Articles in Human Security Analysis - Essay Example

?Human Security: The Dog That Didn’t Bark Introduction Considering the gamut of human rights violations, murders, health and safety threats, and unresolved political and geopolitical conflicts, it is unquestionable why human security has become one of the global concerns since the past decades. This paper critically evaluates two articles, i.e. the article written by David Chandler on the views of human security, and the article written by Taylor Owen as a response to the contentions of Chandler. This paper aims to explore and understand the ideologies on human security. The author believes that the deeper understanding on the ideas will be attained by examining the opposing and concordant views on human security. The articles reviewed have become as compelling as they present realistic and eye-opener accounts, yet antithetical in some degree. Overview of Chandler’s Work The article by David Chandler entitled, Human Security: The Dog That Didn’t Bark provides an important revelation on the “deconstruction of myth that human security shows a typical conflict between the state and the individual security” (Owen 2008). Chandler’s article is based on the analysis of the two books namely, Human Security: Concepts and Implications written by Shahrbanou Tadjbakhsh & Anuradha M. Chenoy and A Decade of Human Security: Global Governance and New Multilateralisms written by Mclean, Black & Shaw. Chandler started his argument through citing the idea that global policy making overbearingly suggests two different views. One view pointed out the construal of the dynamics of the society’s power relationships and inequalities, as well as insecurities. The other view pertained to the idea of identifying the interrelatedness, interconnection, and susceptibilities of security threats and the urgency for composite, cooperative, human-centered answers. Chandler’s First Argument While Tadjbakhsh and Chenoy claimed that human, as well as the state, should work interdependently, Chandler (2008) conceded that human and the state are indivisible, yet gave consideration to the importance of examining the problem that transpires regarding the state’s collaboration of its idea outside of its absolute model. Chandler ended up criticizing that the authors are more involved with advocacies instead of the evaluation of definite process of human security. Chandler’s first argument stated that “human security exaggerates new post-cold war security threats” (Chandler 2008, 435). This argument is compelling as it contradicts to the paradigm of human security. The author contended that one of the prevailing reasons why the human security has been applied wrongly by the state is because it overstated the post-cold war security threats. Chandler (2008) claimed that with the absence of conventional adversaries like terrorists, human security processes close the gap securitization issue like environmental, health, and economic security. Nevertheless, inquiry is not about how these issues are securitized but rather it is more important to evaluate the result of these actions. Since Chandler declined to elaborate the result of these actions, it is safe to assume that he falls short of accusing Tadjbakhsh and Chenoy for not considering the connection between normative theory and policy procedures. Chandler’s Second Argument Further, Chandler (2008, 435) argued that “human security advocates locate these threats in the developing world.” While there are other part of the developed countries, which also have security problems, advocates can also be considered as correct since majority of the people who experienced security problems like extreme poverty are located in developing countries. These people are more vulnerable that is why it has given more attention. In contrast, Chandler (2008) argued that the causal link of human security processes in a globalized world do not exist at all is somewhat questionable since the actual connection solely depends on what dependent variable is utilized. As what Paris (2001) suggests, it is the concept itself that makes the connection difficult. Notwithstanding the contention that human security is more problematic in the developing countries, it is still invalid to put the focus on those countries alone. The developed countries, just like the developing ones, also carry the burden of protecting its constituents through the establishment of heightened level of national and human security. Thus, focusing on the obvious (i.e. diverting the world’s attention more on the developing countries than the other countries in terms of human security) may aggravate the problem of human security. Chandler’s Third Argument Moreover, Chandler continued to argue that “human security facilitates short-term policymaking in the absence of clear strategic foreign policy visions” (Chandler 2008, 435-436). The idea of Chandler, which claimed that there is no prioritization of policies in the states, depends on how the concept is defined. The truth is that no threats were being prioritized along with the others but rather, the threats should be evaluated and prioritized. For instance, the foreign policy should be evaluated based on the asperity of a particular threat. Policy assessment is a vital process to continuously monitor the effectiveness, validity and reliability of the premise set in a particular human security policy. Although Chandler may construe that Tadjbakhsh and Chenoy are plainly concerned about short-term policy solutions, it must be understood that the rationale behind their short-term threat recognition is compounded within the basis of severity (Owen 2008). The article has become compelling as it presented a lot of contradictions on the concepts of human security. Aside from that, the article required deep and greater understanding in weighing the differences that transpire in every country regarding human security. Conclusion David Chandler’s view on human security has provided philosophical accounts on the issues pertaining the safety and security of humanity. He provided some concrete basis on his accounts. One example is his argument that the advocates of human security overbearingly give their attention to developing countries in resolving the issue, thereby relegating the other countries categorized otherwise. This is a demonstration of human beings’ innate tendencies to pay attention to what is visibly apparent and fail to consider the vital and non-obvious aspects. Nevertheless, contradictions are also found in terms of the concepts of human security, such as the policies promulgated in response to the issue, but still failed to address the issue that has to be addressed. Evaluating such articles is essential as it may open one’s understanding on human security, thereby, being able to comprehend better (if not fully) on global issue pertaining issue. References Chandler, David. 2008. Review Essay: Human Security: The Dog That Didn't Bark. University of Texas: Sage Publication. Owen, Taylor. 2008. The Critique That Doesn't Bite: A response to David Chandler's 'Human Security: The Dog That Didn't Bark.' University of Texas: Sage Publication. Paris, Roland, 2001. “Human Security: Paradigm Shift or Hot Air?” International Security 26(2): 87–102. Food, Health, and Migration Security Introduction Security in terms of food, health, and migration is a global issue and concern of government globally. Each of the issue has corresponding causes, effects and suggested solutions, thus, achieving security not only strict implementation of policies but also active participation of every concern individuals. In the article of Bello and Baviera (2009), it is very evident that millions of people experienced hunger because of food insecurity. The article revealed that one of the most important reasons of food crisis is the diversion of corn as food into an agrofuel. Both U.S and EU policy is the reason of the increase of food prices for three quarters between 2002 and 2008. The increasing prices of food resulted to violent actions of various countries such as Bangladesh, Indonesia, India, Guinea, Mexico, etc. Further, many people died during the protest. This implies that insecurity of food not only created turmoil to the people but it also resulted to death. Bush Administration which initiated the goal of energy independence, as well as combating climate change, is the main reason for the conversion of corn to agro-fuel. While this policy helps the environment, this also created a significant negative effect to U.S. farming. In addition, the worst part is that the impact of this policy is more severe and negative in developing countries. For instance, countries like Madagascar, Philippines and Cambodia experienced huge land rental deals. In reality, the utilization of land significantly depends on what crop is cost-effective. In line with this, the aim of the people is to cultivate the land for agro-fuel production instead of food production. As a result, millions of people suffered from hunger. Thus, it is important to take into consideration that government must not directly implement policies without weighing the positive and negative side. The role of the government is to serve and protect the people but what happened in reality is that people suffered hunger as a consequence of government policies. On the other hand, food insecurity is not caused by government policies but also because of structural adjustments. For instance, Mexico became highly dependent on corn imports in U.S. because of the decline of services such as credit and extension support of agricultural production in the country. This can be seen as an important reason why Mexico-- a country where corn was first domesticated -- now became highly dependent with U.S. in terms of food. Similarly, Philippines also suffered from food shortage because funding of rural programs declined during the reign of President Marcos. Similarly, Philippines also suffered from food shortage because of the government focuses on land rented for foreign interests. Lastly, Africa has suffered from food insecurity because of their government eliminated the funds for fertilizers. With these reasons, government must create initiatives that can help the people rather than implementing policies or structural adjustments that led people to hunger. Food security requires precise policies, preventive planning and careful implementation. Health Security Poverty as a crucial problem has serious negative effect to the health of the people. Poor people suffered worse health and it is very vulnerable to various diseases. In developing countries, safe water supply is lacking. As a consequence, 3.4 million individuals die per year for water-related diseases. In addition, malaria and HIV/AIDS diseases are also a serious cause of death individuals (Durbak and Strauss 2005). Due this problem, it can be seen that there are three aspects of health in the Millennium Development Goals with the aim health security. These goals are very important to be achieved since a healthy population is the greatest country’s resource. According to Dodds and Pippard (2005), the appropriate model in securing health is the public health model which outlines disease intervention rather than curing disease. In personal opinion, this policy is the right answer of the health security problem. Nevertheless, it requires strict implementation of health campaigns, desired government funds for the campaigns, and active participation or support for every community. Migration Security Migration in United States also has become an issue. The article of Gupta (2005) claimed that migration has both good and bad effects in terms of development of the country of origin which can be considered as true. In a personal point of view, there is nothing wrong with migration as each citizen has important reasons in migrating. Gupta argued that there are several important reasons which motivate people to move such as poverty, unemployment, conflict, and population growth. This implies that it is human nature to find alternatives in order to survive, live peacefully, and earn proper income. On the other hand, according to Stephen Castles, migration control facilitates inequality (Gupta 2005). This notion can also be considered as true. For instance, there is an unemployment rate of a certain city. If the government will not allow citizens to migrate, then it can be said that they are facilitating inequalities. Abandoning proper policies in migration will lead unpredictable migration. Thus, U.S. migration policies need reform to meet the needs of the people. Conclusion Food security is an important issue that must be taken into account by the government. It can be traced that food insecurity is caused by government policies and structural adjustments. The rising of food prices, which resulted to hunger of millions of people, is because of the agro-fuel policies of U.S. and EU. Further, structural adjustment also has a negative impact since reducing the funds for agricultural purposes resulted to food shortage. On the other hand, health security is also an important issue especially in developing countries. Poor people are more vulnerable to diseases. Thus, the United Nations Development Goals, which highlights three components of health, is very helpful. Aside from that, the creation of public health model, which emphasizes disease intervention, is an important and right answer in achieving health security. Lastly, migration security should also be given attention of U.S. government. There is nothing wrong with people migrating as it is their rights to do so. Aside from that, there are important reasons why people prefer to migrate. These include conflict, unemployment, and increasing population. Government may consider reform of policies which support security of individuals and equality. Otherwise, if the policies will not be properly implemented, it will result to massive migration. References Bello, Walden and Mara Baviera. 2009. “Food Wars.” Monthly Review 61(3): 17-31. Dodds, Felix and Tim Pippard. 2005. Human and Environmental Security: An Agenda for Change. USA: Earthscan. Durbak, Christine and Claudia Strauss. 2005. “Securing A Healthier World.” In Human and Environmental Security: An Agenda for Change, Felix Dodds and Tim Pippard, 128-131. USA: Earthscan. Gupta, Devyani. 2005. “Migration, Development, and Security.” In Human and Environmental Security: An Agenda for Change, Felix Dodds and Tim Pippard, 115-117. USA: Earthscan. Read More