Archive pour 'IR'

The discource of Economic Security in Understandind International Security

Marius Mufutua Kayembe

 ( Hekima Institute of Peace Studies and International Relations, MAII)

The discource of  Economic Security in Understandind Internationa Security 

The central concern of human behavior is the question of security. The old understanding of security considered only the state’s behavior to protect its boundaries due to the prevalence of the realist ideology   with the international arena. After the Cold World with the increasing number of intrastate conflicts, an imperative concern arose in understanding to which extend the concept of security can be expanded. One the expansion was to infuse the role of economics as a type of security. This paper discusses the design of economic security in the new reform of security and to what extent security is influenced by economic variables. It aims at indicating how the economic security is the logic scheme towards the realization of the other forms of the security.

Introduction

Since centuries, several challenges emerged in understanding the synergy which drives human behavior and its implication and commitment in building and shaping a sustainable environment. The central concern of such behavior is the question of security. As noted by several authors, security is widely used, but it is difficult to define it unless an operational definition is given to guide a concern. Hence, in this paper, security is defined as set of mechanisms and policies towards war and peace in a given territory, such as a nation, a region. Such definition aims at understanding the shift of narrow national security to the broad notion of security.

The security reform wanted to respond to the holistic approach of development. The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) have restructured in suggesting indicators which create the real total and safe environment of citizens in a given territory. Causes of insecurity are not only external (territorial level or trans-border between nations) but internal disputes cause more insecurity than expected. Unemployment, inequalities in resource distributions, poverty, and low level of education can lead to strike, protestation, irredentism and become later one the feared threat to the state stability. Consequently, there is a need to create new axis to security. Therefore, security targets not only defense security as related to national security but explore social opportunities, environmental issues as well as economic issues.

This paper discusses the design of economic security in the new reform of security and to what extent security is influenced by economic variables. It aims at indicating how the economic security is the logic scheme towards the realization of the other forms of the security. Our reflection will be hinged on three parties a) how economics can be used for maintaining peace or war in international level, b) how economic measures can help to protect the most vulnerable people of the society and c) the role of economics in enabling collective action and capacities to eliminate extreme poverty.

  1. 1.      Economic Security and National Security :  the Crossroad of Peace and War

1.1. Line of demarcation

National security is linked to politics, while economics is considered to be out the public affairs of the administration of the city. Whereas, the broaden agenda of the twenty first century have shifted the economics from a simple practice of private system to become an influence, even the command which influence the decision making of political leaders. This brings to this conclusion that it is difficult to distinguish political and economic power, since each is always present in the other.

From a comparative perspective, national security is not bargaining related question while economic security is shared point among states.  National security refers to the ability to withstand aggression from abroad and involves winning this economic war[1].  This includes the protection of land and possession of natural resources which are essential commodities of the economic well-being of a nation. This implies that national security is serving the economic axis of a state.

Conversely, the economic factors downplay a big role in the stability of the states in two ways by supporting the military expenditure and sponsoring internal policies to reduce the intensity of internal threat to state stability. To that the point, “the economy is important only to the extent that it provides the material and financial means to attain (or ‘produce’) national security”[2].  For the realist legacy to security, the economic dimension is crucial among other reasons because it is seen as one of the key criteria by which great states are defined. Great states over the world are economically stronger and militarily the most equipped. Thus, the economic dimension is crucial because economic resources are one of the key criteria by which can be estimated and it defines the great power[3]

During this twenty-first century the role of economics in international security and international relations become more relevant. For Huntington, “in a world where military conflict between major states is unlikely, economic power will be increasingly important in determining the primacy or subordination of states” [4]. This issue will be discussed later on geo-economics and geopolitics section.

Simply, economic security concerns access to the resources, finance and markets necessary to sustain acceptable levels of welfare and state power[5]. It is war fought with other tools.  For Cable[6], economic security refers most obviously to those aspects of trade and investment which directly affect a country’s ability to defend itself: freedom to acquire weapons or related technology, reliability of supplies of military equipment, or threats of adversaries acquiring a technological advantage in weapons. This economic dimension of security pins point to which extent security is subordinated to economics.

Neocleous[7] suggest three ways in which economic strands get involved in the security studies.  The first strand is directly linked to the definition of the economics which deals with the production; distribution, and the consumption of the means to livelihood, with the aim of continual betterment of life[8]. For Neocleous[9], the extent to which the state system is obviously cut through by the dynamics of production, consumption and class, the budgetary constraints on grand strategy both internally and internationally. The second strand holds the hypothesis that the main actors in global politics certainly never divorced security from political economy because economics and national security have been linked to some extent or an “absolute distinction” can never in any case be made between political and economic power, since each is always present in the other[10]. The third strand focuses on academic approaches of security which pointed to the integral relationship between economics and security during the 1940’s after the World War II and during the cold war: the military and intelligence services, while international political economy developed an independent path, more or less treating economic power independently from security questions.

1.2. Security Dilemma in the context of economic security

The realistic perspective of the international relations considered each state as the primary actor of its own security in anarchical system; all states maintain military capabilities for their own defense therefore each state seeks to enable and produce self-defeating efforts to achieve national security, from which window emerges the fundamental element of realistic security thinking, “ the security dilemma : state defense-offense”[11]. In digging the concept of security dilemma, two ways can link economic security to the traditional security.

The first locates the security dilemma in the unhappy circumstance that ‘many of the means by which a state tries to increase its security decrease the security of others and which refers to war economies[12] . The second assumption deals with the allocation of national resources between economic welfare and military security. This involves the “division of resources between guns and butter, and the actual level of consumption of both goods are determined by two factors: the productive capacity of a society, and its preferences”[13]. The state is reduced as monad without alliances. This approach ignores the fact that “security is a special form of politics […] but not all political conflicts are security issues”[14] . It implies that the threat to security is more various than the mere will of political destabilization.

This new understanding of prudent politic interdependence debates on the possible cooperation; yet the anarchical system in the internal arena is a fact or social construction, but still an alternative towards cooperation is indeed and imperative. The economic interdependence can help a state to pursue cooperation even though the reason of cooperation, economic interests, can be misused for war or insecurity. There is still security dilemma in discussing the role of economic interdependence in state behavior; basically the fear of the state to cooperate with a state is more powerful, knowing that mistrust is still the principle guiding international relations. Therefore, the same economy can be a referential term of peace or war in the international irony.

  1. 2.      Theorizing Economic Security

2.1. Mercantilist theory

Wealth and power are the stakeholders of a state. “The conjunction of economics and security, or ‘economic security’, has more recently become an increasingly important dimension of both international political economy and security studies in global power[15]”.  For Dunne and Brauer[16] “without economics there can be neither war nor peace, thus follows that for the state to ensure its defense, it must  carefully  understand how its economic can  feed other societal level[17]. They are correlated; “economics and national security have always been seen as being linked to some extent[18]”. Either economics provide expenditure to the security or security protects the economic resources of a country.  There is an economic dimension to the successful practice of security politics.

Mercantilists share a static conception of international economic relations in asserting that the country can only progress economically by disadvantaging another country, it is from where we understand the real theory of economic war[19].

In emphasizing on the state’s power players, mercantilist theory argues that economy is an instrument of power in the hands of politicians which uses military force to protect this instrument; therefore economics become a factor to influence war[20]. For them, politics dominate economics[21].  This assumption holds a realistic view wherein the main symptom is the national interest defined in term of power[22].  Linked to neo Marxist, militarism is a support of capitalism for the third word exploitation and economic war. Ibbo[23] argues that “capital seeks to maximize profit, and in profit’s pursuit seeks to conquer all territories, all markets, all natural resources and all human labor, skills and ingenuity”. Therefore they have elaborated the “balance of trade” theory supply in which the “development of trade is of benefit to the country if it generates an excess over imports, the trade balance returning to the nation as money”[24]

Hence, it becomes the combination between Realism and Marxism, Real Marxism, to which extent the Neo-mercantilists stand in assessing that the international political economy during the two latest centuries is driven by the purchase of economic interest over key mineral resources in weak countries by the imperialist. According to the mercantilist, “all means are good to ensure the national economic and political domination”[25] through this statement, they are promoting the sense of an economic war.

For Brauer and Dunne, this fact is highlighting the role that violence plays in the wealth of nations by term of “static peace dividend”[26] to ensure the economic growth of nation by disabling other nations. The static peace dividend focuses on the redistribution of economic activities from violence- related to non-violence related spending; war is a source of income. The state is ready to launch outside its territory to gain interest and use for its own development. For example If Rwanda and Uganda are accused to support several group in exchange with natural resources in the eastern, the Rwandese economy will growth faster and the venues can be used for social needs in Rwanda[27].

2.2. Geopolitics and Geoeconomics

For Brauer and Dunne[28], among the risk factor that may predispose a state to experience large-scale of violence leading to insecurity includes natural resources; low income; low economic  growth; ethnic antagonism; neighborhood external instigation or armed conflict, geography competition for scarce resources; inequality; high military expenditure and large armies . The incompatibility of those factors is driven by some personal interests which act as catalyst. Le Billon suggests that some resources-dependent countries have been the one to experience civil wars mostly in the territory where mineral resources and oil are concentrated. “A wealth of natural resources such as oil or diamonds should, in theory, favor a country’s economic and social development”[29]. Amazingly, the competition over scarce resources is increasingly source of insecurity. Consequently resource-dependent countries are shaping the violent geopolitics war. The different parties to conflict who cause this insecurity are mostly the local conflicting parties (commodities supply), international intervening parties with vested interests) and multi- national corporations. Thus this section discusses insecurity within the global economy in focusing one of the exchange products within the international trade of natural resources.  How the presence of resources become drivers of insecurity. What tension exists between saving the local population life and leaving them in the mercy of predator invader or international market?

2.2.1.      Geopolitics

Geopolitics attempts to dramatically simplify international politics by reducing it to the struggle for control of limited number of key areas[30] . The control is motivated for strategic position, economic commodities or security related plan. For Hussein [31]  geopolitics is a form of competition for power and legitimacy of territory after the cold war. It determines the new phase of international relations by drawing attention to four possible security model including Unipolarity – the capacity of one state (USA) to project military power on global scale –; Balance of power – a system of competing centers (alliances) of power which don’t reflect the dictates of the imperial power (NATO versus WTO),  it is a kind of competitive multipolarity- ; Concert of power – cooperation between great power for issues of global security which refers to co-operative multipolarity – and finally  Universal system of security – a system  with the notions of collective and common security. All those scenarios determine the current international behavior in international security.

Relating to the four perspectives, the geopolitics also determines the role of third party intervention in acting as interest parties to security zone. The third intervention in this case referrers to either unipolarity; alliances of power; co-operative security or the universal system of security.  For Brauer and Dunne, “the third parties are never only benevolent. They have interests and will bring these to bear: Cuba intervened in Angola, the United States in Vietnam, and Russia in Afghanistan, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in the Balkans and in Libya. They may support one side more than the other, push their own interests” [32].  Geopolitics has also justified the motives of the Cold war and the military presence of West and the United States of America (USA) in the Gulf Persian for oil. The geopolitics acts more in external level policy and determines the bargaining within the international relation. It is related more with how a State can maximize and feed its capital from abroad. This scenario describes and designs the bipolarity during the cold war the USA and the Soviet Union, looking to conquer territory, to impose their beliefs and to flourish their economy the curse of the geopolitic strategies is their consequence in the local population and the insecurity.

A good example is the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) which has become the battle ground of economic international market between the West and China and the Great Lake region countries and its allies[33]. DRC is really the great picture of competitive multipolarity facing the global economy of war that becomes the source of underdevelopment with a lower economic growth, a higher number of unemployment, difficult access to education and health. The level of economic growth and economic development as provided by the United Nations Human development Report (2012) confirms this notification in placing it the last but one. Cater thinks that “resources like diamonds and coltan as such are not valuable for Congolese, which contributes of course to the low price of production. “They […] have little intrinsic worth; it is only within the context of the international market that they have value”[34] In several reports have pointed the activities of some African, European and Middle Eastern companies and the atrocities taking place in DRC. This linkage is alleged by gold mining, the illegal exploitation of natural resources, oil, timber and the arms trade[35] For Congolese, mineral resources are cursed. They don’t contribute to their development. Given the level of insecurity for example in the eastern part of DRC, we expect a low movement of people. Notwithstanding the insecurity there is an increase in the level of activities and business in the area held by multi-national corporations, rebel groups as well as local population.

2.2.2.      Geoeconomics

Geoeconomics retraces the economic capability being itself an instrument of policy available to states and capable of being applied as force or power[36]. In the same, Cable understands Geoeconomics to be the power supply that is considered as the economic productivity which can be applied as force. As discussed above, the identification metric of great power is their high level of economic capabilities to be international creditor or their contribution to the International Institutions. The USA contribution of the United Nations for example, makes her to become more influential and powerful in decision making than other states with a low contribution to the UN budgets.

For Edward Luttwak[37], geoeconomics is “the pursuit of adversarial goals with commercial means”.  It is the state policy to have access to its interest by use economic means. It is more about competiveness which has penetrated popular thinking it emphasis that ‘each nation is like a big corporation competing in the global market place’ in disadvantaging other actors, it is a kind of knock-out competition where states or actors used strategies to weaken other actors. The discourse of Western aid in Africa, the Breton Woods institutions plan for Africa and the Chinese presence in Africa and the Marshal Plan used to block to spread of communism ideology are seen as this kind of competitiveness.

Chinese presence in Africa is perceived as a kind of determination for breaking this western imperialist. Therefore, Chinese venture in Africa as considered as an offense to West. The latest consider Chinese invasion to be multifaceted, multilayered and extremely heterogeneous and dangerous for western economy expansion and interest. As Stefaan Marysse and Sara Geenen pointed “ the no strings approach by China is a very welcome alternative to the ‘ paternalistic’ policy of the western  donor community, that is now  thwarted by a newcomer, who is going to challenge the so-called ‘new international financial architecture’ designed by the Bretton Woods Institutions” [38].

A current example has been driven by the so-called ‘le Contrat Sino-Congolais’, a red agreement signed between China and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) In September 2007 which brought several debates among DRC partners. The deal of the cooperation implied that in exchange for an access to 10.6 million tons of copper and 600,000 tons of cobalt in the Katanga region, in terms of amount, the total revenues from the mines could come at least $40 billion[39]. China would invest US$ 9 billion for national wide construction in vital infrastructures to the country.  China state companies will build 3500 km of roads and 3500 km of the railways, 31 hospitals of 150 beds and 145 dispensaries, and the modernization of mining infrastructure[40].

Bretton Woods Institutions are offended because Chinese state is likely to be the buyer as well as the principal seller of the copper and cobalt being mined and to gain more market in infrastructure, agriculture and business. What is directly perceived, China will win the market of those precious materials.  As it was been noticed above, Behind IMF and the World Bank, Western countries which indeed invest in those institutions are seeing their interest lost.  They have asked for a negotiation of such agreement and they insist on the fact mining and infrastructure activities must be accounted for the international standard including an independent third party with audits being made public. This kind of geoeconomic game assesses that the competiveness within the international market gives to states the possibility to look for market to the save their interests.

In a given range, the first concept of security was more focuses more on the defense security in highlighting the strength of each state to secure its borders against any threat to its peace. The attention given to military security defense does not take into account the preventives measures to address the root causes of internal and social threats because; the attention was more external than internal.  However in the aftermath of the Cold war, the increasing number of intrastate conflicts due to several factors such as nationalism, irredentism, and poverty and among others enforced the idea of understanding security in broader perspective in including the preventive measures that address social problem as well economic grievances susceptible to causes deadliest conflict.

  1. 3.      Emergence of new model of economic security

3.1. The Neo-Economist

The new model of economic security focuses more on the use of economic factors to ensure peace and development. For the classical economists (Jean-Baptist Say [41], Malthus [42], David Ricardo [43] legacy of Idealism (Kant)[44], the development of economic interdependence owing to the market, outside public action, ineluctably leads to international peace or international stability[45]. Acting under the principle of comparative advantage of Adam Smith[46] and the Free Trade Liberal theory, The Neo-Economist argues the international trade and the free markets which connect people will reduce war and establish prosperity, peaceful relation, among states and individuals, hence commerce would replace war. They enhance commercial business since they believe that “free trade is the best human means for securing universal and permanent peace” (an 1842 title) and warfare is counterproductive[47].  For List[48], the pacification of international relations is gained through economic development. Say believes that peace will be possible when all the nations will reach the same level of economic development that the industrial progress will help in removing the possibility of wars of aggression and insecurity[49].

Two basic assumptions guided this school. First peace is a condition of economic development, through enabling the establishment of free trade and the evolution of economy towards an increased liberalism guarantees the advent of a lasting international peace in internal arena[50]. The Neo-Economists suggest that the economy war can be managed in establishing an economic mechanism, without any political consideration.

The limitation within this theory is that the principle of laissez-faire and laissez-passer has created an anarchical environment in which non-states actors become the potential threat to national and transnational security. In this case, we do not yet see the real demarcation between security – state –stake holder whether nationally or internationally and security as a set of policies for developmental needs in the grassroots level.  Furthermore, this assumption deals with interstate conflict in ignoring the internal conflict that can emerge from the grassroots. Mostly it defines the concept of political economy where the states and the market are the stakeholders. It deals more with international market, economic growth which is limited on productivity growth, long-term opportunities for production, and income generation does not focus on the way this is distributed or consumed[51] .

The challenge is that, the new economist in holding liberal capitalism view ignores the grassroots level. Indeed, one of the defining characteristics of liberal capitalism is “uncertainty and risk” that actors face when the market does not meet their expectations[52] Therefore the state should set policies to overcome those troubleshoots. A real economic security would like to focus more qualitative and equity aspects of economy, such as rural development, the wellbeing of women, and the elderly, and minority or disadvantaged populations. Therefore, it may take into account the measures of personal happiness, communal vitality and resilience[53]

3.2. Economic security and developmental needs: ending poverty

The emergence of the new order of economics of peace is guided by the policies of the political economy. The latter is perceived and mainly criticized as the basis of inequalities in which only the “bourgeois” are the major player in the global or national economy. Later one, without the participation of the entire society, it become the whirlwind of insecurity internally or globally. Yet economic security as related to political economy of globalization should shift from its pure form of capitalism where the form of decentralized market  gives access to certain classes of the society to level where it does not serves the real needs of the marginalized population, the poorest of the poor.

Technically, there is a distinction between, social market economy (political economy) which combines the allocation of resources in competitive markets with income redistribution and social policies which mainly refer to unemployment insurance, pension payments, and health insurance[54]. The correlation of both helps a country to face the competiveness of the international market. The first focuses on the benefit that a state gains over the international bargaining self-interest and the second is a countermeasure of the international bargaining and intrusion of domestic policies. In any case, economic globalization seems to have contributed not only to sustained global growth but also to increasing inequality in many countries as well as downward wage pressure for unskilled workers in other countries. The true challenges of these are the consequences of weak economies which cannot survive and cope with the international competitive market; it regenerates poverty among local population. Great powers have found the way to deal with that in building an economic security as safeguard for the betterment of the population, still poor states are struggling to cope with the wave of the globalization and the competition of the international market[55].

In meeting the crossroad of economic security, some scholars are looking to understand what can be the relation between economic growth and development[56]. If development is understood as the entire process to empower population with opportunities for better life, including their safety, the economic growth should create the environment of such progress. Conversely, the Africa Progress Panel 2013 gave an argument such

Africa’s economic fortunes have changed dramatically in the past decade. Economic growth has been driving up average incomes, and most countries in the region have recovered strongly from the global recession. Resource-rich countries have contributed to the region’s impressive growth record, but their record on human development is more chequered. Rising inequality seems to be the main reason for the disappointing overall record on reducing poverty[57].

 

It implies that the economic globalization seems to have contributed not only to sustained global growth but also to increasing inequality in many countries as well as downward wage pressure for unskilled workers in many countries[58]. To some extent, if economic growth does not foster economic development, the economic security becomes an elusive and pervasive for academic debates rather than “strategy of social transformation”. Development is the accomplished security form that each human being intends to get or to reach. For Sachs, the development is acquired by the satisfaction of preconditions infrastructures (roads, and ports), human capital (health and education) that the international market or the global economy cannot offer unless measures are taken to encourage people to find their way with local manufacturing. The attention should be on agricultural inputs, on investments in basic health, investments in education and the capacity to offer power, transport, and communication services and safe drinking water and sanitation[59].  The synergy of these different factors determines the course of development or the well-being of population and is likely to reduce insecurity. To this also can be added the all strategies of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) based on poverty reduction strategy which shaped on eight axis including eradicate extreme poverty and hunger, achieve universal primary education, promote gender equality and empower women, reduce child mortality, eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education, improve and reduce maternal health by three quarters, fight HIV/AIDS. Different efforts have been done to achieve the core objectives in these different sectors though one cannot that in 2015, the world will be developed. [60]

A particular concern on dealing with economic security is mainly the youth unemployment. The teeming unemployed youths engage in nefarious acts in order to satisfy their basic needs; youth who supposedly are hope for the future generation. What they do join terrorism, why do they become criminal, one the reason is to find what they need (such food, shelter) for survival. For Singh, Singh, and Singh[61], young people joining those different cops of terror because governments do not structure policies to respond to social, political, even economic challenges. For example, the extreme poverty in the Asian part (Bangladesh, Afghanistan) makes young people vulnerable to the ideology of terror, thus an economic policy empowering people with new opportunities and employment for example will a way toward the problem of insecurity[62]

In Republic Democratic Republic of Congo, the lack economic security can be addressed in two ways, the number of children joining militia group mostly in the eastern part and the level of criminality in big cities like Kinshasa. The informal economy is the one sustaining people life in DRC, even though  the Annual Report of the World Bank of  2013 have shown  that DRC has made some  economic progress, but it does not reflect the reality on the ground. According to Africa Progress Panel the “Democratic Republic, on the world’s best-endowed resource economies, is at the bottom of HDI”[63]. This can justify the increasing youth criminal group such Kuluna or Diable Rouge who become source of insecurity. Those groups have no political, ideological, religious motivations. They can be exploited by any political group which can offer them unless food. This is the same scenario in the eastern part with the increasing of child soldiers working for those warlords in the mining fields who don’t have any access to education, to employment; therefore they look by their own how to survive.  This observation is based on the research of Collier and Hoeffler on how for example the non-enrollment in secondary schooling is highly correlated to the outbreak civil war[64].

This assumes that internally, there are potential and tremendous security threats to state which can disable the entire system.  Therefore, the economic security should be understood   as the capacity of the state to foresee in preventing internal causes of security in empowering of vulnerable people and in offering them opportunities.  Some states have taken some preventive measures to face this challenge; this gives the preventive side of economic security.

3.3. Preventive side of economic security

Sometimes confused to the social security, economic security is linked to preventive measures taken by the state to ensure the life expense and the way a state stand to secure its economy after a long period of conflict. It can also refer to policies to protect the society against beggars. For Elliot (1939) if economic security is going to mean “the duty of the government to promote the general welfare, you can see into what large areas of public policy the question of the content of economic security is carried”[65].  Economic security is the entire welfare of the citizens. In this perspective, economic security can be understood as the degree to which individuals are protected against the risk of finding themselves without an income or with an income that is not sufficient to guarantee them a dignified standard of living[66]. It involves policies and institutions to implement those strategies. At this point economic security cross cut with social protection.  According to Giuliano Bonoli, “social protection here is understood as a form of state intervention that takes place only after resources have been allocated according to market principles”[67]. The all social insurance, health insurance can be understood as a part of economic security. The preventive measures are not taken by the state but can be provided private sector while the state plays the role of watchdog and regulator.

The preventive approach to security corroborate with the thesis that the state is not only one to offer security, but non state actors or the private sector become the major player in the security reform, even though, the state can still have control on that, but still the increasing and the independence, for example in the free market, is likely to go beyond the state control. It implies directly that the economic security have expanded the content of security as well as actors.  The United Nations have agencies which together work to ensure the entire human security such food security.  More and more the state is losing the total control of security while other actors are becoming more significant in addressing pertinent issues related to security challenges.

Conclusion

One but not last, economic security is a key tool to state organization and structure without which a state is compared to a car moving without fuel and can break at any time. It is compared to a standing shaped man and well-dressed but who can fall at any time because he is hungry. Fuel and hunger are the basic components to sustain those tools. The same way economics is the skeleton of state – understand as political organization- in shaping its external relation with other states and in providing to its citizens a safe and alive environment. There is no way a state can survive without money or human resource labour.

Leaving asides the military expenditure area where economics is a servant of defense security, the concept of economic security is widely taken to underline the way a state suggest policy for the development of its citizens. Economic security is more the basis for satisfying developmental need of citizens. This shift leads to the dilemma between individual securities versus national security wherein security is used to individuals from all threats either internal or external than protecting the “absurd state” which service is given to small range of citizens[68]. In this context each citizen should be considered as a “whole unit” of the entire society therefore a specific attention should be given, failure he can become a threat to state overall security design.

In this case, the safe and alive environment is not only structured by proliferations of arms race it must should be “a collective action through effective government provision of health, education, infrastructure, as well as foreign assistance when needed[69] by each citizen.

This underpins also a holistic economic security and all the means which surround human life and its existence because human safety and prosperity depend at least as much on collective decisions to fight disease, promote good science and widespread education, provide critical infrastructure, and act in unison to help the poorest of the poor, than fighting external aggressors. It is not only the way a state constructs and strengths its weaponry against military invasion or respond to macro-economic challenges which will create a steady environment for development but it is in the way a state polishes its economic strategies to sustain its intern structure and become “an effective response” to its population needs.  This is possible is the defense security spending should is cut off and used to productivity-enhancing physical, human, institutional, and social capital which refers to a dynamic peace dividend. It is from this perspective that economic security meets its focus point of the human development when it focuses on national developmental needs of the citizens.

Bibliography

Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776), retrieved from http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/adam-smith/wealth-nations.pdf, 23rd March, 2014.

Africa Progress Panel, Equity in Extractives: Stewarding Africa’s Natural Resources for all. (Switzerland: Africa Progress Panel, 2013).

Barry Buzan, People, States and Fear: An Agenda for International Security Studies in the Post-Cold War Era (New York, NY: Haverster Wheatsheaf, 1991).

Charles Carter, “The Political Economy of Conflict and UN Intervention: Rethinking the Critical Cases of Africa”, In Karen Ballentine and Jake Sherman, Eds. The Political Economy of Armed Conflict: Beyond Greed and Grievance (London: Lynne Rienner, 2003), 19-46.

David Ricardo, On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, 3rd ed. (Canada: Batoche Books, 1821).

Edward Luttwak, Disarming the World’s Economies (Washington, DC: Centre for Strategic and International Studies, 1990).

Emmanuel Kant, Essai Philosophique sur  la Paix Perpétuelle    (Paris : G. Fishbachelier, 1880), Retrieved   http://archiviomarini.sp.unipi.it/208/1/N0075749_PDF_1_-1DM.pdf

Fanny Coulomb, Economic Theories of Peace and War (London, New York: Random House, 2004).

Friedrich List, Système National d’Economie  Politique (Paris : Chapelle Editeur, 1841).

Giuliano Bonoli, “Social Policy through Labor Markets: Understanding National Differences in the Provision of Economic Security to Wage Earners”, In Comparative Political Studies, 2003, 36 (Sage publications)    or online version http://cps.sagepub.com/content/36/9/1007

Global Witness, China and Congo: Friends in Need, (March 2011) retrieved from http://www.globalwitness.org/sites/default/files/library/friends_in_need_en_lr.pdf, (London: Global Witness Limited, 21st October 2014).

Jacques Nzumbu, Pouvoirs et Affaires  dans une Zone à Déficit de Gouvernance : Les  Enjeux de la Réforme Minière  en R. D. Congo de 2002 à 2009 (Kinshasa : CEPAS, 2011).

James Sperling and Emil Kirchner, “Economic Security and the Problem of Cooperation in Post-Cold War Europe”, In Review of International Relations, 24 (1998), 221-237.

Jean-Baptiste  Say, Traité d’Economie Politique (Paris : Calmann-Lévy, 1972).

Jeffrey Sachs, The End of Poverty: the Economic Dimension of our Time (New York, New York: Penguin Press, 2005).

John K. Galbraith, La Paix Indésirable ? Rapport sur l’Utilité des Guerres (Paris : Calmann-Lévy, 1984).

Jurgen Brauer and J-Paul Dunne, Peace Economics: A Macroeconomic Primer for Violence-Afflicted States (Washington, D.C: United States Institute of Peace, 2012).

Luciani Giacomo, “The Economic Content of Security”, In Journal of Public Policy, 8(2), (1998), 151-173.

M. Ibbo, ed. Reflexions on the Crisis in the Democratic Republic of Congo (Harare: Sapes Trust, 1999).

Mark Neocleous, “From Social to National Security: On the Fabrication Order”. In Security Dialogue, 363-84 (Sage Publications, 2006).

Michael Todaro and Stephen Smith, Economic Development, 4th ed. (Boston: Pearson, 2012).

Mikael Sheehan, International Security: an Analytical Survey (London: Lynne Rienner, 2005).

Paul Welfens, Social Security and Economic Globalization (Berlin: Springer-Verlag Heidelberg, 2013).

Philippe Le Billon, “The Geopolitics of Resources Wars: Resources Dependence, Governance and Violence”, In Philippe Le Billon, Eds, The Geopolitical Economy of Resource Wars (London: Frank Cass, 2005), 1-24.

Samuel Huntington, “The Clash of Civilization”, In Foreign Affairs, 72, (1993), 22-49.

Samuel Hussein, Ed. Challenges to Global Security: Geopolitics and Powers in an Age of Transition (New York, NY: I.B. Tauris, 2008).

Singh Aleya, Singh Vinod, and Singh Mahadevi, Eds, Manmade Disasters (New Delhi: APH publishing Corporation, 2010). [1] Paul Collier and Anker Hoeffler, Greed and Grievance in Civil War (Washington, DC: World Bank, October 21st, 2001).

Stefaan Marysse and Sara Geenen, Les Contrats Chinois en RDC : l’Impérialisme Rouge en  Marche in L’Afrique de Grands Lacs : l’Annuaire  2007-2008 (Retrieved http://www.ua.ac.be/objs/00210769.pdf, 20/10/2013, 2009), 287

Thomas Malthus, An Essay on the Principle of Population (London: St. Paul’s Church-Yard, 1978) retrieved from http://www.esp.org/books/malthus/population/malthus.pdf, 115th Oct. 2013.

United Nations, The Millennium Development Goals:  2014 Report (New York, NY) retrieved October 13, 2104 from https://www.un.org./Milleniumgoals/.

Vincent Cable, “What is International Economic Security”, In International Affairs, 71(2), (1995), 305-324.

William Schabas, “War Economies, Economic Actors, and International Criminal Law”, in Karen Ballentine and Heiko Nitzschke, eds. Profiting from Peace: Managing the Economic Dimension of Civil War (London: Lynne Rienner, 2005), 425-443.

William Y. Elliot, “The Struggle for Economic Security in Democracy”, In Social Research, 6(2), 298-312


[1] Luciani Giacomo, The Economic Content of Security in Journal of Public Policy, 8(2), (1998), 151-173.

[2] Luciani Giacomo, The  Economic  Content of Security , 151-173

[3] Mikael Sheehan, International Security: an Analytical Survey (London: Lynne Rienner, 2005), 66.

[4] Samuel Huntington, The Clash of Civilization, In Foreign Affairs 72, (1993), 22-49.

[5] Mikael Sheehan, International Security: an Analytical Survey, 47.

[6] Vincent Cable, What is International Economic Security?  In International Affairs, 71(2), (1995), 305-324.

[7] Mark Neocleous, “From Social to National Security: On the Fabrication Order”. In Security Dialogue ( 2006)

[8] Jurgen Brauer and J-Paul Dunne, Peace Economics: A Macroeconomic Primer for Violence-Afflicted States (Washington, D.C: United States Institute of Peace, 2012), 10.

[9] Mark Neocleous, From Social to National Security: On the Fabrication Order. In Security Dialogue ( 2006)

[10] Mikael Sheehan, International Security: an Analytical Survey, 47.

[11] Mikael Sheehan,  International Security : an Analytical Survey, 58

[12] Fanny Coulomb, Economic Theories of Peace and War, (London, New York: Random House, 2004).

[13] James Sperling and Emil Kirchner, Economic Security and the Problem of Cooperation in Post-Cold War Europe, In Review of International Relations, 24 (1998), 221-237.

[14] Paul Welfens, Social Security and Economic Globalization (Berlin: Springer-Verlag Heidelberg, 2013).

[15] Mark Neocleous, “From Social to National Security: On the Fabrication Order”. In Security Dialogue ( 2006)

[16] Jurgen Brauer and J. Paul Dunne, Peace Economics : A Macroeconomic Primer for Violence –Afflicted  States ( Washington, DC : United Stated  Institute of Peace, 2012)

[17] Barry Buzan, People, States and Fear: An Agenda for International Security Studies in the Post-Cold War Era (New York: Haverster Wheatsheaf, 1991), 232, 237.

[18] Mikael Sheehan, International Security: an Analytical Survey, 65.

[19]  See Fanny Coulomb, Economic Theories of Peace and War, (London, New York, NY: Random House, 2004).

[20] See Fanny Coulomb, Economic Theories of Peace and War, (London, New York, NY: Random House, 2004), 24.

[21] John K. Galbraith, La Paix Indésirable ? Rapport sur l’Utilité des Guerres (Paris : Calmann-Lévy, 1984).

[22] See Hans J. Morgenthau, Politics among Nations: The Struggle of for Power and Peace, 5th ed. (New York, NY: Knopf, 1978).

[23] M. Ibbo, ed. Reflexions on the Crisis in the Democratic Republic of Congo (Harare: Sapes Trust, 1999), 10.

[24] Fanny Coulomb, Economic Theories of Peace and War, (London, New York: Random House, 2004), 25.

[25] Fanny Coulomb, Economic Theories of Peace and War, 27.

[26] Jurgen Brauer and J. Paul Dunne, Peace Economics : A Macroeconomic Primer for Violence –Afflicted States ( Washington, DC : United Stated  Institute of Peace, 2012), p. 9

[27]  This particular case challenges to some extent the annual reports that are published by the World Bank on the Economic growth of each country.  If for example Rwanda is doing well or the USA are doing well, we better understand the fact their involvement in destabilizing other countries can be part of it and they become somehow “dirty economies ”

[28] Jurgen Brauer and J. Paul Dunne, Peace Economics : A Macroeconomic Primer for Violence –Afflicted States ( Washington, DC : United Stated  Institute of Peace, 2012), p. 89

[29] Philippe Le Billon, “The Geopolitics of Resources Wars: Resources Dependence, Governance and Violence”, In Philippe Le Billon, Ed, the Geopolitical Economy of Resource Wars (London: Frank Cass, 2005), 1-24.

[30] Mikael Sheehan, International Security: an Analytical Survey, 20.

[31] Samuel Hussein, Ed. Challenges to Global Security: Geopolitics and Powers in an Age of Transition (New York, NY: I.B. Tauris, 2008), 33.

[32] Jurgen Brauer and J. Paul Dunne, Peace Economics : A Macroeconomic Primer for Violence –Afflicted States ( Washington, DC : United Stated  Institute of Peace, 2012), p. 89

[33] Jacques Nzumbu, Pouvoirs et Affaires  dans une Zone à Déficit de Gouvernance : Les  Enjeux de la Réforme Minière  en R. D. Congo de 2002 à 2009 (Kinshasa : CEPAS, 2011),  23

[34] Charles Carter, “The Political Economy of Conflict and UN Intervention: Rethinking the Critical Cases of Africa”, in Karen Ballentine and Jake Sherman, Eds. The Political Economy of Armed Conflict : Beyond Greed and Grievance ( London : Lynne Rienner, 2003), 33,

[35]  William Schabas, “War Economies, Economic Actors, and International Criminal Law”, in Karen Ballentine and Heiko Nitzschke, eds. Profiting from Peace: Managing the Economic Dimension of Civil War (London: Lynne Rienner, 2005), 425.

[36] Mikael Sheehan, International Security: an Analytical Survey, 70.

 

[37] Edward Luttwak, Disarming the World’s Economies (Unpublished CEO) (Washington, DC: Centre for Strategic and International Studies, 1990), 308.

[38] Stefaan Marysse and Sara Geenen, Les Contrats Chinois en RDC : l’Impérialisme Rouge en  Marche in L’Afrique de Grands Lacs : l’Annuaire  2007-2008 (Retrieved from http://www.ua.ac.be/objs/00210769.pdf, 20/10/2013, 2009), 287.

[39] Global Witness, China and Congo: Friends in Need, (March 2011) retrieved from http://www.globalwitness.org/sites/default/files/library/friends_in_need_en_lr.pdf, (London: Global Witness Limited, 21st October 2014), 4.

[40] Global witness, China and Congo : Friends in Need, 4,

[41] Jean-Baptiste  Say, Traité d’Economie Politique (Paris : Calmann-Lévy, 1972).

[42] Thomas Malthus, An Essay on the Principle of Population (London: St. Paul’s Church-Yard, 1978) retrieved from http://www.esp.org/books/malthus/population/malthus.pdf, 115th Oct. 2013.

[43] David Ricardo, On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, 3rd ed (Canada: Batoche Books, 1821).

[44] Emmanuel Kant, Essai Philosophique sur  la Paix Perpétuelle   (Paris : G. Fishbachelier, 1880), Retrieved from  http://archiviomarini.sp.unipi.it/208/1/N0075749_PDF_1_-1DM.pdf

[45] Jean-Baptiste  Say, Traité d’Economie Politique (Paris : Calmann-Lévy, 1972).

[46] Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776), retrieved from http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/adam-smith/wealth-nations.pdf, 23rd March, 2014.

[47] Fanny Coulomb, Economic Theories of Peace and War, ( London, New York : Random House, 2004), 33

[48] Friedrich List, Système National d’Economie  Politique (Paris : Chapelle Editeur, 1841).

[49] Jean-Baptiste  Say, Traité d’Economie Politique (Paris : Calmann-Lévy, 1972).

[50] Fanny Coulomb, Economic Theories of Peace and War (London, New York: Random House, 2004), 33.

[51] Jurgen Brauer and J. Paul Dunne, Peace Economics: A Macroeconomic Primer for Violence –Afflicted States (Washington, DC: United Stated Institute of Peace, 2012), 12.

[52] Vincent Cable, What is International Economic Security, in International Affairs, 71(2), 306, (305-324), 1995.

[53] Jurgen Brauer and J. Paul Dunne, Peace Economics: A Macroeconomic Primer for Violence –Afflicted States (Washington, DC: United Stated Institute of Peace, 2012), 15.

[54] Paul J. Welfens, Social Security and Economic Globalization (Berlin: Springer-Verlag Heidelberg, 2013).

[55] Michael Todaro and Stephen Smith,  Economic Development, 4th ed. ( Boston : Pearson, 2012)

[56] Michael Todaro and Stephen Smith,  Economic Development, 4th ed. ( Boston : Pearson, 2012)

[57] Africa Progress Panel, Equity in Extractives: Stewarding Africa’s Natural Resources for all. (Switzerland: Africa Progress Panel, 2013), 13.

[58] Paul J. Welfens, Social Security and Economic Globalization (Berlin: Springer-Verlag Heidelberg, 2013).

[59] Jeffrey Sachs, The End of Poverty: the Economic Dimension of our Time (New York, NY: Penguin Press, 2005), 234.

[60] United Nations, The Millennium Development Goals:  2014 Report (New York, NY) retrieved October 13, 2014 from https://www.un.org./Milleniumgoals/.

[61] Singh Aleya, Singh Vinod,  and Singh Mahadevi, Eds,  Manmade Disasters ( New Delhi : APH publishing  Corporation, 2010), 310

[62] Jeffrey Sachs, The End of Poverty: the Economic Dimension of our Time (New York, NY: Penguin Press, 2005), 234.

[63] Africa Progress Panel, Equity in Extractives: Stewarding Africa’s Natural Resources for all. (Switzerland: Africa Progress Panel, 2013), 10.

[64] Paul Collier and Anker Hoeffler, Greed and Grievance in Civil War (Washington, DC: World Bank, October 21st, 2001), 8.

[65] William Y. Elliot, “The Struggle for Economic Security in Democracy”, In Social Research, 6(2), 298-312, 299.

[66] Giuliano Bonoli, “Social Policy through Labor Markets: Understanding National Differences in the Provision of Economic Security to Wage Earners”, In Comparative Political Studies, 2003, 36 (Sage publications)    or online version http://cps.sagepub.com/content/36/9/1007, 108.

[67] Giuliano Bonoli, “Social Policy through Labor Markets: Understanding National Differences in the Provision of Economic Security to Wage Earners”, 109.

[68]  Cf. Barry Buzan, People, States and Fear: An Agenda for International Security Studies in the Post –Cold War Era (New York, NY: Haverster Wheatsheaf, 1991).

[69] Jeffrey Sachs, The End of Poverty: the Economic Dimension of our Time (New York, NY: Penguin Press, 2005), 3.

cliquez dessus

 

International Transitional Justice as component of Neoliberal Intuitionalism

 New international systems created during the 20th Century have become more active in nowadays society, and mostly in Africa.  The case of United Nations, International Monetary Fund, World Bank, ICC, etc.  According to some scholars, International Systems are safeguard for domestic policy by tracking, in the post-conflict period, those we have committed crimes during wars. They control the case of violations of human rights; in the political context, they operate to regulate the implementation of democracy in state, the development enrolling in international cooperation standard. Thus, the actions taken by the states are resonances on the international political scene, therefore are frequently controls by international regimes.  This current policy in which International Systems interfere in the policy within a state is one of the main assumptions of the Neoliberal Institutionalism. Neoliberals embrace a structural theory of international politics and pay much more attention to the ways international institutions and other non-state actors promote international cooperation. The international cooperation agenda include economic factor, political factor, environmental, cultural factor, security factor and jurisdiction factor.

During the led students conference hold in October 11 to 12, 2013, one of the Keynote Speakers, Mr. Kegero underlined the importance of transitional justice in the post-conflict period.  He  defined transitional Justice as sets of practices, mechanisms and concerns arise following the period of conflicts, civil strife or repression which are aims directly at confronting and dealing with past violations of human rights and Humanitarian law.  It seeks to reform heal and transit from illegitimate and repressive rule situations of conflict to national reconstruction and good governance. The main aim is to end the culture of impunity and establish the rule of the law in a context of democratic governance. That is to say transitional Justice seeks to reconcile communities, to renew the citizen’s trust in the institutions of governance and public service. The guest speaker gave a case study of Kenya in the post election violence in 2007 where various crimes have been committed particularly on human rights abuses, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. We know by the fact that an International Criminal Court (ICC) was created during the Rome Status and came into force on 1 July 2002. The Rome Statute grants the Court jurisdiction over four groups of crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression (Art. 5). Most of Crimes committed by some Kenyans during the post election are claimed to be part of the four groups under the Jurisdiction of ICC.  There is a trial ongoing in Hague on international transitional justice on Kenya situation. That is to say that the presumed authors of those crimes must attend the Court.

The case of Kenya deals with the international cooperation in jurisdiction factor. ICC as international regime targets a sovereign country which is Kenya.  The very contrast insight is that those who are ruling the country are those presumed authors of those crimes, such as the President. What will happen if they don’t want to attend the trial? Henceforth, a war is opened between the complex structure of these international regimes and the sovereignty of a state. The pressure of international regimes which control the anarchy system in domestic policy seems to be demanding. Kenya may be sanctioned since the President refuse to attend the trial.

Isanganoarrdc |
Rcdazazga |
Avec Vous Vivre Meythet |
Unblog.fr | Créer un blog | Annuaire | Signaler un abus | Mistercouac
| Guillaumerobaa83
| Ladnwey2012