The Difference Between State Security and Human Security
The Difference Between State Security and Human Security
The issue of security has received deficient attention with much focus being directed towards the clause of State security. The vulnerability of the state to certain threats and its military capabilities has been on the forefront in regard to security matters in most cases. However, the emergence of concepts related to the idea of human security did introduce a broader view of security from different perspectives. This paper is basically focused on distancing the aspect of human security from that of traditional or state security at various levels.
State security basically entails the tendency of a nation to adhere to its own set of demands in regard to the issue of security policies (Baylis, J.2010, p.233). Traditional security also involves a host of other aspects that are defined by virtue of subordination. Describing the matter further; reveals that state security is primarily the protection of available institutions, ethics or values within a nation, and above all human beings living inside its boundaries. In other words, the idea of guarding its borders, particularly from external aggression, features prominently amongst possible priorities (Brauch, 2003, 204). State security is therefore judged by virtue of how well a particular state can stop attacks, and at the same time defeat external threats. An example is Australia’s white defense paper policies that were aimed at building defense strategies, to protect their border against future external threats. The move was enhanced by the September 11 terror attacks in New York, and other places in the world. (Australia Defense, 2009, 16). Apart from protecting its people and values from external threats, it is important to note that, an important aspect that arises in state security is the need to protect the dignity of the state.
We will write acustom essay on your topictailored to your instructions!
183experts online
The state remains the main center of activities and the main player; whereby the focus is obviously directed towards national stability. Australia’s main interest in White Paper Defense is to guard its borders against armed attacks, whether by other states or non states, that can destabilize its national borders. This means that security qualifies as a top priority obligation for the state in terms of their own protection (Baylis, J.2010). It entails the strengthening of military abilities and formulating avenues that help in building national supremacy (Williams, 2003, 93). Common measures taken by states in enhancing the scope of activities include: equipping their military factions, broadening logistical capacity, and generally putting strategies in place, in order to check its boundaries. This was included in Australia’s defense Policies in the white paper, where they intended to broaden national security policies by maximizing the number of military equipments. They included submarines, helicopters and aircrafts for the Armed forces (Australia Defense, 2009, 59). State security therefore entails crucial leads, but the magnitude of activities remains minimal in terms of players and scale of related ventures. It is one reason why critics consider traditional security as “a means and not an end” regarding security policies (Williams, 2003, 93). People get involved in state security on very few occasions since the state believes in its abilities and mileage (Brauch, 2003, 205). As a result, it contrasts human security in that, the people get no chance to participate in decision making. In addition, traditional security is predominantly inclined towards the principle of sovereignty, whereby the state operates under total freedom from international influence. This implies that the state is the final entity in matters concerning its own security.
Human security first emerged on the scene in 1994, in a human development report by the United Nations Development Program. Its main aim was to rectify the shady concentration and definition given to the aspect of security through the blending of several concepts. As a result, it gave birth to a combination of both human rights and human development, in addressing the security of humans and the community. In contrast to state security, human security emphasizes the individuals’ security in relation to two basic approaches (Kaldor, 2008, 183). The first approach basically applies in a country like Canada, and it involves protecting the individual from political hostility. However, relying on this approach seemingly attracts instability, since other aspects of human security are ignored. A familiar situation was witnessed in the Arab world, especially in countries like Egypt and Libya. Citizens were supposedly