Search results

This paper intends to reflect on the most appropriate means to enhance human security under the multiplication of new security risks, asking whether the responsibility should be attributed to the military or the civil protection forces and discussing the challenges that both agencies' operations raise. We argue that civil protection forces' role should be reinforced (and their resources, capabilities and readiness improved) to protect human security under risk materialization (which also meets United Nations Oslo Guidelines). In order to support this claim, we will explore: first, the intentions (and opportunities and challenges) of the military in co-opting new security risks into their agenda, as well as (argue for and) intervening as the key actor in foreign interventions; second, how the divide between internal and external security curtails military action abroad in new threats and risks and demonstrates its inadequacy (even with dual-purpose/dual-use equipment); third, how new threats and (particularly) risks make civil protection forces more useful in foreign interventions than the military. Resorting to the Idai cyclone in Mozambique and Portugal's response to it, we will briefly explore issues arising from the deployment of the military in a scenario on natural disasters. In short, we claim that, civil protection forces' frequently offer a better contribution to human security crises than the military.

This paper intends to reflect on the most appropriate means to enhance human security under the multiplication of new security risks, asking whether the responsibility should be attributed to the military or the civil protection forces and discussing the challenges that both agencies' operations raise. We argue that civil protection forces' role should be reinforced (and their resources, capabilities and readiness improved) to protect human security under risk materialization (which also meets United Nations Oslo Guidelines). In order to support this claim, we will explore: first, the intentions (and opportunities and challenges) of the military in co-opting new security risks into their agenda, as well as (argue for and) intervening as the key actor in foreign interventions; second, how the divide between internal and external security curtails military action abroad in new threats and risks and demonstrates its inadequacy (even with dual-purpose/dual-use equipment); third, how new threats and (particularly) risks make civil protection forces more useful in foreign interventions than the military. Resorting to the Idai cyclone in Mozambique and Portugal's response to it, we will briefly explore issues arising from the deployment of the military in a scenario on natural disasters. In short, we claim that, civil protection forces' frequently offer a better contribution to human security crises than the military. ; Este documento tiene como objetivo reflexionar sobre los medios más apropiados para mejorar la seguridad humana ante una multiplicación de nuevos riesgos para la seguridad. El documento se pregunta si la responsabilidad corresponde a las fuerzas armadas o a las de protección civil, y analiza los desafíos que plantean las operaciones de ambas agencias. Argumentamos que el papel de las fuerzas de protección civil debe ser reforzado (asimismo, deben optimizarse sus recursos, capacidades y preparación) con el fin de proteger la seguridad humana cuando se materializa el riesgo (cumpliendo las Directrices de Oslo de Naciones Unidas). Para respaldar esta afirmación, exploraremos: en primer lugar, las intenciones (y oportunidades y desafíos) de las fuerzas armadas al incorporar nuevos riesgos para la seguridad en su agenda, así como al (argumentar e) intervenir como el actor clave en intervenciones en el extranjero; en segundo lugar, cómo la división entre la seguridad interna y externa limita la acción militar en el extranjero frente a "nuevas" amenazas y riesgos y demuestra su insuficiencia (incluso con equipos de doble uso); en tercer lugar, cómo las "nuevas" amenazas y (en particular) riesgos hacen que las fuerzas de protección civil sean más útiles en intervenciones en el extranjero que los militares. Basándonos en el caso del ciclón Idai en Mozambique y la respuesta de Portugal al mismo, exploraremos brevemente los problemas derivados del despliegue de militares en un escenario de desastres naturales. En resumen, aseveramos que las fuerzas de protección civil garantizan con frecuencia una mejor contribución a las crisis de seguridad humana que las fuerzas armadas.