Human security on the global commons

The term 'human security' was coined to shift the focus of security from the state to the individual, to emphasize freedom from fear and want. But I would like to depart from the familiar dichotomy between security as the defense of states and security as a personal right, and offer a different perspective, viewing this question through a wider lens, a lens which captures the full gamut of interpersonal, community-oriented and culturally founded relationships which take place between the levels of individual and state. This lens is the one with which I am the most familiar, and the lens which I believe gives us a way to frame and implement effective and collective action toward the advancement of human security.

It would seem obvious that we must frame the meaning of security within an expanded context, that human security must now contain the imperative of human survivability and resilience. Imbalances between nations - population growth, poverty, food, resources, ecology, migration, energy, money, peace and cultural understanding - are pivotal security issues. They have the capacity to impact individual lives exponentially in all places across the world. As transnational issues, they are multipliers of human security - either for widespread stability or instability - and these multipliers can provide a new foundation for human security as a responsibility of the global commons.

[ ... ]

There must be a third sector of popular will - a powerful countervailing force dedicated to ensuring human security and cooperation across borders. Responsibility and authority must shift from governments downwards to individuals, communities and civil society, and upwards to international organizations, regional systems and networks. As a global citizenry, we must now confront the many problems that impact our lives across territorial boundaries, involving matters of shared international concern that governments and markets are not equipped to address.

The real issues are:
1) that states have not relinquished their sovereignty to cooperate with one another more effectively, and market-driven solutions have proven incapable of addressing the systemic problems that transcend national borders;
2) that a new balance between the common interests of states, markets and people is essential to economic and social development, environmental harmony and peace;
3) that all matters bearing on the global commons must soon be linked together in one multilateral agenda and discussed by a diverse group of representatives from every sector - government, business and civil society;
4) that these representatives should launch an immediate global action program ensuring the end of poverty, adequate food supplies, fair distribution of resources and commodities, a clean environment, protection of migrants and refugees, reliable and affordable energy, stable purchasing power and a climate of peace; and
5) that this common action plan must also be seen as a tentative step toward geo-political realignment and global economic adjustment, leading to a greater degree of international unity and the creation of inclusive global governance.

~ more... ~