Human-centred Security and Peace
|
Human-centred Security and Peace This paper is divided into three parts. The first part briefly describes the concept of a national security policy that is based on military power and the challenge to redefine this in the broader concept of human security. The second part focuses on the limitations of the military security policy in Korea, with particular emphasis on women, and the rise of a militaristic culture. Lastly, the paper outlines concrete recommendations on how the people in Asia and Europe can build a new concept of security focusing on humans and peace. 1. Changes in Geopolitical Security and People's Awareness In the 20th century, the greatest priority for leaders of nations dealing with both major and minor international disputes has been the issue of national security - protecting their nations from an external threat. In order to guarantee national security, immense efforts were made to accumulate arms in order to strengthen the military. Furthermore, nations maintained strict control over their people by continuously promulgating security ideologies. Not surprisingly, people who had previous experience of war were accommodating and willingly paid taxes to support this notion of national security. Nevertheless, as humankind reaches the 21st century, the time has come for a major transformation of the state of national security. Current national crises include the collapse of the cold war system, the increase of conflicts between different ethnic groups, economic crises and environmental devastation. These problems cannot be solved through either the deployment of the military or the rationale of a national security policy. Nation-states are now faced with new national security problems, including economic, food, and environmental crises; the widening gap between rich and poor; the spread of a violent culture; organized crime and the global reach of aggressive multinational corporations. We have become trapped in a so-called national defence dilemma. The number of authoritarian states has decreased; more and more nations have progressively democratised; developments in information systems have allowed freer access to intelligence materials and people have acquired a greater critical consciousness and an increased awareness of human rights and citizen rights. The international community is realising that national security policies focused solely on the build-up of the military are inadequate to address the non-military threats facing the world today. This shift in thinking has resulted in fresh concepts being explored such as human security, joint security and alternative security. These changes have brought about a greater scrutiny of national security policies. The investigations reveal the paradox lying at the heart of national security policies i.e. focusing solely on military strength is actually detrimental to people's safety and represses national development and peace. The studies conclude with a demand for a revised national security policy and further work is currently examining ways to create a human security policy that guarantees a person's economic, nutritional, environmental and political safety. 2. The Limitations of a Military Security Policy as Experienced in Asia Women in Asia have recently been calling for a redefinition in the concept of military security. National security policy has developed along narrowly defined lines with an excessive focus on military build-up. National security policies can no longer provide true security for its people. In fact, these policies have created a paradoxical situation whereby the security and rights of the Asian people, and the human rights of women and children, are threatened. Voices from all over Asia are unifying and giving force to civic campaigns criticising the national security policies in their respective countries. Asia's people, who were silenced for so long because of the excessive importance placed on national security, have come out and criticised the limitations and abuses experienced under these security policies. A prime example of this is the campaign against military bases. In Korea, the anti-base movement has begun a campaign to close down the US Air Force's bombing range near Maehyang-ri, while in Japan the anti-base movement has focused on Okinawa. Women's movements against militarism have been very active in East Asia (Korea, the Philippines, Japan, Okinawa). The movement to revise the unfair and unequal Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) in Korea has also received wide public support. Their criticisms and accusations succinctly summarise the limitations and abuses of national security policies. The stationing of foreign troops provides the best illustration of the limitations inherent in security policy. There are 37,000 American troops stationed in Korea for the sake of national security and they have caused serious damage to Korea and it's people. Koreans have suffered financially from their proximity to the 96 American military bases since the bases have appropriated their properties for undervalued prices. Koreans living close to these bases have suffered in other ways - military operations create serious health problems from loud explosions to polluted water, soil and air. Koreans have experienced rape, robbery, murder and assault, traffic accidents, prostitution, neglected mixed-blood children, and other unspeakable offences. Nevertheless, a deep-seated fear of Korea's National Security Law has silenced Koreans and the very words 'National Security' have prevented any complaints or official demands for reparations for the damage suffered being made. Even where people have been victims of crimes perpetrated by American soldiers, there is no equitable or legal avenue available to punish the criminals. This is due to the terms imposed by the unfair SOFA that places restrictions on holding criminal trials before Korean courts where the accused is a non-national. In forming a military alliance, Korea and the US have entered into binding agreements. However, Koreans have criticised the terms of these agreements as being unequal and disadvantageous to Korea or that these agreements infringe on Korea's sovereignty and violate the Korean people's basic human rights. American troops are stationed on the Korean peninsula for an indefinite period to support Korea's national defence. They have occupied a position of military superiority and subsequently their behaviour has demonstrated 'a superiority complex'. The natural extension of this is that they have committed numerous crimes against Koreans. A good example is the environmental damage that has seriously endangered people's health, particularly those of children and pregnant women. Yet SOFA contains no provisions relating to the protection or care of the environment. Korea's people are drawing attention to the basic paradox of military security: the American military presence, which is supposed to guarantee the security of the nation, has instead deprived the people of personal safety and created an unstable environment. Critics also point out that the rationale underpinning national security policies naturally justifies the huge military expenditure and arms purchases. Many Asian nations have yet to provide a social security net for the underprivileged, and yet they continue to spend an inordinate amount of money on a military build-up for the sake of national security. A large portion of the military budget is used for the purchase of arms. Although currently no Asian nations are engaged in war, they continue to spend enormous amounts importing weapons. In 1996, Korea, China and Taiwan collectively bought 30% of the world's arms. The European Union is the centre for some of the world's most important weapons producers and exporters. In 1997, of the top 10 conventional weapons supplying countries, seven were from the European Union. The people of Asia believe that the excessive military budgets and the large trade in arms reduces both the amounts available for social welfare spending and the capital available for investment in production, and is leading to a food and economic crisis. The arms trade is closely associated with the feminisation of poverty, the devastation of human life and nature, the promotion of conflict, the breakdown of regional peace and stability, and is seen as the most serious threat to human security. Women's groups point out that the over-emphasis on national security policy has resulted in the military maintaining a long-standing political power base within the Asian region. Once Asian countries gained independence from their colonisers, the region suffered continual disputes, poverty, and social misery. This context allowed for ideologies of national security, unity and economic development to flourish under the rubric of national militarism and supported by the trade in arms. Military dictatorships were able to claim moral legitimacy in this climate of conflict and poverty. The military governments disregarded people's basic rights in the name of national security and economic development, and accumulated massive wealth and power for themselves and their supporters. Human rights violations such as arrests, detentions, massacres, censorship, and quasi-military occupation were the reality for many of the people in the region. Those who resisted were subjected to imprisonment, torture, and execution under the directives of the National Security Laws. Sons were conscripted for national defence while mothers and daughters became sexual victims of the military. This prolonged period of military political power, combined with the nurturing of a national security mentality among the people, inevitably led to the promotion of military culture, the socialisation of violence and the deepening militarisation of society. A militarised society works on a system of rule-and-submit where 'might makes right'. This form of military culture helped recreate a new system of patriarchy. Rather than being seen as oppressive, the patriarchal system was considered an essential condition to social security. What is more, a militarised society considers all others as 'enemies' and supports the use of violence and weapons as a means of resolving disputes. It has been the women's assessment that many forms of violence against women, such as domestic violence, sexual violence and social ostracism, are rooted in this form of militarism. A military culture also assumes that the use of military solutions is the only way to overcome national and social problems and demands blind support for the solutions put forward by the government. On the Korean peninsula, it is this military culture, more than other factor, which has sustained the division of the peninsula. Women's groups point out that a military culture constitutes violence against the environment. The military government has led the way towards environmental pollution and destruction by focusing almost exclusively on economic growth and allowing reckless development and widespread industrial pollution. The type of economic growth established under military dictatorship created and sustained numerous abuses - victimized the people, exploited workers, permitted the spread of corruption, exhausted resources and devastated the environment. Today it is difficult to find water safe to drink or food safe to eat and people are becoming increasingly susceptible to diseases such as cancer. The implementation of a national security policy has resulted in the proliferation of land mine zones throughout Asia, injuring innumerable people (particularly the poor). These anti-personnel land mines, which were laid to prevent enemy invasion, are crippling civilians. Impoverished people, eking out a subsistence living on the land, are indiscriminately targeted (in Cambodia one out of every 230 people are injured by land mines). Very often these mines are swept away by a flash flood and end up not only in fields and farms but also in private homes. Since the use of anti-personnel land mines has been widespread and their location is difficult to pinpoint, they continue to kill and injure civilians long after any war has ceased. Like biological and nuclear weapons, a total ban on the use of anti-personnel land mines must be enforced. Korea, however, refuses to join the ban on anti-personnel land mines and uses its divided status as an excuse. Consequently, its civilians are exposed to the danger of land mines on a daily basis. It is clear that the people of Asia have suffered greatly under national security policies. People of the region have begun to question the very foundations of existing security policies.
With questions like these, people are demanding a change in national security policies away from a focus on the military to a focus on humans. 3. The Peoples of Asia and Europe Demand Human Security and Peace The peoples of Asia and Europe, who have endured the limitations and abuses of security policies focused solely on building military strength, are demanding the adoption of a new concept of security. This concept focuses on human-centred security and the implementation of a constructive peace policy. Until recently, those of us who had become accustomed to military security were unable to see how education, housing, roads, clean water, employment, safe bridges, employment and food security could contribute to national security. Now, however, we are awakening to the fact that people are injured and killed under prevailing national security policies even during peacetime. The people of the regions stress that the present national crises are growing and assert that we must change the existing security policies and create alternative security programmes which should include the following elements: (A) A guarantee of the basic necessities for survival: food, shelter and clothing. Many women believe that deprivation in one area ultimately damages the peace and well being of an entire society. Therefore, security policies must place priority on satisfying the basic needs of the weak and poor on both the national and international level. National peace and security can finally be achieved through shaping a security policy that places primacy on the needs of the weak. With this in mind, we must re-examine the current expansion of capitalist globalisation, which, in its present form, only rewards venture capitalists. We must put a stop to structural adjustment programmes in Asia and Europe that are leading to mass unemployment and, in particular, plunging women into poverty. Furthermore, taxes should be levied on the huge profits earned by multinational venture capitalists and should be applied to either developing or expanding social security budgets. Women's groups are calling for the formation of World Council for Economic and Financial Security to protect, among other things, the economic security of impoverished nations. This objective can be achieved through:
As the nations of ASEM forge closer bonds, they will have to embrace the demands of civil society from both regions who are calling for greater economic security and peace. (B) Secondly, the people of the regions demand that disarmament and demilitarisation become the fundamental components of any future security policy. We hope that the military culture that developed during the hot and cold war periods of the 20th century will be dismantled and replaced with a policy that focuses on human security. This policy should include the outlawing of the institutions of war; reduction of arms; regulation and/or prohibition of arms production and trade; abolition of nuclear and biological weapons and anti-personnel land mines and the dismantling of US military hegemony. It should also address issues such as the 'demilitarisation' of media and society; the reform of the military-based economy, and the prohibition of violence against women. (C) Any alternative security policy should pursue non-violent and peaceful methods of conflict resolution with the objective of constructing a lasting and peaceful society. We hope that the member states of ASEM will re-evaluate America's military role and security structures in their respective regions and determine a way to construct a new regional security system. We hope that the recent US-Japan joint research plans on TMD, or Japan's ongoing attempts at rearmament, are limited to the objective of promoting peace on the Korean peninsula and the north eastern region of Asia. We believe the regulation of the enormous and lucrative arms trade between Asia and Europe must be urgently addressed. Recent studies have shown that there is a nexus between the development of complex supra-national military lobbies and international military conflicts and war. These well-connected lobby groups include the military bureaucracy, members of national assemblies or parliaments who are supported by the arms industries, industrial capitalists, academics and corporate and labour executives. They lobby for large increases in the national military budget and promote international arms sales in order to improve profit and maintain their privileged positions. The suspicion is that the American-backed TMD plan was developed partly because of effective lobbying by manufacturers of military equipment. According to these lobbying groups, the arms trade is essential in ensuring the region's economic security and peace in face of expanding economic globalisation. (D) Fourthly, we believe that an essential element of any human security policy must be environmental preservation that respects the delicate ecological balance and maintains a healthy biosphere. It must incorporate the concept of environmental security that halts any economic development causing excessive exploitation of natural resources and obstructing environmental rehabilitation. In particular, something concrete must be done about the military bases (especially the numerous American bases) that have caused enormous pollution and yet have been considered sacred and untouchable. (E) Fifthly, we believe that human security must guarantee gender equality and the eradication of all forms of discrimination (racism, class discrimination, discrimination against nature). The most basic principles of a democratic society are to respect human dignity and individual cultural identities. However, women are denied these basic rights in a gender-blind society. A discriminatory system that suppresses and excludes 'difference' is an obstacle to democratic development denies security to women and creates social conflict. Discrimination in the economic realm means women are the last to be hired and the first to be fired. Once the member states of ASEM unite and cooperate to promote gender equality, peace and human security in both regions will be greatly enhanced. The peoples of Asia and Europe wish to build a peaceful, safe and prosperous life in both regions for the new century. Ms. Lee, Yyun-sook |
Text Size:
Current Size: 100%
Support TNI
Subscribe
Upcoming events
-
Het vrijhandelsverdrag met Colombia
May 2012
Amsterdam, Netherlands
-
EU crisis: Another way is possible
June 2012
Amsterdam, Netherlands
-
Global Land Grabbing Colloquium
June 2012
Den Haag, Netherlands
