Human Security

Debate on Human Security

The concept of human security is still in the process of maturation. Proof of this is that there are different definitions of the same and different approaches on how to move towards it. What it means and what political implications and evaluation practices are still under discussion among scholars and politicians interested in the subject? In any case, despite the inaccuracies and discrepancies around him, the idea of human security can be seen several positive contributions and potential, both in terms of security as in the development or democratic governance. In return, you can not hide his own formulation has weaknesses and problems, while its practical realization raises some doubts and various risks. Thus, the aim of this paper is precisely to reflect on the scope of human security paradigm based on the evaluation assessment of their pros and cons (Paris, 87-102).

The concept of human security has emerged on the world stage as the late 20th century. Previously, for over three centuries, the idea of security of the state was a concept familiar and accepted. States had the right to defend their territorial integrity against external threats. This discussion draws on, inevitably, the discussion between the two interpretations and proposals in recent years have been formed around human security, which have become known as "comprehensive approach" and "narrow focus". Any analysis of the contributions and limitations of human security must take into account these two approaches. The first focuses on "freedom from want", ie the satisfaction of human development and a minimum welfare (food security, health, environmental, etc..), Corresponding to the initial formulation of safety human by UNDP in its Human Development Report 1994, also supported by the Commission on Human Security, led by Japan and its relevant report Human Security Now, published in 2003. For its ...