Human Security Dilemmas

As a Security Dilemma: Human Security

Human Security; One of the key question at the hearth of contemporary security : What does it to be secure?

In terms of national security: in terms of traditional way of thinking security having Integrity of borders and independent control of territory, economic wealth and military power, preservation of vital interests.

But what does it mean to make a human being secure? If we change our referent object to state to human being, what does it make a human secure?

We can think about human security then as an another approach to security that developed after the end of the cold war, and in lighted the short comings of realist approach of the security. Rather than developing an academic discourse, human

Therefore, it can be seen that human security takes its place within widening within security studies in terms of the reference object no longer the state but the human being and for the human security the claim is that the reference object is all human beings regardless of their geographical location which means that it is not only about citizens’ protection of a state but protection of all humans. In terms of agents of security of who provides security, which can be taken as a shift from the state alone to intergovernmental organizations to non-governmental organizations perhaps one of the implications of human security is that the state is no longer sole provider of security and also agents of security need to be transnational as well if the threat is international so it may create a need for international

In May 1998, Canada and Norway announced that the human security was to be the leading principle in their foreign policy security. That draws the question in which way human security is useful for policy makers. (?) Accordingly, in 1999 nine countries which can be counted as middle powers established the Human Security Network and those countries are: Canada, Austria, Norway, Chili, Greece, Jordan, Ireland, Mali, the Netherlands, Slavonia, Switzerland and Thailand. In addition to these countries, Japan also had adopted the Human security concept but stayed separate from the Human Security Network. It worth taken under consideration that why some countries adopt the concept whereas others do not and also what can be their motivation on adopting the concept since none of the big powers did not. And the other question that also comes out is that what kind of policies adopting human security concept as their foreign policy framework enables (?) and how those policies practices benefit the state(s) and how and why some states wary on human security