Understanding global security - Peter Hough

SECURITY AND SECURITIZATION
non-military concerns now that the Soviet threat had receded. The impact of this was
explicit in the 1994 ‘National Security Strategy’, an annual foreign policy manifesto.
‘Not all security risks are military in nature. Transnational phenomena such as
terrorism, narcotics trafficking, environmental degradation, rapid population growth
and refugee flows also have security implications for both present and long term
American policy’ (White House 1994: 1). Clinton’s widening approach to security
owed much to his special adviser Strobe Talbot who, in turn, was inspired by Joseph
Nye’s concept of ‘soft power’ (Nye 1990). Soft power for Nye denotes the non-military
dimension of state power, particularly rooted in the world of information. For the
US government being ‘on top’ of information on global issues was useful not only
for better comprehending problems like AIDS and transnational crime but for
advancing the USA’s standing in the world. Explicit recognition that the protection
of US citizens was a domestic as well as foreign policy matter came in the aftermath
of the September 11th 2001 terrorist strikes on New York and Washington with the
launch of a new government department for ‘Homeland Security’.
Fewer countries have taken the more radical step of deepening as well as widening
by embracing human security. The Canadian government like their southern
neighbour were influenced by Nye but have gone further and repeatedly expressed
their support for human security in their foreign policy statements. Canada’s Foreign
Minister from 1996 to 2000, Lloyd Axworthy, advanced the concept rhetorically in the
UN General Assembly and other global fora and practically, by being a leading
advocate for the creation of the International Criminal Court. Cynics have suggested
that this strategy was just a tactical move by the Canadian government to raise the
diplomatic profile of a middle ranking power in an exercise of populism (McDonald
2002: 282). Axworthy’s advocacy of ‘soft power’ gives some credence to this since
Nye’s concept was ultimately concerned with the advancement of state interests
rather than altruism or the global interest, but the Canadian government have done
much to further global political responses for the common good. The Canadians, for
example, have been at the forefront of campaigns to ban the use of land mines and
reform the UN Security Council so that it is less constrained by power politics.
Perhaps most significantly for the advancement of deepened security, the
Canadian government signed a declaration with their Norwegian counterparts at
the 1998 Lysoen Conference launching the Human Security Network. This network
advocates the development of global policies focused on the human interest, whether
or not these happen to coincide with state interests. By 2003 the network had
expanded to include ten other states, both geographically and politically diverse
(Austria, Chile, Greece, Republic of Ireland, Jordan, Mali, Netherlands, Slovenia,
Switzerland and Thailand).
The securitization of issues
It is clear that designating an issue as a matter of security is not just a theoretical
question but carries ‘real-world’ significance. The traditional, Realist way of framing
security presupposes that military issues (and certain economic issues for Neorealists)
are security issues and as such must be prioritized by governments above
other ‘low politics’ issues, important though these might be.
14