human security kaldor

7232019 Human Security Kaldor

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullhuman-security-kaldor 117

Human security

a new strategic narrative for Europe

MARY KALDOR MARY MARTIN AND SABINE SELCHOW

Absolute despair would be the wrong response [to the current situation in Iraq] Insteadthe disaster that is the Westrsquos current strategy in Iraq must be used as a constructive call

to the international community to reconfigure its foreign policy around human securityrather than national security

Jan Egeland UN Undersecretary for Humanitarian Affairs983089

Human security refers to the security of individuals and communities expressedas both lsquofreedom from fearrsquo and lsquofreedom from wantrsquo Severe threats to humansecurity range from genocide and slavery to natural disasters such as hurricanesor floods to massive violations of the right to food health and housing In thisarticle we argue that the adoption of a human security concept represents a quali-tative change in the conduct of foreign and security policy This step-change isparticularly relevant for the European Union as it seeks to improve its effective-ness and visibility as a collective global actor Terms matter and human securityis not simply a leitmotif for EU security policies983090 or an analytical label whichcategorizes the EUrsquos international role in the way that concepts such as normativepower or civilian power have done 983091 Rather it provides an enduring and dynamicorganizing frame for security action a frame which European foreign policytexts and practices currently lack Thus human security can be seen as a proactivestrategic narrative with the potential to further EU foreign policy integration

To elaborate this organizing frame we examine two distinct aspects of a humansecurity doctrine lexis or what is said and written about it and praxis or what itmeans in terms of everyday actions from policies to tactics on the ground

The lexis of human security matters because it deals with how policy-makersand the European public view and articulate issues of external security This isnot just the stuff of academic discussions we need to know what we mean whenwe talk about the ideas values interests and goals of EU external relations Evenpractitioners who regard concepts with suspicion as abstract and unhelpful use

983089 983121uoted by Sarah Boseley lsquoOne in 983093983088 Iraqis ldquokilled since invasionrdquorsquo Guardian 983089983090 Oct 983090983088983088983094983090

Sascha Werthes and David Bosold lsquoCaught between pretension and substantiveness ambiguities of HumanSecurity as a political leitmotif rsquo in Tobias Debiel and Sascha Werthes eds Human Security on foreign policyagendas changes concepts and cases (Duisburg Eigenverlag 983090983088983088983094)



Mary Kaldor Mary Martin and Sabine Selchow

them unconsciously as mind maps in practical analysis and problem-solving At thesame time recent debates about the semantics of the lsquoglobal war on terrorismrsquo orwhether what is going on in Sudan should be called genocide reveal acute polit-ical sensitivity towards policy terms and labels In a Europe of 983090983095 member states

concepts can help us to reach common understandings and expressions of issuesThe praxis of human security deals with how this doctrinal concept translates intopractical action and whether it is useful in guiding the actions of policy-makersplanners and experts in the field

Lexis and lexicon

We already do human security we just donrsquot call it that983092

This is a common response in discussions with practitioners about the concept of

human security It presupposes that there is a difference between calling somethinglsquohuman securityrsquo and actually doing lsquohuman securityrsquo that is between concepts orideas and political practice Yet political concepts take hold only if they resonateif they contain real meaning as providing either a guide to action or a descrip-tion of practice and if subsequently action confirms the rightness of the descrip-tion Terms like lsquohumanitarianismrsquo or lsquodemocracyrsquo have often been discredited asOrwellian types of Newspeak when wars are conducted in their name preciselybecause they are empty linguistic vessels

Developments in the European Common Foreign And Security Policy (CFSP)

have helped catalyse an emerging European discourse but the lexicon of termsused is a muddled affair which obscures rather than clarifies the nature of Europeanforeign policy Three key terms that are used to name what lsquois donersquo provide atleast a partial view of what we mean by a European Security and Defence Policy(ESDP) these are crisis management civilndashmilitary coordination and conflict preventionWe have selected these concepts as ones that are explicitly used within texts aboutESDP indicating that certain essential features of the idea of lsquohuman securityrsquo canbe found in current ESDP discourse and leading us to assert that lsquohuman securityrsquoseems in essence to be something lsquoEuropeanrsquo However we argue that using the

specific term lsquohuman securityrsquo can help to take what is done a stage further

Crisis management

Generally speaking a crisis is something that is considered an lsquourgent threat to thecore values of a polityrsquo983093

The term lsquocrisis managementrsquo exemplifies the imprecisionof the EUrsquos CFSP and ESDP language and illustrates the lsquoterminological junglersquothat surrounds collective security policy983094 Terms like lsquocrisis responsersquo lsquocivilian crisis

983092

Interview Post Conflict Reconstruction Unit Department for International Development London 983095 July983090983088983088983094983093 Arjen Boin Magnus Ekengren and Mark Rhinard lsquoFuntional security and crisis management capacity in the

E U i rsquo A il 983090983088983088983094 983090 htt l id i l t t d t il983090983088983088983094



Human security a new strategic narrative for Europe

responsersquo and lsquohumanitarian responsersquo and lsquoconflictrsquo and lsquocrisisrsquo are often used as ifthey were interchangeable983095 The European Commission defines crisis managementas lsquohumanitarian and rescue tasks peacekeeping tasks and combat-force tasks incrisis management including peacemakingrsquo983096 There is a tendency within the EU

discourse to equate lsquocrisisrsquo with conflict Although crises are offi cially referred toas either lsquoman-madersquo or lsquonaturalrsquo it is usually lsquoman-madersquo crises that are consideredan lsquourgent threat to the core of values and the system of the EU as a polityrsquo

The EU defines crisis management in terms of capabilities focusing on theinstruments of civilian crisis management (CCM) such as the police the rule oflaw and civil protection As Renata Dwan points out civilian crisis managementlsquois particular to the EU and has no equivalent parallel in the lexicons of UN OSCEor non-European regional organisationsrsquo983097

The European Council defines CCM as designed to help lsquorestore civilian

governmentrsquo alongside other instruments such as military means to restore peaceand economic means to restore the viability of conflict zones and considers bothmilitary and civilian crisis management as short-term instruments applied in theimmediate reaction to a crisis983089983088 The Commission by contrast considers CCM tobe a long-term activity983089983089 Recent efforts to integrate long- and short-term CCMactions represent part of an attempt to build a more coherent and proactive ratherthan reactive approach to CCM

It was only after the end of the Cold War in the face of the crises in the Balkansthat the EU and its member states explicitly identified the need for viable and

synchronised crisis management structures and felt lsquoobliged to engage moredirectly in conflict prevention and crisis managementrsquo983089983090

The first step in the establishment of new procedures and structures for thedevelopment of a coherent and comprehensive crisis management (CM) capabilitywas the SwedishndashFinnish initiative to integrate the so-called Petersberg tasks intothe Amsterdam Treaty in 983089983097983097983094 The primary concern in the Balkans crises wasthe EUrsquos lack of military capabilities hence the main focus was on building aEuropean military force while the concern for civilian capabilities came secondSince 983090983088983088983090 the negative term lsquonon-militaryrsquo has been increasingly replaced by

the positive term lsquocivilianrsquo illustrating a discursive shift which stresses the multi-faceted character of CM involving a wide variety of personnel from police offi cers

983095 Benita Ferrero-Waldner lsquoThe role of crisis response in external relations ldquofrom needs to solutions enhanc-ing civilian crisis response capacity of the European Unionrdquorsquo paper presented to conference organized by theEuropean Commission in cooperation with the Crisis Management Initiative (CMI) Brussels 983089983092 Nov 983090983088983088983093speech983088983093983094983096983092

983096 wwweceuropaeucommexternal_relationscfsppcppcmcmhtm accessed 983089983092 Jan 983090983088983088983095983097 983121uoted in Agnieszka Nowak lsquoCivilian crisis management within ESDPrsquo in Agnieszka Nowak ed Civilian

crisis management the EU way Chaillot Paper 983097983088 June 983090983088983088983094983089983088 A secure Europe in a better world European Security Strategy document proposed by Javier Solana and adopted by

the heads of state and government at the European Council in Brussels 983089983090 Dec 983090983088983088983091983089983089

lsquoWe recognise that conflict prevention and crisis management are long term undertakingsrsquo Chris PattenlsquoDebate on conflict preventioncrisis managementrsquo European Parliament plenary Strasbourg 983089983092 March 983090983088983088983088speech983088983089983089983090983091




to judges and firemen This is consistent with developments on the ground wherethe majority of EU missions have been civilian Importantly it also reflects thefoundational idea especially strong in Germany and the Nordic member states ofthe EU as a lsquocivil powerrsquo

The idea of civilian crisis management was given prominence during the 983090983088983088983094Finnish presidency via the adoption of the Action Plan for Non-military CrisisManagement of the EU intended to establish effective mechanisms of rapidcoordination and deployment Rapid response once seen as the guiding idea ofa collective European security presence is now subsumed under crisis manage-ment Meanwhile the imperative of responding to the tsunami of December 983090983088983088983092extended the concept of crisis management to cover natural disasters and civilprotection of local populations

Civilndashmilitary coordination (CMCO)

The EUrsquos crisis management efforts are increasingly characterized by a drivefor integration and comprehensiveness This refers to integration between thedifferent lsquopillarsrsquo of EU activity983089983091 as well as to the coherence and integration ofcivil and military capabilities A comprehensive civilndashmilitary approach to crisesis embedded in the EUrsquos understanding of contemporary challenges and threatsAccording to the European Security Strategy (ESS) lsquoIn contrast to the massivevisible threat in the Cold War none of the new threats [outlined in the ESS] is

purely military nor can any be tackled by purely military means Each requires amixture of instrumentsrsquo983089983092

The concept of CMCO adopted by the Council in November 983090983088983088983091 refers to theinternal coordination of the EUrsquos military and civilian crisis management efforts983089983093 In contrast to national conceptions of civilndashmilitary coordination the EUrsquos versionis political rather than military-operational In order to achieve coherence the EUconcept of CMCO as expressed in the Council paper promotes the idea of alsquoculture of co-ordinationrsquo

Rather than seeking to put too much emphasis on detailed structures or procedures hellipThe aim must be to encourage and to ensure the co-ordination in the actions of relevantEU actors in all phases of the operation In this context it is important to recognise thatthis CMCO culture needs to be lsquobuilt intorsquo the EUrsquos response to a crisis at the earliestpossible stage and for the whole duration of the operation rather than being lsquobolted onrsquo ata later stage This culture of co-ordination is based on continued co-operation and sharedpolitical objectives983089983094

983089983091 See Catriona Gourlay lsquoCivilndashcivil coordination in EU crisis managementrsquo in Agnieszka Nowak ed Civilian

crisis management the EU way Chaillot Paper No 983097 June 983090983088983088983094 pp 983089983088983091ndash983089983097 983089983092 A secure Europe in a better world p 983089983090983089983093 Civilndashmilitary coordination (CMCO) in the context of CFSPESDP addresses the need for effective coordin-

ti f th ti f ll l t EU t i l d i th l i d b t i l t ti f EUrsquo




Civilndashmilitary coordination sounds like but is different from civilndashmilitarycooperation (CIMIC) a more controversial concept which in EU terminologyrefers to cooperation with external actors in EU-led missions The ideas of civilndash military coordination cooperation or synergy (the Union is not sure which of

these nouns it prefers) are given institutional expression through the Civilian Military Cell (CivMil Cell) established under the Italian presidency983089983095 lsquoTheCivilianMilitary Cell enhances the EUrsquos capacity for crisis management planningreinforces national HQ designated to conduct an EU autonomous operation assistsin co-ordinating civilian operations and generates the capacity to plan and run anautonomous EU operationrsquo983089983096 Another important initiative has taken place in jointcivilndashmilitary training with two programmes related to CMCO (one run by theCommission since 983090983088983088983089 and one offered by the Council since 983090983088983088983092) While theseinitiatives receive vocal support (and the Commission has two members attached

to the CivilianMilitary Cell) in practice civilndashmilitary cooperation remains amarginal and contested practice983089983097

Confl ict prevention

Unlike crisis management and CMCO which are primarily related to Counciloperations conflict prevention is a key discourse within the European Commis-sion which defines prevention in terms of addressing both the long- and short-term causes of conflict through action on poverty development social injustice

aid trade arms control and governance although it is also associated with strat-egies of lsquopreventive engagementrsquo set out in the ESS As Commission policy itcombines long- and short-term measures Long term include development policiesand cooperation with target states to reduce poverty and an emphasis on cross-cutting issues such as traffi cking in drugs small arms and people short terminitiatives include sending observers to elections giving emergency economicassistance applying sanctions and undertaking civilian missions Confusinglygiven the overlap with Council terminology short term lsquocrisis managementrsquo is ashort term Commission tool within its overall responses to conflict

This idea of conflict prevention is closely related to the notion of sustainablepeace which figures in the discourse of the UN and of international civil societyactors983090983088 Sustainable peace was seen as the ultimate goal of conflict preventionmanagement and resolution for example in the initiative by the Finnish andSwedish foreign ministers in 983089983097983097983094 with regard to the Petersberg tasks referredto above and actions in Bosnia and Macedonia through which the EU tried topromote the idea at the UN983090983089 The conflict prevention discourse has its origins

983089983095 lsquoEuropean defence NATOEU consultation planning and operationsrsquo ueeuintuedocscmsUpload983095983096983092983089983092983090983088-983090983088EU-NATO983090983088Consultation983090983088Planning983090983088and983090983088Operationspdf accessed 983089983089 Jan 983090983088983088983095

983089983096

wwwconsiliumeuropaeucms983091_foshowPageaspid=983089983088983092983089amplang=DEampmode=g accessed 983089983089 Jan 983090983088983088983095983089983097 Comments by Umberto Incisa European Parliament hearing Security and Defence Sub-Committee Brussels983089983097 Sept 983090983088983088983094




in a political ethos rooted in civil society collective action the public sphere andreconciliation

Conflict prevention attempts to break vicious circles of instability with differententry points for intervention at the various stages of conflict cycles including

subsidiary tools of early warning and analysis on the one hand and rapid responseon the other It has also come to encompass capacity-building in target states anda shift from the culture of donorship by the EU to ownership by the victims ofconflict altering the contractual relationship between the two

Despite its roots in civil activism the term as currently used also implies a focuson the nation-state as institutional reformmdashof the security sector the judiciary andgovernancemdashforms a significant part of the toolkit deployed under this heading Atthe level of individual member states conflict prevention and post-conflict recon-struction are often allied to strategies which target lsquofailed or fragile statesrsquo983090983090

The dividing lines between conflict prevention and crisis management are alsoincreasingly blurred but while the two concepts are seen as complementary theycan also clash the long-term approach involved in conflict prevention is frequentlyknocked off course by the imperatives of short-term crisis management983090983091 Theconflict prevention discourse places much emphasis on a variety of policy instru-ments and their coordinated use in bridging the gap between chronic structuralproblems in states and the outbreak of violence It also intersects with multilater-alism in seeking to address conflict by working with target states and their regionalneighbours and through partnerships with NGOs and local civil society

Implications for human security

Human security as a term can be understood to encompass the concepts ofconflict prevention crisis management and civilndashmilitary coordination but ittakes them further It draws on the debates generated by these concepts as well asother terms used more broadly in the current global discourse such as lsquoresponsi-bility to protectrsquo lsquoeffective multilateralismrsquo and lsquohuman developmentrsquo

First of all insecurity is closely related to crisis Human security can be treated

as the lsquocrisis endrsquo of terms like human rights and human development It hasto do with human need at moments of extreme vulnerability not only in warsbut in natural and technological disasters as well Security is often viewed as theabsence of physical violence while development is viewed as material develop-ment improved living standards In much the same way human rights are oftentreated as civil and political rights even though properly speaking human rightsshould include economic and social rights These distinctions pervade much ofthe literature about human security as a policy concept yet they are misleadingMany conceptual boundaries such as those dividing the political civil economic

and military have to be redrawn in an era of globalization because they are definedlargely in terms of a nation-state frame All three conceptsmdashhuman security




human rights and human developmentmdashinclude lsquofreedom from fearrsquo as well aslsquofreedom from wantrsquo Just as human rights includes economic and social as wellas civil and political rights so human development is about more than a decentstandard of living It is also about feeling safe on the streets and being able to

influence political decision-making Human insecurity even in conflict is not just about the impact of military violence it is also about the consequences ofhuman rights violations violent crime and the material consequences of conflictIn contemporary wars only a minority of deaths occur in battle Most people whodie do so either because of violence deliberately targeted against civilians as a resultof terror ethnic cleansing or genocide or because of the indirect effects of warlack of access to health care disease hunger and homelessness

Rather than seeing these terms as relating to different fields of activity (economicsocial civil political etc) we can more usefully understand them as different ways

of addressing human need Human development is about capabilities and aboutthe construction of institutions that give rights meaning Nowadays the rule oflaw governance community-building and so on are all considered key compo-nents of human development strategies along with policies enabling people tomake sustainable livelihoods Human rights express a sense of human dignity anacknowledgement that human beings have the right to develop those capabili-tiesmdashthat meeting urgent needs is not charity or paternalism

So human security is part of human development and human rights but it is ifyou like at the sharp end of human development and human rightsmdashit addresses

what Amartya Sen has described as the lsquodownside risksrsquo faced by individuals andcommunities983090983092 Some authors use the term lsquovulnerabilitiesrsquo as opposed to lsquothreatsrsquopreferring the broader term that allows for more subtle forms of insecurity notlinked to immediate violence983090983093 Perhaps the indicator that comes closest to ameasure of human security is displaced persons Displaced persons are a typicalfeature of contemporary crises both natural disasters and wars Since the 983089983097983095983088sthere has been a steady increase in the number of displaced persons arising fromeach conflict In Lebanon in 983090983088983088983094 for example over 983089983088983088983088 Lebanese civilians werekilled and over 983092983088983088983088983088983088 people were forced to leave their homes Hundreds of

thousands had to leave New Orleans as a result of Hurricane Katrina Displacedpersons are the victims of both physical and material insecurity

Thus while human security is about crisis management it is about more thanthat for it offers a perspective on crisis itself If a lsquocrisisrsquo is an event or episodethat represents an urgent threat to the lsquocore values and system of a polityrsquo humansecurity is about how we respond to an urgent physical or material threat toindividuals and communities From a human security perspective the aim isnot just political stability it encompasses a notion of justice and sustainabilityHitherto stability has tended to be defined in terms of the absence of overt conflict

or in an economic perspective about halting a downward spiral of GDP or the




value of a currency In recent years the international community does seem tohave learned how to stabilize conflicts how to reach and sustain peace agreementsand how to stabilize economies983090983094 But it has not yet learned how to address thesecurity of individuals and communities and deal with crime human rights viola-

tions and joblessness The parlance of crisis management especially on the civilside within the EU does of course emphasize some of these lsquovulnerabilitiesrsquomdashforexample in the critical focus on strengthening the lsquorule of lawrsquo The language ofhuman security would further entrench this kind of thinking and would help tounderline the need to address these lsquovulnerabilitiesrsquo and thereby to reduce the riskof renewed crisis

Human security capabilities like crisis management require civilndashmilitarycoordination But it is more than just a matter of coordinationmdashor lsquointegrationrsquoor lsquosynergiesrsquo to borrow from current parlance human security is about how and

why civil and military capabilities are combined rather than their automatic inclu-sion as part of a standard conflict toolkit In classic wars civilians always insisted ontheir autonomy from the military Their ability to operate depended on lsquohumani-tarian spacersquomdashtheir neutrality and impartiality were important to allow themto help non-combatants prisoners of war and the wounded on all sides Manyhumanitarian and development agencies fear that association with the militarywill undermine their ability to work and indeed this has happened in Iraq andAfghanistan where the international institutions are perceived to be on the side ofthe coalition forces Human security however as spelled out in the next section

is not about war-fighting it is about protection of individuals and communi-ties and it is about expanding the rule of law while squeezing the arena of warIn contemporary wars where civilians are targets humanitarian space is disap-pearing In a human security operation the job of the military is to protect andpreserve that space rather than to fight an enemy Thus human security is not justabout developing a culture of civilndashmilitary cooperation it is about an entirelynew way of functioning in crises that is best described by a new language of humansecurity The discussion surrounding CMCO does of course emphasize that it isabout political coordination and not just about organizational arrangements but

such political coordination needs to be spelled out in terms of coherent goals andmethods and how they are defined

Crisis management whether we are talking about conflicts or humanitariandisasters is usually thought to encompass all phases of crisismdashprevention mitiga-tion recovery and reconstruction There is a tendency for the internationalcommunity to be preoccupied with phases and to assume that different phasescall for different tools and instruments Conflict prevention addresses the lsquovulner-abilitiesrsquo that are associated with lack of human securitymdashjoblessness weak ruleof law resulting in crime and human rights violations weak capacity to provide

public services These can be regarded as the structural conditions that make crisesmore likely They are not necessarily the causes of conflicts or natural disasters




but they weaken societyrsquos capacity to cope with crises These lsquovulnerabilitiesrsquo areusually exacerbated both by conflict and by disasters Thus in the aftermath ofcrises the conditions for future crises are not suppressed but further aggravatedOur solutions to crisis become part of a future problem In terms of dealing with

conflict this means that reconstruction is also prevention and that both preven-tion and reconstruction need to focus on the security of individuals rather thanonly on the stability of states

Human security could be considered a lsquobridging conceptrsquo between the immediateneed for stabilization and the need simultaneously and over the long term toaddress these structural conditions Rather than seeing stabilization and structuralassistance as relevant to different phases of crisis it is important to combine bothduring all phases even though the mix of instruments may vary according to thespecific situation

In the case of the EU the public language of foreign policy that is beginning toemerge from the experiences of collective action needs to have a clearer focus TheEU has distinctive public positions on issues such as the death penalty human rightslegislation Guantaacutenamo Bay and extraordinary rendition Media correspondentsand representatives of civil society groups from unions to NGOs and businessesare widening their horizons beyond the technocratic vocabulary of economicintegration to take account of the new and growing foreign policy dimensionto the Union At present this discourse is stranded in fragmented rhetoric andmultiple policy labels These add to the confusion of purpose behind ESDP and

CFSP and they also contribute to a lack of transparency and visibility Humansecurity already implicit in this discourse could offer a new dimension to theway the EU deals with conflict and instability The next section elaborates thisargument by spelling out what a human security policy would mean in practice

Praxis

Human security is utopian Even if we had the capabilities it is not practical or realistic 983090983095

To espouse human security can be regarded as requiring a paradigm shift fromtraditional national security approaches to foreign policy Another common criti-cism of the concept of human security which appears to contradict the lsquoso whatrsquocriticism instanced at the beginning of the previous section is the charge thatis too idealistic But it can be argued that this paradigm shift is actually alreadyunder waymdashand moreover that the new outlook is more realistic than traditionalnational security approaches since it represents the only possible approach to thekinds of insecurities that human beings face in the contemporary global era Howwe develop the concept of human security and imbue it with relevant meaning isactually part of the process of implementing this paradigm shift

The failure of the European constitutional treaty in 983090983088983088983093 and the presentuncertainty over whether and how it might be revived have limited the scope for




innovation in foreign policy-making The treatyrsquos proposals for an EU foreignminister and for a combined external action service would have provided institu-tional support for an expanded EU external presence but perhaps as importantlythe French and Dutch referendums sparked a crisis of democratic accountability

among the 983090983093 member states and led to a paralysis of integration exacerbated bydomestic political stalemates during this period in the Big Three foreign policymember states Germany France and the UK

The first years of the new century have also coincided with the passing of thehigh-water mark of EU enlargement with the accession of 983089983095 new central andeast European states future rounds involving Turkey and some of the Balkanstates remaining highly contested Enlargement has been arguably the EUrsquos mostsuccessful foreign policy and successor policies designed to systematize relationswith neighbours to the east and south of the Unionrsquos borders offer less clear-cut

avenues of external stabilizationDespite all this security policy at ground level has seen unprecedented growth

The EU currently has around 983089983088983088983088983088 personnel deployed in 983089983091 missions on threecontinents with Aceh Sudan and the DRC (Congo) added in the past year and amajor new engagement in Kosovo planned for 983090983088983088983095 The diversity and ambition ofthese missions from monitoring a border in Rafah to monitoring a peace processin Aceh are fuelling a wealth of experience and lessons learned and building aforeign policy acquis capable of informing future external security policy At thesame time the build up of capabilities has continued both through the military

force generation process and the creation training and deployment of rosters ofcivilian experts as well as the development of planning and operations infrastruc-ture in Brussels to meet the headline goals of 983090983088983088983096 (civilian) and 983090983088983089983088 (military) Thecreation of 983089983091 battlegroups and of civilian response teams (CRTs) is the outwardsign of this capacity development

Notwithstanding this positive picture overall the nagging question remainswhat is the EU actually doing with its foreign and security policies The polit-ical and strategic goals of ESDP are poorly articulated in Brussels in nationalcapitals and on the ground where the Union intervenes Mandates for external

security action date back to the Treaty of European Union of 983089983097983097983090 exist inEuropean Council declarations dating back to 983089983097983097983097983090983096 and are best codified inthe 983090983088983088983091 ESS In all these documents the emphasis is on security as fulfilling theEuropean integration project and as a necessary adjunct to the Unionrsquos develop-ment questions about the specific goals and modes of a common security policyare not addressed983090983097 The ESS itself with its focus on threats responsibilities andcapabilities leaves unanswered key questions about why the Union should inter-vene beyond its borders where it should do so and according to what criteriaA growing corpus of knowledge and experience from its diverse interventions

to date remains fractured lacking any strategic overview or lsquoroad maprsquo to enable




these experiences to inform future action Thus some critics take the view that theEUrsquos security strategy is in fact only a lsquopre-strategic conceptrsquo983091983088

The advantage of the term lsquohuman securityrsquo is that it can be used to combinemany of the concepts and ideas that have been developed in the ESDP It can

encompass conflict prevention crisis management and civilndashmilitary cooperationand indeed it draws on the assumptions inherent in these concepts But it alsooffers a way to act a set of principles for crisis management conflict preventionand civilndashmilitary cooperation How an institution acts in crises becomes a symbolof how it is perceived in general Security is bound up with political legitimacyWe feel safe if we trust our institutions and we trust our institutions if we see thatthey act effectively in crises

There is a lot of discussion nowadays about the lsquoresponsibility to protectrsquo andthe conditions under which it is right to use military force There is much less

discussion about how military force should be used in such a role and yet thisis critical for effective protection There are also discussions about why civilianelements of crisis management should be used with an emphasis on helping toestablish a rule of law but much less about how and when they work togetherwith the military Human security offers a set of principles that apply to bothlsquowhyrsquo and lsquohowrsquo both ends and means983091983089 A key element is the establishment ofthe rule of law and the associated institutions and from this perspective the roleof the military is neither war-fighting nor peacekeeping but rather supporting theestablishment of the rule of law

The first principle of a human security policy is respect for human rights Thisis the key concept and most radically different for the military from the classic useof military force For civilians it is more obvious since this is how we behave ina domestic setting For the military it means the primary goal is protecting civil-ians rather than defeating an adversary Of course sometimes it is necessary to tryto capture or even defeat insurgents but this has to be seen as a means to an endcivilian protection rather than the other way round

This principle implies a different way of thinking about collateral damageProportionate collateral damage can be justified within the framework of tradi-tional wars against foreign enemies The problem is that nowadays it is diffi cult to

distinguish between wars and human rights violations What appears to Ameri-cans or Israelis as collateral damage as a result of legitimate attempts to destroyan enemy appears to others as massive human rights violations A human securityoperation is more like a domestic operationmdasheveryone is in effect a citizen Thisprinciple entails minimizing all loss of life including the lives of the terroristsor insurgents who should be treated as criminals rather than enemies and wherepossible arrested rather than killed

This also means that human security operations may be more risky than contem-porary military operations because saving the lives of civilians whatever their

983091983088 J Lindley-French lsquoThe revolution in security affairs hard and soft security dynamics in the 983090983089st centuryrsquoEuropean Security 983089983091 983089 983090983088983088983092 pp 983089ndash983089983093




nationality comes before force protection This is something that is recognized byhuman rights activists who do risk their lives if not by politicians

Just as in coping with violence the focus is on the needs of the individual andnot only overall stabilization in economic terms the human security principle

implies a focus on individual need rather than on macro indicators like economicgrowth or budgetary stability

The second principle is the establishment of legitimate political authorityHuman security depends on the existence of legitimate institutions that gain thetrust of the population and have some enforcement capacity Again this appliesboth to physical security where the rule of law and a well-functioning system of justice are essential in constructing an individual sense of security and to materialsecurity where the provision of legitimate employment infrastructure and publicservices has to be underpinned by a regulatory framework Legitimate political

authority does not necessarily have to be wielded by a state it could rest in localgovernment or regional or international political arrangements like protector-ates or transitional administrations Since state failure is often the primary causeof conflict the reasons for state failure have to be taken into account in recon-structing legitimate political authority Measures like justice and security sectorreform disarmament demobilization and re-integration (DDR) and extension ofauthority and public service reform are critical for the establishment of legitimatepolitical authority

This second principle explicitly recognizes the limitations on the use of military

force The aim of any intervention is to stabilize the situation so that a space can becreated for a peaceful political process rather than to win through military meansalone The military like the civilians play an enabling role The military supportand make possible various civilian tasks that contribute to the construction ofinstitutions capable of solving or managing conflict In the end it is only thosewho are engaged in conflict who can end violence The most that external actorscan do is to help provide conditions that make this possible In other words the job of human security forces is stabilization or peace support rather than winningThis is obvious for civilian crisis management but less obvious for the military

who are used to believing that solutions can be imposed through forceActually in most counter-insurgency operations victory is very diffi cult to

achieve and can only be reached if at all through widespread destruction andrepression The Chechen capital of Grozny for example has been reduced torubble but sporadic violence continues The Israelis have succeeded in slowingdown suicide attacks but the overall situation is worsening Human securityprinciples explicitly recognize the impossibility of swift outright victory and aiminstead to establish safe zones where political solutions can be sought or wherecivilian instruments can help to provide the conditions for political processes

Techniques such as the establishment of safe havens humanitarian corridors orno-fly zones are typical of a human security approach




that there needs to be a single commander political or military who understandspolitics and has access to political authority

The third principle is multilateralism lsquoEffective multilateralismrsquo is another keyterm in the European discourse Multilateralism means more than simply lsquoacting

withas part of a group of statesrsquo In that narrow sense nearly all internationalinitiatives might be considered multilateral Multilateralism is closely relatedto legitimacy and is what distinguishes a human security approach from neo-colonialism

First multilateralism means a commitment to work with international institu-tions and through the procedures of international institutions This means firstand foremost working within the UN framework but it also entails workingwith or sharing out tasks among other regional organizations such as the OSCEand NATO in Europe the AU SADC and ECOWAS in Africa or the OAS in the

western hemisphereSecond multilateralism entails a commitment to creating common rules and

norms solving problems through rules and cooperation and enforcing the rulesNowadays legitimate political authority has to be situated within a multilateralframework Indeed state failure is partly to be explained in terms of the failure oftraditionally unilateralist states to adapt to multilateral ways of working

Third multilateralism has to include synthesis and interoperability rather thanduplication or rivalry An effective human security approach requires coordinationbetween intelligence foreign policy trade policy development policy and security

policy initiatives between the member states between the European Commissionand the Council and between these and other multilateral actors including theUN the World Bank the IMF and regional institutions Preventive and proactivepolicies cannot be effective if they are isolated let alone contradictory

The fourth principle is the bottom-up approach It is critical to have a goodgrasp of the local situation This requires intensive consultation not simply towin hearts and minds but in order to gain knowledge and understanding Thisprinciple seems obvious but there is often a built-in tendency to think lsquowe knowbestrsquo Womenrsquos groups are particularly important since women are usually more

likely than men to be engaged in the everyday consequences of conflict rather thanin sectarian struggles for power

Human security is about empowering vulnerable communities even in condi-tions of conflict and crisis rather than coercing or regulating them to producepeace A bottom-up approach also means a new contractual relationship betweenthe EU on the one hand and on the other states and local people who are thetarget of intervention It is also more conducive to the success of external missionsto build a better role for local intelligence and for longer-term sustainable relationsto make missions more accountable to local populations

The final principle is regional focus There is a tendency to focus on particularcountries when dealing with crises Yet insecurity spills over borders through

f t ti l i i l t k t d i ill l diti i iti




Leone without addressing other crises in West Africa especially Liberia The warin Afghanistan will not end without cooperation with Pakistan Iran and Tajiki-stan And there are many other examples of lsquobad neighbourhoodsrsquo In its relationswith neighbouring states the EU has recognized the importance of a regional

approach Its Neighbourhood Policy towards Russia and surrounding states andthe Barcelona ProcessEuro-Mediterranean Partnership both rely on the idea ofa regional dialogue but this principle has been less systematically applied to itscrisis policies

The case of Afghanistan though not the only example illustrates what cango wrong when the principles of human security are not applied In Afghani-stan NATO has tried to put into practice some of the current ideas about crisismanagement and civilndashmilitary cooperation in the provincial reconstruction teams(PRTs) Moreover these efforts are undertaken within a multilateral framework

involving the UN the EU and individual states including EU member statesHowever the overall approach represents a mix of traditional national securitythinking alongside some elements of what could amount to a human securityapproach First of all in the south and south-east the priority has been defeatingthe Taleban rather than protecting people Since it is often impossible to distin-guish Taleban fighters from civilians many civilians get killed However muchNATO and US forces proclaim their lsquohearts and mindsrsquo strategy the killing ofcivilians undermines those protestations Moreover PRTs in other regions are asit were contaminated by what is happening in the south and south-east Second

the inclusion of warlords and opium poppy-growers in the political institutionsand the weak rule of law including reliance on for example Sharirsquoa courts hasmeant a failure to establish legitimate political authority The present governmentis dependent on the international presence despite some real advances such as theelection of women trust in institutions is very low and this makes it extremelydiffi cult to mobilize popular support for efforts to defeat the Taleban Third theinclusion of warlords while partly of course explained by the American relianceon the Northern Alliance in toppling the Taleban is also the outcome of an exces-sively top-down approach and a failure to involve civil society especially in the

initial political settlement Finally although there is now talk about Pakistanrsquosresponsibility for harbouring the TalebanAl-983121aeda not nearly enough emphasishas been placed on relations with neighbours thus allowing insurgents to berecruited from abroad

Is it utopian to suggest that the concept of human security can be applied insuch diffi cult dangerous and complex crises as Afghanistan It is evident that tradi-tional security approaches do not work Moreover elements of a human securityapproach already exist in much EU thinking and doing What we are suggestingis that developing the narrative and putting into practice the principles of human

security should at least be tried if we are serious about facing up to current securitychallenges




Human security as value added

What would human security principles add to what is being done already Essen-tially they amount to a strategic narrative with several consequences

bull Coherence It is very diffi cult to achieve coherence through institutional mea-sures Turf battles and bureaucratic competition are inevitable in any large or-ganization Additional coordination mechanisms can often just add to the layersof competition What is really needed is conceptual coherence clarity aboutshared goals and principles encouraging notions of public service and commit-ment

bull Effectiveness The principles of human security provide a focus for external man-dates They offer a framework for standardizing doctrines and rules of engage-ment Essentially the principles adapted to each situation could be expressed

on a card carried by personnel deployed to crisis regions They could also beused as a checklist for those involved in planning and evaluating operations andprovide a reference point for the EUrsquos intervention

bull Visibility At present public awareness of the EU role in dealing with crises isvery limited A readily understandable policy concept could help to increasethe public impact of EU missions A human security approach would addressboth the internal and external legitimacy of intervention underpinning it witha set of norms and values and offering both EU citizens and those in targetcountries with clear principles and justifications for security policy

Why should the EU adopt a human security approach and lexicon The first andobvious argument is self-interest Europe can no longer insulate itself from crisesabroad Terrorism transnational crime and migration are all intertwined with crisesin the Middle East Africa and elsewhere A focus on the human factors behind(in)security also allows us to construct more plausible links between our internal domestic security and external relations instead of tolerating the dichotomy ofbombing insurgents abroad and building community programmes to head offpotential suicide bombers at home

But even if there were not self-interest there is an ethical argument Europeanswatch television and browse the Internet and if they are aware of tragedies inother parts of the world they do want to be able to contribute to their alleviationConcern about wars human rights the environment and poverty are part of theidentity of Europeans

Perhaps most importantly there is a legal argument that brings together theethical and self-interest arguments Europeans have an interest in the extension ofinternational law and international law has to be underpinned by global normsHuman security is about upholding those norms in crisis situations It could serve asa lsquosymbolic signpostrsquo in the development of the EUrsquos strategic culture reconciling

the Unionrsquos normative and value-driven tradition with a quest for effectivenesswhich has led the EU to develop military capabilities983091983090 A human security doctrine




for Europe brings together both internal and external aspects of security and alsosuggests new ways of combining them

The foundational ideas behind European external relations reflect a backwardglance to history as well as an attempt to look forward to the international environ-

ment of the twenty-first century Many Europeans crave a role for the EU onthe world stage as a peace promoter in order to banish the demons of Europersquosown conflict-ridden experience they seek to extend beyond Europersquos borders thezone of peace and stability which the integration project has helped to achieveand they believe that the EU can use its transformative power to persuade othersto move from war to peace and to universalize its own norms and ethics983091983091 Theadoption of an explicit human security approach would be a way to reiterate andreinforce those foundational ideas and help to break through the political paralysisthat followed the French and Dutch repudiation of the constitution

Conclusion

In this article we have proposed human security as the basis of both a discursive linguistic shift and a change in operating principles We believe that the languageof European security is important and that the current fragmentation into multiplepolicy labels adds layers of linguistic confusion to an already incoherent institu-tional architecture Europeans in 983090983095 different member states need to find commonmeanings that express the unique character of CFSPESDP and enable them toproject the EUrsquos personality on the world stage We have also examined what ahuman security approach means in practice to show that it is not simply a labelserving the EUrsquos own image as a security actor but allows the EU to put in placea coherent and innovative policy tailored to the complex needs of contemporaryglobal security

There are those of course who see the EU as a means for strengtheningEuropean nation-states in an era of globalization and envisage a foreign policybased on self-interest While the foundational idea(l)s of the EU led to its beingcharacterized as a normative ethical or civiliancivilizing power other ideas havealways existed alongside this dominant thread for example that the EU rather

than the Western European Union should be a guarantor alongside NATO ofEuropean defence983091983092 Human security offers a way to reiterate and reinforce thosefoundational ideas which are inspirational to many Europeans and to distance theEU from aspirations to great power status

Finally a human security approach may be the only way to close what can bedescribed as the security gap Conventional military approaches do not seem to beworking in places like Iraq or Afghanistan or Lebanon Millions of people live insituations of deep insecurity in large parts of Africa the Middle East the BalkansCentral Asia and the Caucasus The inability of our institutions to address the

challenge of global insecurity greatly weakens their legitimacy






them unconsciously as mind maps in practical analysis and problem-solving At thesame time recent debates about the semantics of the lsquoglobal war on terrorismrsquo orwhether what is going on in Sudan should be called genocide reveal acute polit-ical sensitivity towards policy terms and labels In a Europe of 983090983095 member states

concepts can help us to reach common understandings and expressions of issuesThe praxis of human security deals with how this doctrinal concept translates intopractical action and whether it is useful in guiding the actions of policy-makersplanners and experts in the field

Lexis and lexicon

We already do human security we just donrsquot call it that983092

This is a common response in discussions with practitioners about the concept of

human security It presupposes that there is a difference between calling somethinglsquohuman securityrsquo and actually doing lsquohuman securityrsquo that is between concepts orideas and political practice Yet political concepts take hold only if they resonateif they contain real meaning as providing either a guide to action or a descrip-tion of practice and if subsequently action confirms the rightness of the descrip-tion Terms like lsquohumanitarianismrsquo or lsquodemocracyrsquo have often been discredited asOrwellian types of Newspeak when wars are conducted in their name preciselybecause they are empty linguistic vessels

Developments in the European Common Foreign And Security Policy (CFSP)

have helped catalyse an emerging European discourse but the lexicon of termsused is a muddled affair which obscures rather than clarifies the nature of Europeanforeign policy Three key terms that are used to name what lsquois donersquo provide atleast a partial view of what we mean by a European Security and Defence Policy(ESDP) these are crisis management civilndashmilitary coordination and conflict preventionWe have selected these concepts as ones that are explicitly used within texts aboutESDP indicating that certain essential features of the idea of lsquohuman securityrsquo canbe found in current ESDP discourse and leading us to assert that lsquohuman securityrsquoseems in essence to be something lsquoEuropeanrsquo However we argue that using the

specific term lsquohuman securityrsquo can help to take what is done a stage further

Crisis management

Generally speaking a crisis is something that is considered an lsquourgent threat to thecore values of a polityrsquo983093

The term lsquocrisis managementrsquo exemplifies the imprecisionof the EUrsquos CFSP and ESDP language and illustrates the lsquoterminological junglersquothat surrounds collective security policy983094 Terms like lsquocrisis responsersquo lsquocivilian crisis

983092

Interview Post Conflict Reconstruction Unit Department for International Development London 983095 July983090983088983088983094983093 Arjen Boin Magnus Ekengren and Mark Rhinard lsquoFuntional security and crisis management capacity in the

E U i rsquo A il 983090983088983088983094 983090 htt l id i l t t d t il983090983088983088983094










































983089983096














































Praxis
























































































Conclusion

















































983089983096














































Praxis
























































































Conclusion




















































Praxis
























































































Conclusion




























































































Conclusion








human security kaldor

Documents