Geopolitics

The Drift from Security State to Human Security: Contextualizing the Rise of ISIS
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
Issue Net Edition | Date : 21 Jan , 2016

The 2003 Commission on Human Security stated:

‘The state remains the fundamental purveyor of security. Yet it often fails to fulfill its security obligations…. That is why attention must now shift from the security of the state to the security of the people – to human security.’

It still remains a challenge for the policy-makers and scholars to find a common conceptual ground for understanding the essence of human security.

Post cold-war, the term ‘human-security’ emerged as the buzz word and it visibly started to challenge and question the role of state, institutions and governance. [20]

The United Nations Development Program’s (UNDP) Human Development Report of 1994 defined human-security according to seven different dimensions-personal, economic, environmental, political, community, food, health and security.[21] For the first time, a ‘people-centric’ focus was adopted to deal with the nuances of security. The individual rights and interests were given significance rather than the collective functioning of the international community. Rather than just the military threat being perceived as a powerful antagonism to the main referent the state innumerable other threats were also included like political oppression, hunger, disease, unemployment and environmental degradation.

Over the years, a debate between the ‘East Versus West’ in the understanding of human security has emerged. In the West, human security is understood as a means of reducing the human costs of violence and is used as a strategy by the state to address basic human needs. While, in the East, human security is perceived as another attempt by the Western hegemony to establish liberal values and institutions on the non-western societies. It still remains a challenge for the policy-makers and scholars to find a common conceptual ground for understanding the essence of human security.[22] Rather than confusing human security with human development, it should be understood that it basically means dealing with the ‘vulnerability to physical violence during conflict.’ Sverre Lodgaard states that the meaning of human security is synonymous with the security of the people and its main objective deals with their safety and security. [23]

In the aftermath of 9/11 attacks, human security and the responsibility to protect have been given more value, to justify stabilization missions and foreign intervention.

In the aftermath of 9/11 attacks, human security and the responsibility to protect have been given more value, to justify stabilization missions and foreign intervention. Though, security still continues to be embedded with political power, the emerging paradigm of human security deals with how individuals along with their communities are protected from abuse of power, violence and existential risks. [24]

There are three main debates for understanding the basic aspects of human security. Firstly, viewing human security with the paradigm of national strategic importance, it is a predominant way to reduce the human costs of violent conflict. Secondly, it is a mechanism to address the respective governments for dealing with the basic human needs and placate the inequalities caused by globalization. Thirdly, the framework of human security helps in estimating the risks and vulnerabilities by ensuring social security, especially for people living in deprivation as well as those who have experienced economic loss. [25]

There are several challenges faced by the promotion of human security, especially in the context of West Asia and the emergence of ISIS. To start it, it is perceived that this concept masks the hidden western notions of control, which are quite detrimental to the region. Secondly, the initial concept of state security which is based on the military threat paradigm is still more powerful than the conception of human security. Thirdly and most importantly, human intervention has become the defense for promotion of human security in West Asian countries, which ultimately undermines the regions sovereignty and the basic doctrine of non-interference. All these critical analyses, often forget that human security, stands to be a people-centric approach and a very large part of its functioning also deals with the domestic politics. The implementation of human security needs to be mutually reinforcing and complimentary. Both the referents, which are freedom from want and freedom from fear need to be tackled in a flawless manner, because endowing one in the absence of the other would not have much utility. Thus, it should not be seen as a recent entrant in the line of neologisms that have previously included common security, international security, cooperative and comprehensive security. After all, as Daniel Deudney puts it, ‘not all neologisms are useful and practical.’ [26]

The rise of ISIS in West Asian countries has led to massive human rights abuse, religious and ethnic fragmentation.

Though, the ambiguity endowed to human security due to the vastness of the fields it encompasses, does create a challenge. So, can any kind of irregular or sudden discomfort conceivably constitute a threat to human security? The drafters of the UNDP report have not validated their definitional boundaries. Instead it continues to be all-encompassing and integrative. [27] All of it merely creates a hodge-podge of the principles and objectives underlying the concept of human security.

Thus, in order to face and obliterate the vagueness of this concept, two serious analytical projects have refurbished that are still in the early days of their development. The first one, dealing with the work of Christopher Murray and Gary King have narrowed down the meaning of human security, in which they give precedence to five main factors health, poverty, political freedom, education and democracy. [28] The second work has been done by Kanti Bajpai who states that there is a need for ‘human security audit’ which can help in measuring the direct and indirect threats to the individual’s freedom and safety. At the same time, it would also differ from society to society, especially when it comes to measuring their potential to deal with crisis and threats. [29]

Security in West Asia: Contextualising the Emergence of ISIS

The rise of ISIS in West Asian countries has led to massive human rights abuse, religious and ethnic fragmentation. The traditional conceptions of state security and human security have become quite redundant due to the changes in the strategic environment of the Arab World. Traditional variables cannot be used to understand the gravity of new security threats. The shift in international system has eventually made inter-state violence redundant. New forms of conflict are proliferating at an unprecedented rate. [30]

The territory seized by ISIS continues to be greater than many other countries, with around 20,000 foreign fighters travelling to Syria and Iraq to take part in this machinery.

The West Asian political system, produced after fighting away with the yoke of colonialism is still an emerging paradigm. In spite of being authoritarian in character and complemented with omnipotent state machinery and institutions, it must be noted that countries in West Asia are essentially described as ‘soft’, especially when it comes to dealings in the strategic area. This ‘softness’ had been a major temptation of the great powers to cause foreign interventions, implementation of neo-conservative ideology or even democracy promotion. And interestingly, this ‘softness’ has been targeted by the ISIS itself, which has done several physical, personal, historical and ethnic harm to the populations of Iraq and Syria. There are several reasons which contribute to such ‘softness’ in the West Asian countries, most of them dealing with the lack of material progress, political underdevelopment, dependent economies and flawed social contracts that lead to ethnic and sectarian fragmentation. Other factors include fatalistic ideologies, age-old poverty, external environment and climate. [31]

For a very long, it has been debated by authors like Tami Amanda, Jacoby and Brent E. Sasley that a ‘people-centered approach is needed’ to understand the security threats faced by citizens of West Asia, emphasizing on the ‘ideas, norms and inter-subjective meanings’ especially when it comes to studying the perspective of security from the side of the participant.[32]This analysis reveals the loopholes in understanding the West Asian political system by the western discourse of state security and human security. The state-centric approach of defining threat, if utilized in the context of ISIS, can be very flawed. To start with, the emergence of Arab Uprisings in December 2010 has been followed by changes in government and the consecutive state machinery. The territory seized by ISIS continues to be greater than many other countries, with around 20,000 foreign fighters travelling to Syria and Iraq to take part in this machinery. The idea of state itself does not continue to persist in Iraq and Syria, which is at present rife with civil war.

Secondly, with the emergence of ISIS, how can human security be understood under the UNDP parameters of personal, economic, environmental, political, food, health and security? In all these parameters, the role and impact of ISIS demands to redraw the understanding of these very concepts and especially re-define who is going to witness the impact in the longer run.

… the oil-threat being caused by the ISIS would not just affect West Asia but the global oil market prices and availability.

To start with, personal threat would have different meanings for Shias, Sunnis, Alawaites, Coptic Christians, Kurds, Assyrians and other ethnicities. In addition, this parameter does not leave any room for the gender debate. A lot of it varies on the demographic profile of the countries and there is no means, yet applicable to quantify it. Also, in today’s world, the essence of personal threat has also reached the virtual platform of social media, adding further dynamics to it. Along with the citizens of Iraq and Syria being the main victims of ISIS, the personal threat paradigm now includes also foreign hostages who have been kidnapped and beheaded by the organization.[33]

Turning to the economic threat included in human security, it must be noted that it would have a different dynamics in Iraq and Syria respectively. For example, in Iraq, it cannot be judged merely by the growth of oil revenues. If that was the case, Iraq would not have remained in a dichotomous state in 2011 when its output had crossed 2.5 million barrels per day, for the first time after the over-throw of President Saddam Hussein. The inter-communal relations among the ethnic and communal groups had deteriorated, being the main economic threat, even at that time. Between 2010 to 2013, the Iraqi government’s revenue had increased to $100 billion and in spite of it; the wealth was not equally distributed. Thus, the country was already facing the economic threat, in the words of Human Security, long before ISIS invaded. [34] Even in the case of Syria, several tribes pledged their loyalty to the ISIS because of the detrimental aspect of the Syrian government’s economic liberalization policies. In addition to it, the oil-threat being caused by the ISIS would not just affect West Asia but the global oil market prices and availability. The Paris-based International Energy Agency has already stated that initially there were parameters like prices, supply, demand and economic growth. Interestingly, ISIS has now entered into the list of parameters. Such update reveals that human security’s understanding of economic threat does not entail the territorial boundary, a fact that is making its utility even more redundant. [35]

The study of environmental security includes the various interactive dynamics of diverse human and natural networks. Over the years, environment has been envisaged as a significant factor for states that build power through various natural resources like water, oil, gas and others. [36]

1 2 3 4
Rate this Article
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of the Indian Defence Review.

About the Author

Shubhda Chaudhary

PhD scholar from JNU.

More by the same author

Post your Comment

2000characters left