By W. Andy Knight, University of Alberta and Robert J. Hanlon, Thompson Rivers University, The Conversation
It’s been three decades since the release of the United Nations Human Development Report (HDR), a landmark publication that contemplated security by challenging dominant views of international relations.
The HDR advocated for the connected principles of freedom from fear and freedom from want. It shifted the focus from traditional state-centric and military-oriented security to one that placed the basic protection of people first — human security.
This report came at a transitional moment in world history, at the advent of the post-Cold War period. Observers noted the world had entered a period of uncertainty. The traditional idea of security, which dominated the Cold War, created a precarious balance of power characterized by fear, retribution and violence.
This human-centred approach to security was championed by Mahbub ul-Hag, a Pakistani economist and diplomat and the lead editor of the HDR. It was also embraced by Amartya Sen, an Indian Nobel Laureate economist; Sadako Ogata, former UN High Commissioner for Refugees from Japan; and Lloyd Axworthy, a former Canadian foreign affairs minister.
Canada and human security
Human security became a central theme of Canadian foreign policy during the 1990s and early 2000s. Axworthy pledged that “putting people first” would be more than a slogan, even while recognizing that the security of the state was still essential.
By 1999, Canada was leading a new Human Security Network comprising a coalition of governments, non-governmental organizations and international entities.
Axworthy was instrumental in obtaining funds from the International Development Research Centre to support the activities of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty that developed the Responsibility to Protect doctrine, which emphasized the responsibility of governments to protect civilians from mass atrocities.
Canada would later advocate for the creation of an International Criminal Court to hold individuals and governments accountable for the crimes of genocide, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.
These innovations in human security considered the deeper causes of violence and humanitarian emergencies. It became clear that longstanding unaddressed tensions of poverty and injustice served as the main drivers of these crises.
Solving the world’s interconnected challenges would require governments to co-operate by focusing on the marginalized and vulnerable populations in their communities as well as those abroad. This approach remains powerful today.
Human security in the Indo-Pacific region
More than ever, Canada needs to remember its human security roots as it looks to navigate an increasingly complex world.
For example, Canada can help prevent, guide and respond to violence such as human trafficking. A human security framework can protect children affected by war, prevent their recruitment into armed conflicts and can provide education, health care and rehabilitation.
At a time of global populism, China’s increasing power, climate change and other emerging threats, the world needs a renewed focus on co-operation rather than conflict. By cutting across political divides, human security can potentially temper extremism and polarization by refocusing development, diplomacy and defence away from harmful zero-sum “us vs. them” narratives.
Following Canada’s efforts to strengthen its trade and co-operation with partners at the recent APEC and G20 conferences in Peru and Brazil respectively, it should now reflect on how it can leverage human security as a source of strength — especially in the context of its Indo-Pacific Strategy.
Advocating for human security has allowed Canada to punch above its weight while avoiding the worst of superpower geopolitics. In fact, Canada remains a powerhouse in the human security domain.
Indo-Pacific Strategy themes such as peace, trade sustainability, and advocacy through the strengthening of people-to-people ties touch on both the broad and narrow applications of human security. But how best to proceed?
Three ways for Canada to lead on human security
First, Canada should consider appointing an Envoy for the Practice of Human Security to serve as a liaison between government, civil society and business. The role would serve as a point of contact for stakeholders seeking guidance on best practice as Canada looks to strengthen its presence in Asia.
Second, the concept should be reintroduced to elected officials, Canada’s Armed Forces and civil servants whose work focuses on the Indo-Pacific. Enhancing human security competency in the public service can bring new thinking to policy circles.
This approach could serve as an exercise in creating empathy for strangers by adopting precautionary principles that promise to “do no harm.”
Finally, Ottawa should draft human security guidelines on how to implement Canada’s Indo-Pacific Strategy. To do so, Canada should consider reinvesting in the Human Security Network by empowering grassroots entities to advance the concept with their counterparts in Asia through greater people-to-people ties.
As we enter a new period of political instability, environmental crises and seemingly endless existential anxieties, it’s more important than ever for Canada to lead the world by working to uphold the principles of human security and human dignity.
Rosalind Warner, political science professor at Okanagan College, co-authored this piece.
W. Andy Knight, Distinguished Professor, International Relations, University of Alberta and Robert J. Hanlon, Associate Professor of International Relations and Asian Politics, Thompson Rivers University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
