learning with professionals - Higgins Counterterrorism Research ...


learning with professionals - Higgins Counterterrorism Research ...

ecognizable external military threats and a growing body of scholars and some in government

who emphasize personal security.

The state-centric or conservative model focuses on protection of a state’s territory and

population from external military, economic, and ideological threats emanating from

another recognizable sovereign state or alliance. Its responses call for strong defense budgets,

military counter-alliances, and the projection of diplomatic, economic, and military


The human security-centric or liberal model argues that states cannot be stable or

secure if the individuals that they comprise feel insecure and threatened by pestilence,

crime, poverty, environmental degradation, and unresponsive or repressive governments.

Human security also assumes that many of these threats — such as disease — do

not emanate from recognizable or intentional threateners or enemies and thus call for

global cooperation.

Since publication of the NIE, several studies have elaborated on its points and given

them more empirical content. Convincing the world’s political leaders that infectious diseases

such as AIDS pose a national and global security threat has been a more daunting

task because there is rarely if ever a smoking gun that can tie diseases directly to national

and global security and mobilize the world’s countries to deal with them. Instead, to paraphrase

Thomas Hobbes, diseases will make life even more nasty, brutish, and short. It is

the cumulative effects of this Hobbesian process that will erode national and global security

as mass killers such as AIDS, TB, and malaria undermine social and economic

growth and development, stymie political development, and intensify the struggle for

scarce resources and thereby destabilize already troubled polities.

Clinton Administration Links Disease to National Security

Responding in part to the 2000 National Intelligence Estimate, the Clinton administration

declared AIDS to be a national security threat and launched a major effort in Congress,

the U.N., and with U.S. allies and lending institutions to secure more funding for it

and related diseases. The upshot was a tripling of U.S. funds to over $1 billion annually

and a similar surge in global spending. Both former Secretary of State Madeline Albright

and National Security Adviser Samuel R. Berger subsequently highlighted the Clinton

administration’s elevation of the fight against infectious diseases to that of a “national

security priority” as one of its chief accomplishments.

A Conservative Bush Administration Follows Suit and Ups Ante

After some hesitancy, including elimination of the senior international health adviser

position on the National Security Council established during President Clinton’s tenure,

the Bush administration raised the health and security nexus to an even higher level of

importance. It also added a more visible moral imperative championed by its evangelical

political base. “I know of no enemy in war,” declared Secretary of State Powell at the

U.N. Special General Assembly Session on HIV/AIDS, “more insidious than AIDS, an


More magazines by this user
Similar magazines