Thanks for the update and for the record I have to go to the airport on Friday and I will be there at the same time I don't have a car so I can get a ride to the airport
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
0 ratings0% found this document useful (0 votes)
22 views23 pages
Security
Thanks for the update and for the record I have to go to the airport on Friday and I will be there at the same time I don't have a car so I can get a ride to the airport
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 23
Introduction
What is Security?
The term "security" refers to the absence of
threats.
Human life and the life of a country are both
fraught with dangers. Every time a person
leaves his or her home, their existence and
way of life are threatened in some way.
Things that threaten 'core values' should be
considered in security discussions.
Security only refers to extremely dangerous
threats that could jeopardise core values to
the point where they would be irreparably
damaged if we did nothing to address the
situation.
There are two types of security conceptions:
traditional and non-traditional.Traditional Notions
What are the external threats?
Traditional security thinking holds that
military threats pose the greatest threat to a
country. Any other country jeopardises the
core values of sovereignty, independence
and territorial integrity by threatening military
actions.
In a situation like war not only soldiers are
likely to be injured or killed. Ordinary men
and women are frequently made targets of
war in order to sever their allegiance to the
conflict.
In such a situation a government has the
following options to choose:
* surrender
+ promise to increase war costs in order to
deter the opposing side from attacking.
+ To defend itself in the event of a war,
denying the attacking country.
When faced with a conflict, governments
may choose to surrender, but this is not
advertised as the country's policy.
As a result, security policy is divided into two
parts: deterrence, which is concerned with
preventing war, and defence, which is
concemed with limiting or terminating the
war.
The third component of traditional security
policy is the balance of power.
As a result, governments are acutely aware
of the power dynamic that exists between
their country and other nations. They work
hard to maintain a favourable power balance
with other countries, particularly those in
close proximity, with whom they disagree, or
with whom they have previously clashed.ARMS CONTROL TREATIES
ropa
Limited Test Ban Nuclear-Non Proliferation Anti-Ballastic Missile
Treaty (LTBT) Treaty (NPT) Treaty (ABMT)
Alliance Building
Military power is an important part of
maintaining a balance of power, but
economic and technological power are also
important because they serve as the
foundation for military power.
Traditional security policy includes a fourth
component: alliance building.
An alliance is a group of states that work
together to deter or defend against military
attacks. Most alliances are formalised in
written treaties and are based on a fairly
clear identification of who poses a threat.Why Alliances are formed?
Alliances are formed by countries to increase
their effective power in comparison to
another country or alliance.
Alliances are formed based on national
interests, and these interests can shift over
time.
For example, in the 1980s, the United States
supported Islamic militants in Afghanistan
against the Soviet Union, but later attacked
them after Al Qaeda—an Islamic militant
group led by Osama bin Laden—launched
terrorist attacks against America on
September 11, 2001.
The majority of security threats come from
outside a country's borders. This is because
the international system is a rather brutal
arena with no central authority capable of
regulating behaviour.
Within a country, the threat of violence is
regulated by an acknowledged central
authority — the government — but there is
no acknowledged central authority that
stands above everyone else in global politics.
It's alluring to believe that the United Nations
is or could be such a power.
The United Nations is a member-driven
organisation, and its authority exists only to
the extent that its members allow it to exist
and obey it. Each country is responsible for
its own security in international politics.Internal
Traditional security is also concerned with
internal security.
It is not given as much weight because,
following WWII, it appeared that the internal
security of the world's most powerful
countries was more or less assured.
Following 1945, the United States and the
Soviet Union appeared to be united and to
be on the verge of establishing peace within
their respective borders.
The majority of European countries,
particularly those in powerful Western
Europe, faced no serious threats from within-
border groups or communities.
These countries focused their efforts
primarily on threats that came from outside
their borders.The Cold War was a period following WWII in
which the Western alliance led by the United
States fought the Soviet-led Communist
alliance.
Both alliances were wary of each other's
military assaults.
Furthermore, some European powers were
concermed about violence in their colonies
caused by colonised people seeking
independence. (For example, in the 1950s,
the French were in Vietnam, and the British
were in Kenya in the 1950s and early 1960s.)
When the colonies gained independence in
the late 1940s, their security concerns
mirrored those of European powers.
Some newly independent countries, such as
Europe's major powers, became members of
Cold War alliances. The Cold War between
the two superpowers was responsible for
roughly one-third of all wars in the post-
World War II period. The vast majority of
these conflicts occurred in the Third World.
The European colonial powers feared
violence in the colonies, and some colonial
people feared that their former colonial rulers
in Europe would attack them after
independence.As a result, they needed to prepare to defend
themselves in the event of imperial war.
Security challenges confronting newly
independent Asian and African countries
differed from those confronting Europe in
two ways. First, the new countries had to
deal with the threat of war with their
neighbours. They had to be worried about
internal military conflict as well.
These countries faced threats not only from
the outside, primarily their neighbours, but
also from within. Many newly independent
countries began to fear their neighbours
more than the US, the Soviet Union, or
former colonial powers.
They fought for control of borders and
territories, as well as people and populations,
or all three at the same time.
Internally, the new states were worried about
separatist movements attempting to
establish independent states. At times,
external and internal threats merged.
External and internal wars posed a serious
threat to the security of the new states.WHAT IS COLLECTIVE SECURITY?
d rather loosely in the
8.
will work together to solve
collectively together.Non-Traditional
Notions
In addition to military threats, this concept
encompasses a wide range of threats and
dangers affecting human existence.
Human security in a non-traditional sense, in
which the emphasis shifts from the state to
the individual. It is security in a broad sense,
including other forms of insecurity such as
hunger, poverty, civil war, and so on.
In the last century, their own governments
have killed more people than foreign armies.
According to all proponents, the primary goal
of human security is to protect individuals.
Supporters of the 'narrow' definition of
human security focus on violent threats to
individuals, or, in the words of former UN
Secretary-General Kofi Annan, "the
protection of communities and individuals
from internal violence."According to proponents of the "broad"
concept of human security, hunger, disease,
and natural disasters kill far more people
than war, genocide, and terrorism combined.
According to human security policy, people
should be protected from both these threats
and violence.
The human security agenda includes
economic security and "threats to human
dignity."
To put it another way, the broadest
formulation emphasises "freedom from want"
and "freedom from fear."
Global security emerged in the 1990s in
response to global threats such as global
warming, international terrorism, and health
epidemics such as AIDS, bird flu, and COVIT-
19.
These problems cannot be solved by a single
country. In some cases, a single country may
be forced to bear a disproportionate share of
the burden of a global problem, such as
environmental degradation.New Sources Of
Threats
Human security and global security both
have non-traditional perspectives that
emphasise the changing nature of security
threats.
Terrorism
It refers to political violence that targets
civilians on purpose and indiscriminately.
International terrorism involves citizens or
territories from more than one country.
Terrorist organisations use force or the threat
of force to alter a political context or
condition that they do not agree with.
Civilians are frequently targeted in order to
terrorise the public and use public
dissatisfaction as a weapon against national
governments or other opposing parties.
Terrorists have previously hijacked planes or
planted bombs in trains, cafes, markets, and
other crowded places.
Despite the fact that terrorism is not new,
other governments and the general public
have paid more attention to it since the
terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in
New York on September 11, 2001.
Previously, the majority of terrorist attacks
took place in the Middle East, Europe, Latin
America, and South Asia.Human Rights
It is divided into three sections. Political
rights include freedom of expression and
assembly.
There are two kinds of rights: economic and
social rights.
Rights of colonised peoples, as well as
ethnic and indigenous minorities. Events
such as Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, Rwanda's
genocide, and Indonesian military killings in
East Timor have sparked debate over
whether the UN should intervene to stop
human rights violations.
Some argue that the UN Charter authorises
the use of force in the defence of human
rights. Others argue that the national
interests of powerful states will determine
which cases of human rights violations the
UN will investigate.Poverty
It exacerbates insecurity. Global population
will rise to 700-800 million in 25 years, then
stabilise at 900-1000 million.
More than half of global population growth is
now attributed to these countries.
Most developing countries’ populations are
expected to triple in the next 50 years, while
many wealthy countries' populations will
shrink.
Wealthy states and social groups benefit
from low population growth, while poor
states and social groups benefit from high
income per capita.
A global divide between the Northern and
Southern hemispheres exists.
For example, the majority of global armed
conflicts now occur in Sub-Saharan Africa,
the world's poorest region. More people
were killed in wars in this region in the early
twenty-first century than anywhere else.Southern poverty has caused mass migration
to the North in search of a better life,
especially economic opportunity.
Global political tensions have risen.
International law distinguishes between
migrants (who leave voluntarily) and refugees
(who are forcibly displaced) (those who flee
from war, natural disaster or political
persecution).
In general, states must accept refugees but
not migrants.
Internally displaced people are those who
have fled their homes but remain within
national borders, as opposed to refugees.
Internally displaced Kashmiri Pandits fled the
violence in the Kashmir Valley in the early
1990s.
A 1990s study found that all but three of the
60 refugee flows coincided with an internal
armed conflict.Migration, business, tourism, and military
operations have accelerated the spread of
epidemics like HIV/AIDS, bird flu, and SARS.
The ability of one country to contro! disease
spread affects infections in other countries.
In 2003, an estimated 4 crore people had HIV
AIDS, with two-thirds in Africa and half in
South Asia.
In the late 1990s, new HIV AIDS drugs
dramatically reduced deaths in North
America and other industrialised nations.
Others, such as ebola and hantaviruses,
have emerged, while old diseases like
cholera, tuberculosis, and malaria have
mutated into drug-resistant forms that are
difficult to treat.
Economic consequences of animal
epidemics. During the late 1990s mad cow
disease outbreak, Britain lost billions of
dollars, and bird flu shut down several Asian
poultry exports.Epidemics like these show how states are
becoming more interdependent, diminishing
the importance of borders and emphasising
global cooperation.
Extending the definition of security does not
include any disease or distress.
This will likely render the concept of security
incoherent. Anything can cause a security
breach.
Even if the threat is unique, it must meet a
minimum common criterion, such as
endangering the referent's (a state or group
of people's) existence.
The Maldives may be threatened by global
warming as rising sea levels submerge large
portions of the country, while HIV/AIDS
threatens Southern African countries as one
in every six adults has the disease (one in
three for Botswana, the worst case).In 1994, the Hutu tribe slaughtered nearly
five lakh Tutsi in Rwanda. The same as
traditional security conceptions, non-
traditional security conceptions are context-
dependent.
DISARMAMENT CONVENTIONS
LOGICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION (BWC), 1972
'E CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION (CWC), 1992,
¢ ANTI-BALLISTIC MISSILE (ABM) TREATY, 1972
¢ STRATEGIC ARMS LIMITATIONS TREATY II OR SALT II
STRATEGIC ARMS REDUCTION TREATY (START).Cooperative Security
Rather than military confrontation, many of
these nontraditional security threats
necessitate cooperation.
Military force may have a role to play in
combating terrorism or enforcing human
rights (and even here, there are limits to what
force can achieve), but it's hard to see how it
would help alleviate poverty, manage
migration and refugee movements, or control
epidemics.
Using military force would almost always
worsen the situation! It is far more effective
to develop strategies that involve
international cooperation.
Bilateral (between any two countries),
regional, continental, or global cooperation
are all possible. It all depends on the nature
of the threat and the willingness and ability of
countries to respond.Nongovernmental organisations (Amnesty
International, the Red Cross, private
foundations and charities, churches and
religious organisations, trade unions,
associations, social and development
organisations, businesses and corporations,
and great personalities may all be involved in
cooperative security (e.g. Mother Teresa,
Nelson Mandela).
Cooperative security may require the use of
force as a last resort. The international
community may be forced to sanction the
use of force against governments that
murder their own citizens or ignore the plight
of their citizens who are afflicted by poverty,
disease, and disaster.
Nontraditional security is far better when the
international community sanctioned and
used force collectively rather than when a
single country decides to use force
unilaterally.How is India dealing with these
security threats?
Traditional (military) and non-traditional
threats to India's security have emerged from
both within and outside its borders. Its
security strategy is made up of four main
components that have been used in various
combinations over time.
India has been involved in conflicts with its
neighbours in the past, including Pakistan in
1947-48, 1965, 1971, and 1999, and China
in 1962.
India's decision to conduct nuclear tests in
1998 was justified by the Indian government
as a means of ensuring national security
because it is surrounded by nuclear-armed
countries in the South Asian region.
In 1974, India conducted its first nuclear test.
To protect its security interests, it must
strengthen international norms and
institutions.Jawaharlal Nehru, India's first Prime Minister,
supported Asian solidarity, decolonization,
disarmament, and the United Nations as a
forum for resolving international conflicts.
India has also taken steps to establish a
universal and non-discriminatory non-
proliferation regime in which all countries
have the same rights and obligations when it
comes to WMD (nuclear, biological,
chemical).
It argued for a more equitable New World
Economic Order (NIEO). Most importantly, it
used non-alignment to help carve out a
peace zone outside of the two superpowers'
bloc politics.
The 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which provides a
roadmap for reducing greenhouse gas
emissions to combat global warming, has
been signed and ratified by 160 countries. In
support of cooperative security initiatives,
Indian troops have been deployed to UN
peacekeeping missions around the world.Meeting internal security challenges: Several
militant groups from Nagaland, Mizoram,
Punjab, and Kashmir, among others, have
attempted to secede from India on several
occasions.
India has attempted to maintain national
unity by adopting a democratic political
system that allows various communities and
groups to freely express their grievances and
share political power.
Finally, India has attempted to develop its
economy in such a way that the vast majority
of its citizens are lifted out of poverty and
misery, and huge economic inequalities are
eliminated.
Democratic politics creates spaces for the
voice of the poor and disadvantaged to be
heard.
The democratically elected governments are
under pressure to combine economic growth
and human development.What do you understand about
the term “Kyoto Protocol”?
The Kyoto Protocol is an international treaty
that extends the 1992 United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) by requiring state parties to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, based on
the scientific consensus that (part one) global
warming is occurring and that human-
caused CO2 emissions are a significant
contributor.
The Kyoto Protocol was signed on December
11, 1997, in Kyoto, Japan. It became
effective on February 16, 2005.
There are currently 192 parties to the
Protocol (Canada has withdrawn from the
Protocol as of December 2012).