2006Cooperation and ConflictRequires access

Paradigms in Conflict

Mohammed Nuruzzaman

Open publisher page 31 citations

Abstract

Proponents of human security paradigm, in emphasizing the individual as the fundamental referent of security and in highlighting the non- military sources of threats to security, strongly claim a paradigm shift from the state-centric realist paradigm of security. The article disputes this, arguing that the claim for a paradigm shift from the traditional realist security paradigm is by no means new in security studies or International Relations. The basic issues that the human security paradigm brings into focus have already been well elaborated by critical theorists and feminist scholars in International Relations emphasize human emancipation through transformation of the existing rich-dominated unequal global and national power structures. Moreover, the human security paradigm shares some of the basic assumptions of the realist paradigm of security that undercut its claim of newness in contemporary security studies and International Relations.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Proponents of human security paradigm, in emphasizing the individual as the fundamental referent of security and in highlighting the non- military sources of threats to security, strongly claim a paradigm shift from the state-centric realist paradigm of security. The article disputes this, arguing that the claim for a paradigm shift from the traditional realist security paradigm is by no means new in security studies or International Relations. The basic issues that the human security paradigm brings into focus have already been well elaborated by critical theorists and feminist scholars in International Relations emphasize human emancipation through transformation of the existing rich-dominated unequal global and national power structures. Moreover, the human security paradigm shares some of the basic assumptions of the realist paradigm of security that undercut its claim of newness in contemporary security studies and International Relations.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 31 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Proponents of human security paradigm, in emphasizing the individual as the fundamental referent of security and in highlighting the non- military sources of threats to security, strongly claim a paradigm shift from the state-centric realist paradigm of security. The article disputes this, arguing that the claim for a paradigm shift from the traditional realist security paradigm is by no means new in security studies or International Relations. The basic issues that the human security paradigm brings into focus have already been well elaborated by critical theorists and feminist scholars in International Relations emphasize human emancipation through transformation of the existing rich-dominated unequal global and national power structures. Moreover, the human security paradigm shares some of the basic assumptions of the realist paradigm of security that undercut its claim of newness in contemporary security studies and International Relations.

Key concepts: Human security, Security studies, International security, Critical security studies, Paradigm shift, International relations, Political science, Referent

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Paradigms in Conflict — Research Paper | ScholarLens