Introduction: Evolving Security Discourse and Crises in Africa: Conceptual, Policy, and Practical Relevance

  • Jack Mangala


Since the end of the Cold War, there has been a broadening of the security concept and framework in two fundamental directions. In the first direction, the range of threats traditionally considered relevant to national security has been expanded to include issues such as forced migration of populations, terrorism, diseases, food insecurity, and the impacts of climate change. This reconceptualization effort is aimed at making nonmilitary threats an integral part of a national security discourse and policy that takes into account the evolving nature of potential threats that nation-states face in today’s world. In reaction to the traditional state-centric approach to security, a second direction emphasizes the needs and well-being of humans as primary referents of security. This has been the central focus and contribution of the concept of human security.


Food Insecurity National Security Security Council United Nations Development Program African State 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Barbara von Tigerstrom, Human Security and International Law (Portland: Hart Publishing, 2007), 8.Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    Barry Buzan, People, States and Fear: An Agenda for International Security Studies in the Post-Cold War Era (New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1991), 112.Google Scholar
  3. 5.
    Michael Sheehan, International Security: An Analytical Survey (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 2005), 11.Google Scholar
  4. 6.
    Astri Suhrke, “Human Security and the Protection of Refugees,” in Edward Newman and Joanne van Selm, eds., Refugees and Forced Displacement: International System, Human Vulnerability, and the State (New York: United Nations Press, 2003), 95.Google Scholar
  5. 9.
    See, inter alia, Ole Waever et al., Identity, Migration and the new Security Agenda in Europe (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1993).Google Scholar
  6. 13.
    United States of America, A National Security Strategy for A New Century, May 1997. In regard to Africa, the document stated that “serious transnational security threats emanate from Africa, including: state-sponsored terrorism, narcotics trafficking, international crime, environmental damage and disease. These threats can only be addressed through effective, sustained engagement in Africa.”Google Scholar
  7. 14.
    Canada, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAIT), Freedom from Fear: Canada’s Foreign Policy for Human Security (Ottawa: DFAIT, 2000), 1.Google Scholar
  8. 15.
    Kofi Annan, “The Quiet Revolution,” Global Governance 4, No. 127 (1998): 136–137.Google Scholar
  9. 16.
    United Nations Development Program (UNDP), Human Development Report 1994 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), 22.Google Scholar
  10. 18.
    Canada, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAIT), Human Security: Safety for People in a Changing World (Ottawa: DFAIT, 1999), 3.Google Scholar
  11. 19.
    Japan, Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA), Diplomatic Bluebook 2002 (Tokyo: MOFA, 2002), 88.Google Scholar
  12. 20.
    Commission on Human Security, Human Security Now: Protecting and Empowering People (New York: Commission on Human Security, 2003), 4.Google Scholar
  13. 21.
    Barry Buzan, “A Reductionist, Idealistic Notion That Adds Little Analytical Value,” Security Dialogue 35, No. 3 (2004): 370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 22.
    See, inter alia, Roland Paris, “Human Security: Paradigm Shift or Hot Air?” International Security 87, No. 26 (2001), 87–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. William Tow and Russell Trood, “Linkages between Traditional Security and Human Security,” in William Tow and Ramesh Thakur, eds., Asia’s Emerging Regional Order: Reconciling Traditional and Human Security (Tokyo: United Nations University Press, 2000), 14.Google Scholar
  16. 23.
    Keith Krause, “The Key to a Powerful Agenda, if Properly Delimited,” Security Dialogue 367, No. 35 (2004), 368.Google Scholar
  17. 24.
    Heidi Hudson, “‘Doing’ Security as Though Humans Matter: A Critical Perspective on Gender and the Politics of Human Security,” Security Dialogue 155, No. 36–2 (2005): 170.Google Scholar
  18. 25.
    Ibid., 157. The Commission on Human Security seems to have responded to this concern by stressing both protection and empowerment. See Commission on Human Security, Human Security Now: Protecting and Empowering People (New York: Commission on Human Security, 2003), 10–12.Google Scholar
  19. 28.
    Rob McRae, “Human Security in a Globalized World,” in Rob McRae and Don Hubert, eds., Human Security and the New Diplomacy: Protecting People, Promoting Peace (Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2001), 15.Google Scholar
  20. 29.
    International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, Responsibility to Protect: Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (Ottawa: International Development Research Centre, 2001).Google Scholar
  21. 33.
    See Timothy Murithi, The African Union: Pan-Aficanis, Peacebuilding and Development (Adershot: Ashgate, 2005).Google Scholar
  22. 34.
    Tanzania’s deputy home affairs minister E. Mwambulukutu spelled out the new security approach toward refugees in a 1996 speech: “Hosting refugees has become a heavier and more painful burden than ever before to countries of asylum like Tanzania. Protecting and assisting refugees has brought new risks to national security, exacerbated tensions between states and caused extensive damage to the environment.” Quoted in Augistine Mahiga, “A Change of Direction for Tanzania,” Refugees, No. 110 (1997): 15.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Jack Mangala 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jack Mangala

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations