The second generation of human security: lessons from the UN and EU experience

Abstract

The concept of human security, while much contested in both academic and policy debates, and highly fragmented across different meanings and forms of implementation, offers a potential locus around which global security discourse might converge, particularly in light of current shifts in US security thinking. However, key pioneers of human security, such as the United Nations and Canada, appear to be losing their enthusiasm for the concept, just at the moment when others such as the European Union, are advancing a human security agenda. This article examines the divergence of human security narratives between the UN and the EU. It argues that the UN's use of the concept ran aground owing to a triple problematic of lack of clarity, confusion between previously distinct policy streams on human rights and human development and conceptual overstretch. After assessing the EU experience with the concept to date, the article argues that future use of human security will require greater focus on how it deepens ideas of individual security, rather than treating it as an agenda for broadening security. As well as a need to project clarity on the conceptual definition of human security, there is also a need to associate human security with greater clarity of intent. If successful, this would contribute to establishing second generation human security as a new policy paradigm.

O histórico da segurança humana e o (des)encontro das agendas de desenvolvimento e segurança

“…E também porque a literatura das relações internacionais acaba por fazer uma leitura de que essa foi uma contribuição praticamente exclusiva do sistema ONU, ao afirmar que a organização serviu de incubadora para aspectos chave do pensamento da segurança humana (MACFARLANE; KHONG, 2006;OWEN, 2010).…”

Is a European Practice of Mass Atrocity Prevention Emerging? The European Union, Responsibility to Protect and the 2011 Libya Crisis

“…in this case existing scholarly interpretations of EU R2P implementation are too simplistic. It is worth noting, however, that the EU approach to Pillar Three also in this case seems to emphasise humanitarian assistance and capacity building within the existing crisis management framework, in continuity with the EU's normative agenda on human security, as described by Martin and Owen (2010), rather than more mainstream interpretations of what R2P's Pillar Three should entail. In particular, according to officials from the EEAS multilateral relation division, the Libya crisis revealed different interpretations of Pillar Three among member states and substantial resistance to R2P's limitations to state sovereignty emerged.…”

“…As outlined by Martin and Owen (2010), not only did the Report on the Implementation of the European Security Strategy (ESS) (Council of the European Union, 2008) explicitly mention human security as a guiding principle of EU external action, it also drew "extensively, and in more detail than in previous texts, on human security ideas, affirming the importance of respect for human rights, and the gender dimension of security" (Martin & Owen, 2010, p. 217). In its drafting the Council was reportedly influenced by then High Representative for European Foreign and Security Policy (EFSP), Javier Solana; by Finland, which during its 2006 presidency of the EU commissioned a study on the European Security and Defence Policy's (ESDP) relation to human security; and by the European Parliament (Martin & Owen, 2010, p. 218).…”

“…Hereafter, human security was mainstreamed especially by the European Commission into initiatives on human rights and policies on small arms and light weapons, non-proliferation, mine action and human trafficking. Following Martin and Owen (2010), the EU's implementation of human security specified the norm in a way that differed slightly from the UN's original conception by combining "physical protection and material security, and situating it firmly within a crisis management and a conflict resolution policy frame" (Martin & Owen, 2010, p. 219).…”

“…Meanwhile, the notion of "human security" has become central to the development of EU security policy (Curran, 2015;Dembinski & Reinold, 2011;Gottwald, 2012;Martin & Owen, 2010). As outlined by Martin and Owen (2010), not only did the Report on the Implementation of the European Security Strategy (ESS) (Council of the European Union, 2008) explicitly mention human security as a guiding principle of EU external action, it also drew "extensively, and in more detail than in previous texts, on human security ideas, affirming the importance of respect for human rights, and the gender dimension of security" (Martin & Owen, 2010, p. 217).…”