Their view of international relations is much more
optimistic than the realist perspective because
they see states as rational utility maximisers.
iii. Constructivism view of security
• In a highly significant shift from the first two
approaches, the constructivist school thinks of
security as socially constructed, along with
capabilities and threats.
• Constructivism emerged in the early 1990s as
a major challenge to the traditional paradigms
of international relations.
iii. Constructivism view of security
• Constructivist scholars argue that perceptions
of security vary significantly among actors in
the international arena.
• Consequently, it is not the state that the level
of level of analysis, but society as a group of
people sharing a common identity.
 Three notions of security
• Based on these three approaches,
• Helga Haftendorn, a notable German
political scientist,
• Distinguished between three notions of
security,
• Depending on their proposed solutions to
meet the perceived challenges.
 Three notions of security
• In her view, each concept of security
corresponds to specific threats and values:
• The paradigm of nations can be traced back to
Hobbes’ pessimistic view of human nature and
his belief in an absolutist and autocratic form
of government.
• According to Hobbes, absolute sovereign can
protect the security of the state.
 Three notions of security
• The paradigm of international security
becomes meaningful in the Grotian tradition
and the idea of law as an institution of
international society.
• And, the paradigm of global security
vindicates Kant’s reflections on universal
peace and an attempt to ensure everyone’s
freedom in accordance with a universal law.
 Security in Post-cold War Period
• The discussion has deepened significantly in
the post-cold war period.
• New approaches to the study of international
security highlight the role of globalisation as
the critical element in influencing our current
thinking about security.
 Security in Post-cold War Period
• Globalisation has not only blurred the
delimitation of external and internal security
but also enhanced inter-state cooperation at
bureaucratic level.
• Many American and European scholars
believe that realism is dead because the
international system’s power structure has
changed in fundamental ways.
 Security in Post-cold War Period
• In their view, the emergence of powerful non-
state actors has diminished the importance of
states as primary actors on the world stage.
• This point of view has become so pervasive
that it has become increasingly difficult for
adherents of the realist theory to survive in
American academia.
 Security in Post-cold War Period
• President Clinton became a leading proponent
of the anti-realist view in the early 1990s when
he said that
• “in a world where freedom, not tyranny, is on
the march, the cynical calculus of pure power
politics simply does not compute. It is ill-
suited to a new era.”
 Security in Post-cold War Period
• While Clinton’s rhetorical words were not up
to the theoretical standards, he also ignored the
only lesson of history – that human beings
have never lived in a state of natural harmony,
nor can they.
 Conclusion
• It is concluded that security is a key concept in
IR not only in 21st Century but it has remained
important throughout history.
• Some explain it through power politics, others
through peaceful means and cooperation others
through perceptions of insecurity.
• The absence of security both nationally and
internationally has been a longing for generation
and would continue to be in future.