In today’s globalised world and particularly in the midst of global emergencies – a human-induced climate crisis, a ravaging pandemic and rapidly rising wealth inequality - rethinking security is far less radical than one may think it is. It is also worth mentioning that prioritising one over the other does not entail replacing one for the other. Both approaches to security should work in tandem to truly ensure the welfare and prosperity of humanity, by international action for the common good. Countries prioritising the holistic protection of people through human security over national security are likely to find themselves in an ideal position to tackle the current global emergencies and their far-reaching ramifications.

According to the UN General Assembly resolution 66/290, “human security is an approach to assist Member States in identifying and addressing widespread and cross-cutting challenges to the survival, livelihood and dignity of their people” and it calls for “people-centred, comprehensive, context-specific and prevention-oriented responses that strengthen the protection and empowerment of all people.”[1] On the other hand, national security is defined as “the safety of a nation against threats such as terrorism, war, or espionage.”[2] Based on the above, one can come to the conclusion that human security encompasses a form of security that national security – otherwise known as military security – simply fails to address. The latter’s interests are advanced through defence expenditure, which has been rising exponentially in recent years – primarily driven by the US which has the largest defence budget by far, equivalent to more than the next 10 countries’ budgets combined.[3] Total global defence spending rose by 3.9% in real terms from 2019 to reach US$1.83 trillion in 2020, according to the latest data from the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS).[4] In other words, military budgets were sustained during a pandemic and a significant contraction in the global economy, with a series of lockdowns introduced across the world.[4] That sends a stark message that current priorities are wholly wrong – given that the number one threat to humanity was Covid-19 and not a potential war breaking out whilst we were in lockdown to stem the pandemic. Above all, that excess spending has failed to deliver, even on its own merits. According to the Global Peace Index (GPI), levels of peace have fallen by 2.05% since 2008, which clearly demonstrates that the increase in defence spending over the last years in the name of national and military security has by no means led to the promise of peace or security.[5]

If governments wish to protect their people holistically, they should take a human security approach – alongside their national security strategy – by redirecting a share of their defence expenditure towards better addressing the ramifications of a pandemic, rising global poverty and a climate crisis. Through a strategy of redirecting defence and military expenditure, there is a huge potential to successfully tackle the aforementioned emergencies facing humanity.[6]

Redirecting expenditure

Rethinking security ought to involve redirecting a share of the defence and military spending to address current global emergencies. In terms of the rising wealth inequality and poverty[7], the cost of eradicating poverty globally is US$175 billion annually for 20 years[8] and just to put that number into perspective, it is less than 10% of the annual global defence spending for last year. Although there are various other means of eradicating poverty and alleviating inequality, it is worth highlighting how redirecting spending by prioritising human security can also be extremely useful. Concerning the Covid-19 pandemic – which  has so far taken the lives of over 3.2 million people globally – the vaccine rollout programme must be among the top priorities for the international community.[9] With just 7.8% of 2020's defence spending, we could vaccinate every single person on earth against Covid-19.[10] Regarding the climate crisis, it is now estimated that 250,000 people die of climate-related causes every year, while biodiversity is being lost at an alarming rate.[11] The Global Commission on Adaptation to climate change calculated in a report that an investment of US$1.8 trillion across five key areas (early warning systems, climate-resilient infrastructure, improved dryland agriculture, mangrove protection, and water resources resilience) over the next decade would return US$7.1 trillion in economic benefits.[12] The amount needed to be invested in the investment programme is approximately what the world spent on defence and the military in 2020 alone. Furthermore, by reducing the world’s defence spending by just 10%, education for every person on earth could be financed (UN Sustainable Development Goal 4). These are all alarming comparisons which help us understand the scale of the squandering of funds on defence and the military.[13]

The common good

Moreover, the threats from global emergencies are common to us all, regardless of the countries we live in. Through multilaterally addressing them with a human security strategy, the international community can unite to be a force for the common good of our planet. National security, on the other hand, often involves addressing issues in a way in which a nation’s interests are advanced at the expense of another’s; thus leading to potential tensions between adversaries and ultimately deadlock in positive diplomatic efforts. Take, for instance, the case of the US and Iran. The US – alongside China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States, Germany and the EU – signed an agreement with Iran in 2015: the Iran nuclear deal.[14] The deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), provided sanction relief to Iran which had to curtail its nuclear programme in return.[12] Whilst Iran was fully compliant with the terms of the agreement according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the Trump administration unilaterally withdrew in May 2018, re-imposing sanctions on the Middle-Eastern country’s trade, travel and transactions.[12] Since Joe Biden took office, he has failed to re-join the JCPOA, and as a remedial measure, Iran has significantly enriched its uranium for developing nuclear weapons.[15] Assuming the US had prioritised human security over its national security policy of “maximum pressure” against Tehran, Iran would have been nuclear-free and it would also have been experiencing less economic isolation from sanction relief under the terms of the JCPOA. This example highlights the fact that through a hegemonic national security approach, the world is failing to come together in order to address serious issues of nuclear proliferation and economic isolation.

The status quo

Above all, for any such systemic change in priorities to transpire, it is imperative that political determination exists. So far, that has generally not been the case for the most powerful countries of the world - the ones with the growing defence expenditure. That could be down to the widespread lobbying of government officials by the military-industrial complex, which constantly seeks to influence public policy.[16] The UN’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals involve bringing an end to poverty and other inequalities; they aim to improve health, education, and stimulate economic growth, whilst tackling climate change and working to preserve the environment. Despite the aforementioned goals set in 2015, there has been no significant shift in the priorities of countries that have some of the largest nuclear weapon stockpiles and military budgets in the world.[17] On the contrary, the UK government, for example, has announced that it will increase the number of nuclear warheads it stockpiles by more than 40% - from 180 to 260 warheads, reversing a 30-year period of gradual disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation.[18] This move is also in violation of the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Treaty – of which the UK is a signatory to – and it seems to be instigating a new nuclear arms race. It also comes at a time of a global trend for complete nuclear disarmament, with the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons already attracting 86 signatory countries.[19] In addition to nuclear proliferation, due to the perceived growing threat from Russia and China, the British government has approved the largest rise in its defence budget since the end of the Cold War, with £16.5 billion (US$21.9 billion)  additional funding made available.[20] Yet as if all that was not enough, the UK government is recklessly slashing overseas aid from 0.7% to 0.5% of its national income – at a time of a surge in poverty.[21] The above demonstrates how far we currently are from a situation where countries shift their priorities to value human security over national and military security.

 Conclusion

Even as we are witnessing a worrying global trend in the priorities of countries, our movement for human security can have a real impact. In order for the movement to have the desired impact, it is imperative to raise awareness by highlighting how unsustainable the status quo is and how it can change by rethinking security to tackle the global emergencies we are faced with whilst enhancing international cooperation.

References

[1] General Assembly resolution 66/290. Follow-up to paragraph 143 on human security of the 2005 World Summit Outcome. A/66/L.55/Rev.1 and Add.1. https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N11/476/22/PDF/N1147622.pdf?OpenElement. (10 September 2012).

[2] Oxford University Press. Definition of National Security. https://www.lexico.com/definition/national_security. (Lexico, 2020).

[3] Peter G. Peterson Foundation. THE UNITED STATES SPENDS MORE ON DEFENSE THAN THE NEXT 10 COUNTRIES COMBINED. https://www.pgpf.org/blog/2020/05/the-united-states-spends-more-on-defense-than-the-next-10-countries-combined. (2020).

[4] McGerty, F. “Global defence-spending on the up, despite economic crunch”. Military Balance Blog. https://www.iiss.org/blogs/military-balance/2021/02/global-defence-spending-increases. (IISS, 2021).

[5] The Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP). Global Peace Index 2020. https://www.visionofhumanity.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/IEP_GPI_2020_Presentation.pptx. (2020).

[6] Garcia D. Redirect military budgets to tackle climate change and pandemics. Nature. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02460-9. (2020).

[7] Inequality.org. Global Inequality. https://inequality.org/facts/global-inequality/. (2021).

[8] Gorius, L. HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO END POVERTY?. https://borgenproject.org/how-much-does-it-cost-to-end-poverty/. (The Borgen Project, 2017).

[9] Worldometer. COVID-19 CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/. (2021).

[10] Oxfam. Small group of rich nations have bought up more than half the future supply of leading COVID-19 vaccine contenders. https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/small-group-rich-nations-have-bought-more-half-future-supply-leading-covid-19. (2020).

[11] World Health Organization.  Climate Change and Health. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/climate-change-and-health. (2018).

[12] International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD). Adaptation Finance Update: Global Commission Catalyzes Financial Resources for Action. http://sdg.iisd.org/news/adaptation-finance-update-global-commission-catalyzes-financial-resources-for-action/. (2019).

[13] International Peace Bureau. GDAMS 2021 Press Release. https://www.ipb.org/yesterdays-news/gdams-2021-press-release/. (2021).

[14] Wikipedia contributors. Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_Action. (2021).

[15] Murphy, F. Iran cuts number of centrifuges enriching uranium to 60% purity, IAEA report says. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iran-cuts-number-centrifuges-enriching-uranium-60-purity-iaea-report-says-2021-04-22/. (2021).

[16] Vittori, J. A MUTUAL EXTORTION RACKET: THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX AND US FOREIGN POLICY – THE CASES OF SAUDI ARABIA & UAE. https://ti-defence.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/US_Defense_Industry_Influence_Paper_v4_digital_singlePage.pdf. (Transparency International, 2019).

[17] United Nations. The 17 Goals. https://sdgs.un.org/#goal_section. (2015).

[18] Harries, M. Why is the United Kingdom raising its nuclear stockpile limits?. https://thebulletin.org/2021/04/why-is-the-united-kingdom-raising-its-nuclear-stockpile-limits/. (2021).

[19] United Nations. Treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons. https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/nuclear/tpnw/. (2021).

[20] Chuter, A. UK to boost defense budget by $21.9 billion. Here’s who benefits — and loses out. Defense News. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/11/19/uk-to-boost-defense-budget-by-219-billion-heres-who-benefits-and-loses-out/. (2020).

[21] Heffer, G.  Foreign aid cuts: UK charities accuse government of delivering 'tragic blow' to world's poorest. Sky News. https://news.sky.com/story/foreign-aid-cuts-uk-charities-accuse-government-of-delivering-tragic-blow-to-worlds-poorest-12282800. (2021).