Introduction
The concept of security in international relations has undergone a significant transformation in the 21st century, with debates increasingly focusing on whether human security—a framework prioritising individual safety and well-being—has surpassed traditional state security, which emphasises the protection of national sovereignty and territorial integrity. While state security remains a cornerstone of global politics, emerging challenges such as climate change, pandemics, and transnational terrorism have shifted attention towards the protection of individuals and communities. This essay critically examines the argument that human security has taken precedence over state security, exploring the evolution of these concepts, the driving forces behind the rise of human security, and the persistent relevance of state-centric approaches. Through an analysis of contemporary global issues and academic perspectives, it will argue that while human security has gained significant traction, it has not fully eclipsed state security but rather complements and challenges it in a complex interplay.
The Evolution of Security Concepts
Historically, security in international relations was synonymous with state security, rooted in the Westphalian notion of sovereignty established in 1648. This paradigm prioritised the defence of national borders, military power, and state interests, reflecting a realist perspective where states were the primary actors in global affairs (Buzan, 1991). However, the end of the Cold War marked a turning point, as intra-state conflicts, human rights abuses, and non-traditional threats exposed the limitations of this approach. The 1994 Human Development Report by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) introduced the concept of human security, defining it as freedom from fear and want, encompassing seven dimensions including economic, food, health, environmental, personal, community, and political security (UNDP, 1994). This shift broadened the security discourse, placing individuals rather than states at the centre of concern. Indeed, this redefinition signalled a growing recognition that threats to human lives—such as poverty or disease—could be as devastating as military invasions, thus challenging the traditional hierarchy of security priorities.
The Rise of Human Security in the 21st Century
The 21st century has witnessed a notable rise in the prominence of human security due to the nature of contemporary global challenges. For instance, the 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States underscored the limitations of state security in addressing non-state actors like Al-Qaeda, whose operations transcend national borders (Kaldor, 2007). Similarly, the 2014-2016 Ebola outbreak in West Africa and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic have highlighted how health crises can destabilise entire regions, necessitating a focus on individual well-being over mere territorial defence (WHO, 2020). Furthermore, climate change, often termed a ‘threat multiplier,’ exacerbates resource scarcity and displacement, directly impacting human livelihoods while often outstripping the capacity of state-centric security measures to respond effectively (Barnett and Adger, 2007). These examples illustrate how threats to human security frequently undermine state stability itself, prompting international actors to prioritise individual safety through frameworks like the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), endorsed by the United Nations in 2005 to prevent mass atrocities.
Moreover, global institutions and policies increasingly reflect this shift. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), adopted in 2015, integrate human security principles by addressing poverty, health, and environmental sustainability, arguably sidelining traditional military concerns in favour of holistic human development (United Nations, 2015). While critics might argue that such initiatives lack enforceable mechanisms, their widespread adoption by states and non-governmental organisations signals a normative shift towards valuing individual security. This trend suggests that human security is not merely a theoretical construct but a practical imperative in addressing 21st-century challenges.
The Continued Relevance of State Security
Despite the growing emphasis on human security, it would be premature to assert that it has wholly taken precedence over state security. States remain the primary units of international order, and their security continues to underpin global stability. For example, geopolitical tensions, such as those between Russia and Ukraine in 2022, demonstrate the enduring importance of territorial integrity and military preparedness in the face of conventional threats (Smith, 2022). Moreover, states are often the primary actors in delivering human security, as they control resources and policy frameworks necessary to address individual needs. A case in point is the UK government’s integrated security strategies, which balance national defence with commitments to international development aid, suggesting a complementary rather than competitive relationship between the two paradigms (UK Government, 2021).
Additionally, the prioritisation of human security can sometimes undermine state sovereignty, creating tensions. Interventions justified under human security, such as NATO’s 2011 operation in Libya, have been criticised for overstepping state autonomy and exacerbating instability, thus raising questions about the practicality of prioritising individuals over states (Bellamy, 2011). Therefore, while human security has gained ground, the structural and political realities of the international system ensure that state security retains a significant, if contested, role.
Balancing Human and State Security: A Complex Interplay
Rather than viewing human security as having fully supplanted state security, it is more accurate to describe their relationship as one of interdependence. Human security often relies on stable state structures for implementation, while state security is increasingly understood to encompass the protection of populations from non-military threats. This interplay is evident in policies addressing migration, where states must secure borders (state security) while safeguarding the rights and safety of refugees (human security), as seen in the European Union’s response to the Syrian refugee crisis (Betts and Loescher, 2011). Arguably, the challenge lies in reconciling these priorities, as overemphasising one at the expense of the other can lead to unintended consequences, such as neglecting national defence or undermining individual rights through excessive securitisation.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while human security has emerged as a critical framework in the 21st century, driven by global challenges like pandemics, climate change, and terrorism, it has not entirely taken precedence over state security. Instead, the two concepts coexist in a nuanced relationship, with human security gaining prominence but often relying on state mechanisms for realisation. Contemporary examples and policy shifts, such as the SDGs and health crisis responses, underscore the growing relevance of individual well-being, yet geopolitical conflicts and sovereignty concerns affirm the enduring necessity of state security. The implication for international relations is clear: future security frameworks must integrate both paradigms, balancing the protection of individuals with the stability of states. This dual focus not only reflects the complexity of modern threats but also ensures a more comprehensive approach to global peace and stability. As the field evolves, further research into harmonising these dimensions will be essential for addressing the multifaceted challenges of our time.
References
- Barnett, J. and Adger, W.N. (2007) Climate change, human security and violent conflict. Political Geography, 26(6), pp. 639-655.
- Bellamy, A.J. (2011) The Responsibility to Protect: The Global Effort to End Mass Atrocities. Polity Press.
- Betts, A. and Loescher, G. (2011) Refugees in International Relations. Oxford University Press.
- Buzan, B. (1991) People, States and Fear: An Agenda for International Security Studies in the Post-Cold War Era. Harvester Wheatsheaf.
- Kaldor, M. (2007) Human Security: Reflections on Globalization and Intervention. Polity Press.
- Smith, K. (2022) Geopolitical Risk and Security in the 21st Century. Routledge.
- UK Government (2021) Global Britain in a Competitive Age: The Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy. HM Government.
- United Nations (2015) Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. United Nations General Assembly.
- UNDP (1994) Human Development Report 1994. United Nations Development Programme.
- WHO (2020) Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Pandemic. World Health Organization.
