Suchergebnisse

For tjue ar siden pavirket utgivelsen av rapporten 'New Dimensions of Security' fra FNs utvikhngsprogram, UNDP, en allerede gryende debatt om sikkerhet. I denne artikkelen undersokes dagens status for human security som et komplekst og mangfoldig kunnskapsfelt. I fire steg diskuterer jeg begrepets fleksibilitet, vektleggingen av subjektivitet og kontekstuelle og helhetlige forstaelser av sikkerhet. Videre droftes human security som del av en etisk utenrikspolitikk og militaere intervensjoner i tiden etter den kalde krigen. Human security har som kunnskapsfelt en iboende spenning mellom analyser av usikkerhet og sosial organisering pa lokalt niva og human security som retorisk instrument for a legitimere fred/krigforing. A undersoke og forsta den symbolske makten i det vage og abstrakte begrepet human security, bade slik det framstar og brukes i konkrete sammenhenger, kan vaere en vei til kritiske analyser i dette kunnskapsfeltet Twenty years ago the release of the UNDP report 'New Dimensions of Security' stimulated what was already a sprawling debate on security. This article explores the status of human security today as a complex and diverse field of knowledge. In four steps I discuss the flexibility of the concept, the emphasis on subjectivity, contextual and holistic understandings of security as well as how human security is part of an ethical and interventionist foreign policy in the post-cold-war era. I argue that human security as a field of knowledge is characterized by tension. A key tension is between an analytical approach to insecurities and social organization on the local level and analyses of human security as a rhetorical tool legitimizing peace-/war-making. Exploring the symbolic power in the vague and abstract notion of human security, how it is represented and employed in concrete contexts, is one approach to critical analysis in this field. Adapted from the source document.

The following article revisits existing scholarship on human-centric approaches to security in cyberspace and argues that a holistic understanding of cyber security in the Arctic must include discussion of the use of cyber technology in the everyday lives of individuals and communities, addressing both the ways such tools enable and undermine human security. Simultaneously, the article contextualises the Arctic as a region undergoing rapid change as a result of climate change and increased digitalisation and seeks to understand the consequent implications for human security. In light of these considerations, the article analyses the existing constraints and possibilities that cyber security and digitalisation pose for human security and revisits them from a humancentric perspective of cyber security. It also seeks to contextualise such security influences in relation to the role of climate change and its influence on the region. Finally, several examples are discussed to underline the interdependent implications of digitalisation and climate change from a human-centric perspective of cyber security in the Arctic.

This comparative article reveals how the general focus of Canadian and Russian threat perceptions in the Arctic have shifted from a Cold War fixation on hard defence to accommodate soft security issues over the last three decades. Both countries now pay greater attention to threats and challenges stemming from climate change, security, and safety risks associated with resource development and increasingly accessible sea routes. Although concern about military conflict arising from Arctic disputes continues to frame some media discussions in both countries, most strategic analysts and academics have moved away from this line of argument. Instead, military functions now include assertion of Canadian and Russian sovereignty over their respective internal waters, as well as protection of resources in their exclusive economic zones and on and in extended continental shelves; protection of economic interests in the North, including mineral and bio-resources; prevention of potential terrorist attacks against critical industrial and state infrastructure; and dual-use functions, such as search and rescue operations, surveillance of air and maritime spaces, support to safe navigation, and mitigation of natural and human-made catastrophes.
The authors argue that analysts should parse two forms of military modernization in the Arctic: one of capability development related to the global strategic balance, where the Arctic serves as a bastion or a thoroughfare; and a second intended to address emerging non-traditional security challenges. They contend that these modernization programs do not inherently upset the Arctic military balance and need not provoke a regional arms race.