2006Asian Journal of Comparative LawRequires access

The Dangers of the United Nations' “New Security Agenda”: “Human Security” in the Asia-Pacific Region

Ben Saul

Open publisher page 6 citations

Abstract

Abstract Amidst the understandable enthusiasm for enlarging the traditional state-centred view of security and embracing a “human security” agenda, little scholarly attention has been paid to the implications of this shift for international law. This article first charts the scope and genesis of “human security,” including within the United Nations and in the Asia-Pacific region, and traces the views of key Asian governments on the concept. It then analyses the relationship between human security and human rights and highlights the likely adverse impacts on human rights law. The remainder of the article considers how the human security agenda may destabilize the constitutional distribution of powers among UN organs under the UN Charter, especially by transferring power away from the more participatory General Assembly and towards the less representative and less accountable Security Council. In line with the position of some Asian States, this article reasserts that UN organs other than the Security Council, along with other major international institutions, are the appropriate bodies within which to pursue and address human security issues. In particular, the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council require revitalization to avoid the trap of securitizing issues that are better framed as developmental and social concerns.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract Amidst the understandable enthusiasm for enlarging the traditional state-centred view of security and embracing a “human security” agenda, little scholarly attention has been paid to the implications of this shift for international law. This article first charts the scope and genesis of “human security,” including within the United Nations and in the Asia-Pacific region, and traces the views of key Asian governments on the concept. It then analyses the relationship between human security and human rights and highlights the likely adverse impacts on human rights law. The remainder of the article considers how the human security agenda may destabilize the constitutional distribution of powers among UN organs under the UN Charter, especially by transferring power away from the more participatory General Assembly and towards the less representative and less accountable Security Council. In line with the position of some Asian States, this article reasserts that UN organs other than the Security Council, along with other major international institutions, are the appropriate bodies within which to pursue and address human security issues. In particular, the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council require revitalization to avoid the trap of securitizing issues that are better framed as developmental and social concerns.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 6 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

Abstract Amidst the understandable enthusiasm for enlarging the traditional state-centred view of security and embracing a “human security” agenda, little scholarly attention has been paid to the implications of this shift for international law. This article first charts the scope and genesis of “human security,” including within the United Nations and in the Asia-Pacific region, and traces the views of key Asian governments on the concept. It then analyses the relationship between human security and human rights and highlights the likely adverse impacts on human rights law. The remainder of the article considers how the human security agenda may destabilize the constitutional distribution of powers among UN organs under the UN Charter, especially by transferring power away from the more participatory General Assembly and towards the less representative and less accountable Security Council. In line with the position of some Asian States, this article reasserts that UN organs other than the Security Council, along with other major international institutions, are the appropriate bodies within which to pursue and address human security issues. In particular, the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council require revitalization to avoid the trap of securitizing issues that are better framed as developmental and social concerns.

Key concepts: Human security, Political science, Charter, Human rights, International security, Security studies, Public administration, Enthusiasm

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Dangers of the United Nations' “New Security Agenda”: “Human Security” in the Asia-Pacific Region — Research Paper | ScholarLens