The Centrality of Non-traditional Groups for Security in the Globalized Era: The Case of Children

Abstract

The globalized security situation characterized by transnational threats and international interventionism in “new wars,” connect non traditional local actors and traditional global actors to one another in unprecedented ways. We argue that children in particular need to be highlighted because they are highly pertinent to the globalized security situation, yet they make up one of the few agents that have remained non‐politicized in the eyes of the scholarly community. The article suggests a framework of analysis that can generate analyses on security of traditional as well as non‐traditional agents. Placing non‐traditional groups in the center of attention serves to mirror the complexities of the current security situation better.

Understanding Why and How Civilians Resort to Self-Protection in Armed Conflict

“…Much of global protection discourse is dominated by neoliberalism and neorealism (Wagnsson et al. :5). These state‐centric theories elevate the role played by the state as a human security provider.…”

“…Policymakers and scholars guided by these theoretical perspectives overlook civilians who may well play a crucial role in their own protection. They may also overestimate the ability of state actors to ameliorate the plight of those in harm's way (Wagnsson et al 2010). Theories on global governance suffer less from the weaknesses of neorealism and neoliberalism, but civilians also escape their attention because of their focus on traditional protection actors.…”

“…Bruderlein (2000);Bellamy and Williams (2009);Megret (2009);Wagnsson, Hellman, and Holmberg (2010).7 Bruderlein (2000);Bellamy and Williams (2009);Megret (2009);Wagnsson et al (2010).…”

‘Children and armed conflict’ and the field of security studies

“…Children are integral to the politics (Brocklehurst 2006), the strategy (Singer 2006), the economics (Watson 2009;Wessells 2007, 3-4), and the casualties of war -including as direct targets of genocide violence. Therefore, seeing the relevance of children as sites of knowledge (Watson 2006) and as significant security actors (Wagnsson, Hellman, and Holmberg 2010) within modes of political competition and social transformation has much to contribute to the study of security in IR.…”

“…A number of scholars have argued persuasively why children should be included in the study of IR, in the specific areas of global politics (Brocklehurst 2006), the international political economy (Watson 2009), security studies (Wagnsson, Hellman, and Holmberg 2010), and international humanitarian and human rights law (Carpenter 2010). Topically, scholars in IR and related fields -such as international law and peace studies -interested in children have examined child soldiers (Brett and McCallin 1998;Brett and Specht 2004;Cohn and Goodwin-Gill 1994;Denov 2006Denov , 2010Happold 2005;Singer 2006;Wessells 2006), the militarization of childhood (Beier 2011;Brocklehurst 2006;Lee-Koo 2011;Mazurana and Carlson 2008), children born of wartime sexual violence (Carpenter 2007(Carpenter , 2010, and children/youth as contributors to post-conflict peace-building (McEvoy-Levy 2006;Wessells and Monteiro 2006).…”