Global Security: A Vision for the Future - Addressing the Challenges and Opportunities for Research in the Information Age

198 Pages·2011·2.19 MB·English

by  F. Gere

GLOBAL SECURITY: A VISION FOR THE FUTURE
NATO Science for Peace and Security Series

This Series presents the results of scientific meetings supported under the NATO Programme:
Science for Peace and Security (SPS).

The NATO SPS Programme supports meetings in the following Key Priority areas: (1) Defence
Against Terrorism; (2) Countering other Threats to Security and (3) NATO, Partner and
Mediterranean Dialogue Country Priorities. The types of meeting supported are generally
“Advanced Study Institutes” and “Advanced Research Workshops”. The NATO SPS Series
collects together the results of these meetings. The meetings are co-organized by scientists from
NATO countries and scientists from NATO’s “Partner” or “Mediterranean Dialogue” countries.
The observations and recommendations made at the meetings, as well as the contents of the
volumes in the Series, reflect those of participants and contributors only; they should not
necessarily be regarded as reflecting NATO views or policy.

Advanced Study Institutes (ASI) are high-level tutorial courses to convey the latest
developments in a subject to an advanced-level audience.

Advanced Research Workshops (ARW) are expert meetings where an intense but informal
exchange of views at the frontiers of a subject aims at identifying directions for future action.

Following a transformation of the programme in 2006 the Series has been re-named and re-
organised. Recent volumes on topics not related to security, which result from meetings
supported under the programme earlier, may be found in the NATO Science Series.

The Series is published by IOS Press, Amsterdam, and Springer Science and Business Media,
Dordrecht, in conjunction with the NATO Emerging Security Challenges Division.

Sub-Series

A. Chemistry and Biology Springer Science and Business Media
B. Physics and Biophysics Springer Science and Business Media
C. Environmental Security Springer Science and Business Media
D. Information and Communication Security IOS Press
E. Human and Societal Dynamics IOS Press

http://www.nato.int/science
http://www.springer.com
http://www.iospress.nl

Sub-Series E: Human and Societal Dynamics – Vol. 81
ISSN 1874-6276 (print)
ISSN 1879-8268 (online)
Global Security: A Vision
for the Future
Addressing the Challenges and Opportunities for Research
in the Information Age

Edited by

François Géré
Founder and Executive Director of the French Institute for
Strategic Analysis, Director of Research at Paris -3 Sorbonne Nouvelle,
Paris, France

and

Mary Sharpe
Consultant to the Psychology and Religion Research Group,
Faculty of Divinity and Tutor in Transferable Skills to Graduate Students,
University of C ambridge, UK

Published in cooperation with NATO Emerging Security Challenges Division
Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Research Workshop on The Intangibles of Security
Brussels, Belgium
21-23 April 2009

© 2011 The authors and IOS Press.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, without prior written permission from the publisher.

ISBN 978-1-60750-759-8 (print)
ISBN 978-1-60750-760-4 (online)
Library of Congress Control Number: (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:6)(cid:2)(cid:7)(cid:6)

Publisher
IOS Press BV
Nieuwe Hemweg 6B
1013 BG Amsterdam
Netherlands
fax: [phone]
e-mail: [email protected]

Distributor in the USA and Canada
IOS Press, Inc.
4502 Rachael Manor Drive
Fairfax, VA 22032
USA
fax: [phone]
e-mail: [email protected]

LEGAL NOTICE
The publisher is not responsible for the use which might be made of the following information.

PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS
v
Global Security: A Vision for the Future
F. Géré and M. Sharpe (Eds.)
IOS Press, 2011
© 2011 The authors and IOS Press. All rights reserved.
Foreword
From Tradition to Innovation: Considering
New Perspectives for Security Research
François GERE1
Director, l’Institut Français d’Analyse Stratégique (IFAS)

Identifying new paths and new approaches to researching global security through the
life sciences in the years to come is indeed a daunting challenge, for two major reasons.
The first is a shift in the perception of security. The second is related to the recent
involvement of new disciplines in this field, while, at the same time, it has also been
necessary to adapt traditional security research to the new perception.
Aware of the importance of that endeavor, NATO and ESF (European Science
Foundation) have created a joint program aimed at identifying the various areas for
research. L’Institut Français d’Analyse Stratégique (IFAS) has been commissioned to
organize a number of activities for that purpose, the findings of which result in the
present report.
Our task is - and will continue to be - to identify all the paths for security research
for the next generation. Of course, the life sciences will continue with their ordinary
activities and research according to their own nature and goals, but it is the intention to
create an additional security-oriented sector. Creating such a sector suggests that each
discipline will contribute its own knowledge and specific methodologies, bearing in
mind that a security orientation will help to create an innovative, cross-disciplinary
approach. History should collaborate with geography, ethnology needs psychology, and
vice-versa. Together they will interact with sociology, anthropology, philosophy and
many other disciplines under the umbrella of security.
Having recognized that general proposition as the fundamental principle of our
activity, we need to consider several adjustment variables related to the general
transformation of a post Cold War world.
The Cold War was characterized by an ambiguity in the field of security and
defense studies. Military studies were clearly limited to large-scale operations and
tactics, sometimes they could reach strategic level, but they were all about war:
conduct, preparation, planning. The nuclear dimension was a major area of study, and
technology was seen as a crucial factor for more efficient, more lethal, weapons
systems.
In parallel, some countries, particularly in the northern part of Europe, developed
specific security studies for arms control and peacekeeping operations, according to
their culture and national interests. Those nations were more inclined to consider a
broader if not softer concept of security, military concerns being only part of it. For
example, in the former Federal Republic of Germany, the notion of Sicherheit

1 E-mail: [email protected]
vi
competed with defense studies in the context of the Ostpolitk initiated by Chancellor
Helmut Schmidt. Several institutes emerged with the sole purpose of establishing
knowledge, data and analysis which differed from the bipolar sources of information.
Therefore, security studies developed in the civilian academic world, but they hardly
acquired full recognition as an autonomous discipline. One of the main reasons for this
was the traditional existence of specific military training dedicated to the development
of high-ranking officers and including training specific to their role. A second major
reason is related to the desire of existing disciplines to maintain a security component:
law, history, sociology, psychology and others traditionally dealt with war, peace and
security and were very reluctant to allow security studies to attain full autonomy. That
situation still prevails to some extent. However, there are strong incentives for
structural reform.
Such trends have been paralleled by the evolution of NATO as a military
organization. WMD, energy security and communications security have evolved a
higher profile far beyond the traditional concern about logistics and supply for military
operations.
Non-conventional security issues, including human security, have expanded the
notion of security, creating an interaction between individual and global spheres. Many
companies which traditionally were purely oriented towards military business have
reoriented their activities towards security, or created new units aimed at satisfying the
new security needs of counter terrorism. Many of those approaches were, locally, based
upon technology as the main, if not the only, response to security concerns.
A major shift in the relationship between security and defense includes two key
factors: first, the individual dimension (human security), second the ‘planet dimension’
of the ‘global village’ or ‘Earth Security’, and the related perception of connections
between mankind and a fragile environment.
Those two topics are becoming more and more interdependent and interactive. As
a result, non-traditional security studies are on the increase all over the world. These
mutations, which are a combination of long-term and short-term concerns history,
geopolitics, ideologies and the related mutations in the balance of power, need to be
addressed through a variety of structures.
Events
Since the end of the Cold War, the concept of security has made a great leap forward
which can be divided into two periods.
First, the impact of the Balkan wars (1991-1999). New responsibilities arose for
the EU as it addressed a new kind of security matter: peace building through
civilian/military cooperation, and the step by step introduction of the Common Foreign
and Security Policy (CFSP) and the Common Security and Defense Policy (ESDP).
Second, 9/11/2001 and the subsequent terrorist atrocities in London (2003) and
Madrid (2004), generated a major and irreversible shift. The strategic concept of the
EU put forward by Mr. Solana, former Secretary General of NATO and elaborated by a
team chaired by General Naumann, former Chief of Staff and head of the NATO
Military Committee, addressed the new challenges, bringing together security and
defense. In countries like France, new white papers addressed defense and security as
deeply interwoven topics in order to create a continuum which can meet the challenges
of another continuum: risk, threat and danger.
vii
Organizations
EU, NATO, ASEAN (Association of South East Asian Nations), SCO (Shanghai
Cooperation Organization), etc. have modified, or are in the process of modifying, their
missions according to new questions and concerns of various natures, with
international terrorism, pandemics and natural disasters being on the list.
Some organizations approach security from a different perspective. The
background of NATO is military defense, and it is considering security in a new way,
giving priority to ‘hard security’, i.e. WMD and terrorism. Other organizations, like the
EU, have gradually integrated security as a new dimension to their activities because of
terrorism and the need to address all forms of disaster. As a new regional body, the
SCO has its own agenda, subject to many adjustments.
In addition, we must take into account the significant gap between those who
belong to the ‘defense and security’ community because they have made their entire
career in that field, and those coming from the outside, who have a new interest in this
field. They discover that things have been in motion for sometime.
Generations
Most, if not all, of the members of our committee must recognize that they belong to
the Cold War or immediate post Cold War generation.
The new generation (45 years old and younger) have a different perception, but are
ignorant of some fundamentals of security and need to be educated – at the same time
we must also learn from them.
Countries
Most of the nations belonging to NATO and the EU share the same history. Although
Western Europe and Eastern Europe see their security interests differently, they share a
common and sometimes painful legacy.
But cultural perceptions remain strikingly different, if not divergent, when it comes
to the different domains of security. Those variables have shaped our approach in terms
of security research.
We must take into account what has been achieved - what has become or is the
state of the art - but at the same time we are obliged to consider all the variables and
address them as properly as we can.
Taking into account the basic principle and the variables, we should work together
in order to define bold new paths and areas for research for all the institutes, think-
tanks and individuals who are willing to join us and to integrate the research network
we have already begun to build.
Such a network should not be restricted to EU and NATO members. It should
encompass other areas in the world - notably the emerging countries - and/or connect
with existing networks already operating in different parts of the world, for example in
South East Asia (through ASEAN).
viii
Acknowledgements
Apart from over one hundred contributors to the workshops and conference, and the
authors who submitted papers for this volume, several other people have been involved
in the whole process. We would like to acknowledge and thank in particular Dr
Rüdiger Klein from ESF for his cooperation, contribution and vigilance during the
workshops; Elizabeth Cowan for her administrative activities at NATO and also for her
help with translation even after retirement; Denis Collins for his patience and
assistance in formatting the book, and Romain Foliard and Vincent Bistoquet from
IFAS for their useful contributions too.

Fathali Moghaddam’s chapter was reprinted with the permission of the American
Psychological Association.

The spellings in the various chapters of the book reflect both American and British
styles according to the preference of the authors.

François Géré, Paris, 2011
Mary Sharpe, Cambridge, 2011
ix
Contents
Foreword – From Tradition to Innovation: Considering New Perspectives
for Security Research v
François Géré

Acknowledgements viii

Part One: Security in a Changing World: Variables Versus Intangibles

Sustainable Global Security 3
Nayef Al-Rodhan

Security Expectations Today and Tomorrow: A Tangible List of Intangibles
for a Safer World 8
Anne Bader

A Prognosis for Security in East Asia 12
Joseph Chinyong Liow

Global Trends in Organized Violence and Coups d’État 16
Andrew Mack, Zoe Nielsen, Tara Cooper and Mila Shah

Part Two: Modeling Security

Modeling Security: 18-20 June 2007, Sarajevo 35
François Géré, Denis Hadjovic, David Rodin and J.L. Samaan

Imperial Security, National Security and Global Security: The Chinese Point
of View and Proof of the Construction of Modernisation 45
Zhang Lun

Sex, Drugs and Education: A Model of Education for Security in a Changed
Environment 52
Mary Sharpe

What Does Security Mean for the Balkans? 67
Bisera Turkovic

Part Three: Identity, Loyalty and Security

Identity, Loyalty and Security: 19-21 October 2007, Casablanca 73
Mary Sharpe and Mokhtar Benabdallaoui