International security
It ranges from the traditional or conventional modes of military power, the causes and consequences of war between states, economic strength, to ethnic, religious and ideological conflicts, trade and economic conflicts, energy supplies, science and technology, food, as well as threats to human security and the stability of states from environmental degradation, infectious diseases, climate change and the activities of non-state actors.
[1] Edward Kolodziej has compared international security to a Tower of Babel[5] and Roland Paris (2004) views it as "in the eye of the beholder".
[6] Security has been widely applied to "justify suspending civil liberties, making war, and massively reallocating resources during the last fifty years".
[15] States were deemed to be rational entities, national interests and policy driven by the desire for absolute power.
As Cold War tensions receded, it became clear that the security of citizens was threatened by hardships arising from internal state activities as well as external aggressors.
Civil wars were increasingly common and compounded existing poverty, disease, hunger, violence and human rights abuses.
[16] In the historical debate on how best to achieve national security, writers like Hobbes, Machiavelli, and Rousseau tended to paint a rather pessimistic picture of the implications of state sovereignty.
[18] Among the approaches which seeks to acknowledge and address these basic threats to human safety are paradigms that include cooperative, comprehensive and collective measures, aimed to ensure security for the individual and, as a result, for the state.
The twentieth century classical realism is mainly derived from Edward Hallett Carr's book The Twenty Years' Crisis.
[19] The realist views anarchy and the absence of a power to regulate the interactions between states as the distinctive characteristics of international politics.
Liberal thinking dates back to philosophers such as Thomas Paine and Immanuel Kant, who argued that republican constitutions produce peace.
[29] In addition, there is some debate due to lack of testing that international intervention is not the best institution to aid weak or post-war nations.
[33] As states like Egypt and Pakistan grant more rights to women, further liberation and stability within such countries will inevitably ensue, fostering greater security throughout the international realm.
Built into American foreign policy is the idea that empowering women leads to greater international development due to their increased ability to maintain "the well-being of their families and communities, drive social progress, and stabilize societies.
[34] Such principles must be propagated nationally and globally in order to increase the agency of women to achieve the necessary gender equality for international security.
As a renowned theorist within Feminist IR, J. Ann Tickner points out questions that women would likely be more inclined to ask in regards to war and peace.
For example, why men have been the predominant actors in combat, how gender hierarchies contribute to the legitimation of war, and the consequences of associating women with peace.
[35] In general, the main issue of concern to feminists within IR is why in political, social, and economic realms, femininity remains inferior to masculinity, as they see the effects of this transcendental hierarchy both nationally and internationally.
[35] Such considerations contribute significant perspective to the role that women play in maintaining peaceful conditions of international security.
This can be derived by looking at information and statistics presented in Joni Seager's book The Penguin Atlas of Women in the World.
For example, in combat zones, women face heightened risks of sexual assault, and their familial responsibilities are complicated by reduced access to necessary resources.
[36] In terms of governmental presence, (to support their role as leaders), women have not yet achieved equal representation in any state, and very few countries have legislative bodies that are more than 25% female.
[33] This statement by Clinton reiterates the necessity to confront such on-going challenges to female participation, making such issues pertinent to international security.
