Abstract

The small states enjoy equal status with other states. But due to the hierarchical nature of power in the regional system, the security interests and requirements of these states are not similar to the big and powerful states in global politics. The factors that broadly affect the security of such small states are their size, sparse population, limited resource base, lack of cohesion of the population, short of democratic structure, proximity to big neighbors, and threats to their ecology. The factor impinge on the ability of these states is to make itself secure and provide security to its citizen. It is impossible for them to obtain security by using their own capabilities. They have to rely on assistance from neighbours and other states for their security matters. It thus requires substantial assistance and support provided both on a bilateral basis and multilaterally through international institutions. Therefore, a new conceptual framework is urgently needed to study the non-traditional security issues of these small states.

1. Introduction

The problem and perspective of security differ from state to state in accordance with its nature. The nature and military strength of the state to deal with threats are important variables in the first instance to understand and analyse the conception of security.

Generally speaking, the concept of national security can be broadly categorised into two groups: traditional and modern. The classic, or traditional view, is closely related to the realists. Conceptually, the realist viewpoint is inextricably linked with the enhancement of a state's military capability. In the words of Walter Lippman, "A nation has security when it does not have to sacrifice its legitimate interests to avoid war, and is able, if challenged, to maintain them by war." ¹.

The behaviour of the two superpowers during the cold war period was similar to the realistic assumptions about the nature of the international system. The escalating weapons race between the two superpowers during this period, as a result of the realistic assumption of power, led to the emergence of techno-centric violence. According to Kaldor, in the age of the cold war, the concept of security was highly connected with sophisticated military power. During the cold war, the possibility of nuclear war cast doubt on a state's ability to protect its citizens living within a specific territory. People began to think of realism as an inadequate ideology to predict and guide global politics.

2. Redefining Security

The realists failed to give a universally accepted definition of security in the age of the cold war. Present literature on security strongly supports the thesis that the issues related to security cannot be effectively addressed without due focus on factors such as societal, political, and economic. According to them, security is not just absent or preparedness for war. From a security perspective, nonmilitary dimensions are equally important.

For the first-time, nonmilitary aspects of security were mentioned internationally at the conference on the Relationship between Disarmament and Development, convened by the UN General Assembly from August 24th to September 11th, 1987, in New York. The final document was adopted by the majority of consensus among the one hundred fifty member states. The document says:

Security is an overriding priority for all nations. It is also fundamental for both disarmament and development. Security consists of not only military, but also political, economic, social, humanitarian, human rights, and ecological aspects. Enhanced security can, on the one hand, On the one hand, they create conditions conductive to disarmament and, on the other hand, provide the environment and confidence for the successful pursuit of development. The development process, by overcoming non-military threats to security and contributing to a more stable and sustainable international system, can enhance security and thereby promote arms reduction and disarmament. Disarmament would enhance security both directly and indirectly. A process of disarmament that provides for undiminished security and progressively lower levels of armament could allow additional resources to be devoted to addressing non- military challenges to security, and thus enhance overall security ².

Recently, non-military threats to security have moved to the forefront of global concern. Underdevelopment and declining prospects for development, as well as mismanagement and waste of resources, constitute challenges to security. The degradation of the environment presents a threat to sustainable development. The world can hardly be regarded as secure so long as there is polarisation of wealth and poverty at the national and international levels. Gross and systematic violations of human rights retard genuine socio-economic development and create tension, which contribute to instability. Mass poverty, illiteracy, disease, and malnutrition affecting a large proportion of the world’s population often become the cause of social strain, tension, and strife ³.

The document shows that non-military security is just as important as military security. The document also accepts that non-military threats to security have moved to the forefront of global concerns.

In a meeting amongst a group of experts on non military aspects of security, they used some operational definition of security in Uzbekistan's capital, Tashkent (former USSR), in May 1990. They unanimously accepted the relationship between security and development and also security and the environment in their operational definition of security.

An important area of debate is the place of the people as the reference unit in security. As underlined by the UNDP:

The concept of security has too long been interpreted narrowly as meaning security of territory from external aggression, or protection of national interests in foreign policy, or global security from the threat of nuclear holocaust. It has been linked to the birth of a nation rather than to people.......Forgotten were the legitimate concerns of ordinary people who sought security in their daily lives. For many of them, security symbolised protection from the threat of disease, hunger, unemployment, crime, social conflict, political repression, and environmental hazards ⁴.

Thus, as a psychological aspect, security implies two aspects:

1. The absence of objective dangers and

2. The absence of subjective fears, whether or not they are justified ⁵.

Thus, the nation-states realised the need for a new mechanism for adequate study of the concept of security as a psychological issue. Therefore, the concept of security must take into account present-day realities. Perceived and actual threats are important security perceptions and approaches.

In today's world, the main sources of conflict are intra-state.In the new international order, the concept of security necessarily envisages an interdependent world order needing a common security regime to be achieved through the collective efforts of mankind. Barry Buzen has aptly stated that both realists and idealists have greatly weakened their analysis by equating security with the idea of power and later subsuming it under peace. He rightly suggests an expanded and clarified concept of security by maintaining the proper balance between power and peace.

Security has to be understood by acquiring insights into various aspects. The problems in today’s world require the use of methods and insights from a combination of many diverse fields, including strategic studies, international relations, international law, history, economics, sociology, and ecology. A state must not entertain the fallacy that it can be secure at the expense of others.

A state must provide just and equitable socio-economic, political, and social order and satisfy the human rights of its citizens. Sustainable development must be practical, otherwise resource shortages and environmental pollution will challenge the very survival of the planet.

Threats are classified differently depending on whether their source is internal or external, intentional or unintentional, military or non-military, natural or manmade. But the most common threats to security are classified by their geographic nature. The classification is based on military and non-military aspects of security. Military threats are related to war, and nonmilitary threats are related to the economic well-being, healthy environment, human rights, communal harmony, and survival of civilization. Depending on the duration of the threat, these threats are judged as immediate, temporary, long-term, or permanent. Threat perception is vital to the formulation and effectiveness of a nation’s security policy. Threat perception is a "process of appraisal" that separates signal and reaction and incorporates the elements of perception and judgement ⁶. Threat perception is influenced by a number of variables; doctrine, structural, psychological, geo-strategic, historical, relative power capabilities, and domestic vulnerability ⁶. A particular party in power in a state either increases or decreases threat perceptions in other states. Different political ideologies of ruling parties are likely to generate a different perception of the same threat.

3. Emerging Concept of Security

A comprehensive and cooperative security paradigm has emerged as the latest approach to security. The idea of comprehensive security originated in Japan in the early seventies of the last century. Comprehensive security believes that the concept of security is comprehensive in character and not limited to the boundary of military issues. It is described as "a chain of tautly balanced national power, including various factors such as the economy, diplomacy, and politics." ⁷.

The concept of comprehensive security is based on eight general principles:

• Defense of multiple interests. These would include military security, territorial integrity, economic viability, and national political stability.

• Multiple Threats National security can be threatened from many directions, only a few of which are military in nature.

• Employment by multiple means. Varied means must be employed to counter threats coming from different directions.

• Comprehensive capabilities. A nation needs to develop comprehensive capabilities to deal with complex issues.

• Include both external and internal conditions.

• Defensive Defense. Non- military means should not be at the cost of legitimate national defense capabilities.

• Security should include both military and non-military elements. This would include both crisis prevention and crisis management measures.

"Security" is a comprehensive concept. As a comprehensive concept, it did not exclude adequate military capabilities. Yet the idea was successful in drawing attention to the many and varied elements that need to go into the formulation of a national security policy in the new era.

4. Co-operative Security

As a concept seeks to engage both friends and adversaries. It emphasises the need to include non-military elements as well as develop multilateral cooperation. In the words of Gereth Evans, “Cooperative security tends to emphasise consultation rather than confrontation, reassurance rather than deterrence, transparency rather than secrecy, prevention rather than correction, and interdependence rather than unilateralism" ⁸.

Co-operative security recognises the value of existing bilateral and balance of power arrangements. Moreover, it also accepts the presence of multiple actors and the complication of existing roles in geopolitics

5. Human Security

Scholars have pointed out that global issues are as important as domestic issues for the inclusive study of security politics. Though global and domestic issues are distinct entities, the inclusion of global issues within the scope of domestic affairs does not undermine or diminish a nation-state's sovereignty.

The concept of human security has gained prominence in recent years. In the age of globalization, when the security of a state is endangered, all nations are likely to get involved. The latest pandemic is an example that proves that pandemics, toxic waste, drug trafficking, global terrorism, ethnocentric conflict, and environmental degradation are no longer regional events that are confined within manmade borders.

Though national security is state-centric and human security is people-centric, conceptually, both are potentially covered in some instances. Human security is generally applied to meet urgent threats emanating from an external source. But at the same time, it also deals with the overcoming of vulnerabilities of individuals incurred at the domestic level.

The 9/11 incidents and the US hegemonic approach to global politics have already changed the state-centric concept of national security. In the US-dominated post-cold war unipolar world, military security is less important than nonmilitary security, and human security is established as an alternative to national security.

Emerging security issues are truly transnational in nature. Human security is the only way of identifying and resolving such security issues by making a valid paradigm. There will continue to be coverage limitations, however, on its conceptual and empirical utility. Interestingly, in such circumstances, policy communities do not often have the proper resources to deal with micro-level issues. An increasing demand for resources to meet multiple security crises leads to substantial challenges for policymakers. In such circumstances, successive application of human security helps us to solve core issues of prospective threat even before exaggeration.

Marshaling resources may be required to solve the capacity shortfall. This has taken place in various humanitarian intervention missions under the UN, like East Timor and Haiti.

Traditional security perspectives cannot fulfill the requirements of present global issues of security like environmental degradation, pandemics, and cross border terrorism, which are truly transnational and man-made. Human security remains the only alternative for the world community to deal with such diverse security issues. Security demands an internal behavioural change in every individual in the world, regardless of their nationality. Interestingly, the human security model offers us a proper model to meet such security issues without evaluating the basic conceptual framework of security.

Globalization has brought a drastic change with profound implications for human security. In the age of globalization, many security issues have emerged as important challenges in the present international strategic scenario. Due to its global nature, the issue of environmental degradation is the most prominent one.

6. Environmental Security

Recent years have witnessed an explosion of attention and concern about environmental problems. They have become much more salient in public discourse, more prominent in media coverage, more visible and important in political deliberations. Environmental issues have become a significant factor in Security politics. There is now widespread awareness of the Environmental degradation that can attend the human activity and the threats these can pose to human welfare.

The causes of Environmental degradation are basically, economic and demographic. The remedies often have to do with industrial adaption, internal regulation, or international cooperation touching on matters far removed from questions of force and conflict. Nevertheless, environmental problems can be the source of political conflict between states and can contribute to violence within and between states.

Environmental security has a concept encompassing nonmilitary aspects was officially mentioned for the first time in the International Conference on the Relationship between Disarmament and Development, convened by the United Nations General Assembly in New York from 24th August to 11th September 1987. The final document was adopted by consensus by the representatives from one hundred fifty member participating states in the conference. In the document, environmental degradation is mentioned as an important element of the non-military aspect of threat to sustainable development.

Going further than this, the report, by the World Commission on Environment and Development which is known as the Brundtland Report, entitled ‘Our Common future ‘stressed the influence of environmental degradation on the relationship between states. It attempted to establish the conflictual relationship between nation-states to asset to resist control over different resources. The report also mentioned that environmental confects are likely to increase due to scarcity of natural resources in coming years.

Beyond the realist framework, a clear-cut connection between the environment and security is established. Environmental security thus becomes an issue for national security. Two distinct features of environmental security are: first, the environmental causes of conflict, i.e., environmental factors behind potentially violent conflicts; and second, the impact of environmental degradation on the overall economy, health, and life of the people. If environmental degradation or deficiencies create the conditions that render conflict all the more likely or determine the sources of conflict, they act as multiples that aggravate the core causes of conflict. ⁹. If the traditional definition of national security includes environmental degradation as a security issue, environmental degradation in the form of greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide emissions, ozone layer thinning, land degradation, water scarcity, deforestation, desertification, and other natural and anthropogenic disasters such as food and cyclones, has posed a threat to people's well-being.

Ideas of environmental security have also been incorporated into the national security framework. The former Secretary of State of the UN, James Baker, has considered the current environmental problems as "threats to the security of our citizens" ¹⁰. The Clinton administration also stepped in by adopting the concept of environmental security explicitly in the National Security Document. Increased competition for dwindling renewable resources is already a very real threat to global regional stability ¹¹.

Transnational phenomena such as terrorism, narcotics trafficking, environmental degradation, rapid population growth, and refugee flows also have security implications for present and long-term American policy. In addition, an emerging class of transnational environmental issues is increasingly affecting international stability and, consequently, will present new challenges to U.S. strategy.

Environmental security issues can be addressed by the familiar distinction between geocentric and anthropocentric approaches. These approaches differ in their interpretation of the role of physical and social constraints on adaptation in human behavior ¹². The geocentric perspective asserts that natural disasters and other uncontrollable ecological threats lead to the recurrent loss of human life. Therefore, such threats should be regarded as major risks to human security, especially if they are interpreted in a comprehensive manner.

To be taken seriously, the threat needs to introduce two additional dimensions: intentionality and time perspective of threats. Social facts are generally the product of collective intentionality. Therefore, it refers to the important role and impact of human agents in changing the environment and producing, through it, political outcomes. Intentional environmental threats to security include ecological vandalism and the deliberate destruction of the environment for political and military purposes that lead to the weakening of the target society and the loss of human life there. Unintentional environmental threats refer to both large-scale ecological changes and byproducts of commercial activities, such as pollution and the depletion of resources, which have seldom been their primary objectives ¹³.

From the temporal perspective, environmental changes can have either immediate or long-term effects on national and human security. Immediate effects are produced, for example, by floods, earthquakes, and droughts, which affect the population of the target society without much delay. In that respect, they resemble traditional military threats to national security, especially surprise attacks, and nuclear strikes, which also have a short time perspective. Other environmental changes affect security only over the long term as the effects accumulate over decades or even centuries, and responsibility can seldom be attained by any single actor or generation. In this regard, environmental threats differ from military ones, which are almost always intended as instruments of politics.

The concert and nature of climate diplomacy and how countries practice climate diplomacy have changed over a period of time. So, if we look at the way countries behaved or their attitudes towards the climate change negotiations in the nineties, or even, for that matter, the early 2009s, it’s completely different from how it evolved, especially after the Copenhagen Summit in 2009. So, there has been a lot of movement in the direction of more integration and more cross-cutting kinds of policymaking, which is a very important success of climate diplomacy. It’s not just about state actors, but it’s also about other actors. Every section of our civil society, including children, is coming out on the streets to protect them against the way their national governments have failed them. And there's a mainstreaming of climate change happening across different fields. So it’s not just trade or economics, but it’s also about health, culture, and different kinds of exchanges that are happening at multiple levels. So one is the negotiations, which are primarily guided by the UNFCCC. But there were other kinds of exchanges, other kinds of engagements happening. And that’s the biggest success of climate diplomacy in trying to bring multiple people and multiple issues onto the table.

Small states usually don’t have the human and material resources, the military, or the economic capabilities to protect their security. Small states do not have the capability to mitigate new and ongoing threats. Small states are also not able to stand against problems and conflict with their own economic and military strength, which is the only way to avoid or mitigate the risk of security.

Climate change has emerged as a major problem that affects the development of all nations in the era of globalization. Yet, no other group of nations is more vulnerable to its devastating effects than the small island developing states (SIDS). With one-third of their population living on land that is less than five meters below sea level, the threat of sea-level rise, storm surges, and coastal destruction poses existential risks to SIRD. Due to their weak political influence, small island states have had difficulty drawing attention to their issues in the international community. A Message from the Secretary-General, the Rt. Hon Patricia Scotland QC, Secretary-General of the Commonwealth:

“The 24th Session of the Conference of Parties (COP 24) is taking place against the backdrop of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report on Global Warming, which concludes that a temperature rise of 1.0 °C has already occurred and that climate change impacts resulting from this warming are being felt in many parts of the world. An increase of at least 1.5°C is now a real and imminent danger for millions of people and requires comprehensive adaptation measures as well as financial and technological support for developing countries. Given that 31 of the world’s 39 small states are Commonwealth members and that they are on the frontline of this struggle, the Commonwealth is an active partner in contributing to the global debate on climate policy unfolding here during the COP. My earnest hope is that negotiations in Katowice are concluded in a manner that will allow us to regenerate and preserve our common earth by ‘Changing Together’—the theme of COP 24.” ¹⁴.

Traditionally, the limited capacity of small states, especially those that are remote from the centre of global politics, e.g., Geneva, Washington, and New York, has been seen as a major impediment to their participation in multilateral activities. But, at present, small states could potentially have a major role in important multilateral negotiations. There are many organisations of small states in global politics like CSCE, AOSIS, SVEs, etc. who are playing a vital role in the decision-making process on various climate and environmental related issues on multilateral platforms, including the General Assembly of the UN. Bhutan, Maldives, Malta, and Singapore are examples of small states that have successfully presented their climate diplomacy to the global community.

The Global Climate Change Alliance (GCCA) is an initiative of the European Union aimed at strengthening dialogue and cooperation on climate change with developing countries and small states most vulnerable to global climate change. The organisation works to develop and implement various adaptation and mitigation measures for those vulnerable, small states.

The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) is an organisation and negotiating body that represents the interests of the small island states in the United Nations. By providing a collective voice for its members and applying greater pressure to the international community, AOSIS plays an important role in mitigating its problems.

7. Environmental Security Issues of Bhutan

With a fragile eastern Himalayan ecosystem, Bhutan is one of the most vulnerable countries to the impact of climate change. Possible GLOFs, the quantity of firewood collected, debasement and erosion of land, and rapid urbanisation will have a huge impact on the terrain ecology of Bhutan in the coming days.

Bhutan's most serious environmental challenge is the possibility of GLOFs. The world has a total of 562 glacial lakes. According to highly sophisticated Hindu-Kush research study organizations, ICIMOD, and UNEP, twenty-five (including Thorthormi) glacial lakes in Bhutan are rated as potentially dangerous. Several supraglacial ponds on the Thorthormi glacier are growing quickly and also merging. These glacial lakes are posing a threat due to their proximity to other large glacial lakes in the basin; in a worst-case GOLF scenario, they could cascade onto these lakes with catastrophic consequences in the near future. The Geology and Mines Ministry of Bhutan revealed the worst-case scenario of the changes is a combined GOLF of these lakes with a resultant outflow of over 53 million cube meters of water (three times more than the incident in 1994). Since the last inventory of glaciers and glacial lakes in Bhutan by the ICIMOD in 2001, 106 new glacial lakes have already formed in the mountains. In the headquarters of the Phuchu basin alone, 16 more new glacial lakes have been formed in the last fifteen years.

Bhutan is a zero-carbon country. It has a strong conservation policy. Interestingly, it is also the world's highest per capita consumer of fuel wood. Rural Bhutanese make up nearly 69% of the population and are heavily dependent on natural resources for ecosystem service for their livelihoods. Economic growth and national revenue are strongly dependent on the hydropower system, a sector that is itself dependent on the changing pattern of climate change.

Indeed, for Bhutan, the consequence of inaction in conserving and not investing in nature is well understood and appreciated. NAPA is implemented from micro to macro-level. Every development that takes place in Bhutan is done by keeping GNH and environmental preservation in mind.

The people of Bhutan give more value to co-existence than development. That is why every forest in the country has been connected through biological corridors, so that wildlife can roam freely throughout the entire country. Unlike in other countries where electricity is generated through thermal power plants, which is a major source of air pollution, Bhutan’s major electricity generation happens through hydropower plants, which don’t generate pollution.

On the border of GDP and the environment, Bhutan keeps the environment before development. Bhutan simply refuses to be just part of the global economic market by making happiness the benchmark for its development. Gross National Happiness outweighs Gross National Product. The country teaches us the importance of preservation and coexistence by setting numerous examples of something that everyone appreciates, but sadly, very few follow. That’s the country of Bhutan, a country that truly takes a stand for Mother Nature.

The government of Bhutan is always proactive in creating policies that support environmental preservation. Bhutanese believe in living in harmony with Mother Nature by following a simple formula of the nature of coexistence. Bhutan is a clear case study and real prototype of development. The size of a country's economy is irrelevant in the face of a nation's good initiative and good intentions.

References