Intro into Regional Security Regional Security Complexes Věra Stojarová Concepts •Security complex •Region •Regionalism •Regionalisation •Globalism • Security complex •Group of states whose primary security concerns link together sufficiently closely that their national securities cannot realistically be considered apart from one another. •Cultural and racial characteristics may be contributing factor but are not principal in defining security complexes • Examples Region •Means that a distinct and significant subsystem of security relations exists among a set of states whose fate is that they have been locked into geographical proximity with each other •E.g. European regional subsystem Local balances of power •are important features of the security environment •However, can be easily distorted by great powers vis a vis globalisation and external influences Regionalism •‘a state-led or states-led project designed to recognise a particular regional space along defined economic and political lines’ •even though ‘the state is most often one of the regionalising actors, [nonetheless] equally important are NGOs, new social movements, media, companies as well as a range of actors based in the second economy of the informal sector Regionalism – two waves •old : the late 1940s and ended in late 1960s and early 1970s state-centric, internally focused and imposed from above • new: began in mid 1980s and in particular 1990s. In contrast to classical regionalism, the new regionalism involves non-state actors, and is more open, extrovert and more comprehensive. Regionalisation •growth of societal integration within a region and to the often undirected processes of social and economic interaction’ •Regionalisation is a process that can occur even without regionalism. • ‘the process of regionalisation can only be understood within the context of globalisation. Globalisation •stretching of social, political and economic activities across political frontiers, regions and continents •globalisation produces both negative and positive effects •some observers view regionalism as an integral part of globalisation others as concepts ‘bouncing’ against one another generally refers to the ‘stretching of social, political and economic activities across political frontiers, regions and continents’ and the ‘intensification, or the growing magnitude, of interconnectedness and flows of trade, investment, finance, migration, culture, regionalism in theories •For realists international organisations are nothing more than interstate institutions, therefore it is irrelevant whether such institutions are global or regional • neo-liberalists believe that regionalism is useful as long as it leads to free trade •neo-marxists mainly draw on the theory of imperialism (‘as a structural relationship between countries from the centre and periphery’.) Regional Trade Agreements • (a) USMCA (NAFTA) based on the USA, •(b) the EU, •(c) East Asia based on Japan. •Some research shows that most of the trade is within rather than between regions •D) AfCFTA •South America (CAN, MERCOSUR..) • In his first 100 days, Trump threatened to withdraw from NAFTA if Canada and Mexico refused to renegotiate. They are willing because the agreement is outdated. For example, it doesn't address internet commerce. It also needs to include environmental and labor protections that are in side agreements. To do this, the administration wants to eliminate unfair subsidies. It will ask for stronger protection for U.S. digital trade and intellectual properties. It also wants state-owned companies, such as Mexico's Pemex, to operate more like private corporations. In 2013, Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto allowed foreign direct investment in Pemex. But Pemex is a source of national pride, and it's unlikely to be privatized. Trump has asked Mexico to end the maquiladora program. This program allows U.S. companies to set up low-cost factories across the border in Mexico to assemble finished products. They then export the goods back to the United States. As a result, maquiladoras became responsible for 65 percent of Mexico's exports and employ 30 percent of the workforce. That undercut American workers and sent jobs to Mexico. NAFTA expanded the maquiladora program by ending tariffs. (Source: "Lessons of NAFTA," Worldpress.org, April 20, 2001. "The Benefits of Setting Up a Maquiladora in Mexico," The Offshore Group.) Regionalism - results • Regionalism: results • ‘goods and services flow as well as OC terrorism •Creates winners and loosers •Stronger states use (abuse), exploit the weaker ones. •New regionalism subjects hundreds of millions of people to permanent underclass This not only denies people their basic which could lead to future instability •Can consolidate state-building and democratisation •Can help to manage negative effects of globalisation The picture is worse in African regions, where diseases, famine and intra-state conflicts kill millions of people every year, while at the same time each European cow receives more than $ 2.2 per day in subsidies.65 With a political will, which in the developing world lacks so far, this bleak situation could improve. Lee argues that regionalism as practiced in Africa is part of a problem and not part of the solution In the ASEAN case, for instance it can be argued that regionalism gives weaker countries an opening, enabling them to avoid either domination by predominant powers or marginalisation by them Buzan and regional security •Amity among states – friendship, support •Enmity among states – fear, suspicion Give some examples of amity, enmity Enmity can be particularly durable when having historical character (greeks and turks, poles and russians etc.) Buzan and regional security •Lower level security complex – without great powers and not overreaching the region •Higher level security complex – with great powers whose power overreaches the regional complex Give some examples Bufffer zones and states „inbetween“ •States which occupy position between neighbouring security complexes Give some examples (Turkey between Europe and Middle East) Buzan and his comprehensive analytical famework for security analysis • Levels Analytical focus Issues Examples Domestic Weak/strong state -degree of socio-political cohesion Domestic political violence Strong states: Japan, Sweden Weak states: Sri Lanka, Lebanon Regional Local/regional security complexes -security interdependence -amity/enmity -polarity -civilizational area -subcomplexes -domestic spillover India/Pakistan Iran/IRaq Israel/Palestina Mono/bi/multi -South America Gulf, Balkan Kurds, Palestinization Inter-regional Boundaries of indifference Cross-boundary links -boundary change -Pakistan S. Arabia -Gulf/S.. Arabia Global Higher level, global security complex Great power polarity, rivalry Penetration: To domestic level To regional level Overlay Adjacency to local security complex Cold War US and Panama Superpowers and Middle East Colonial period Europe 1945-90 China/SE Asia China /S Asia Key questions: - what are the security dynamics at each level for any given case? -How do these dynamics interact with each other? -What is the relative weight of each level in determining the security situation as a whole? Securitisation on different levels of analysis • Dynamic/sectors military economical environmental societal political global ** **** **** ** *** Nonregional subsystemic ** ** ** ** * Regional **** *** *** **** **** Local *** **** ** *** ** **** dominant securitisation, ***subdominant securitisation, **small securitisation, * no securitisation Regional hegemony/rivalry •Haftel (2013) finds that regional hegemony (Buzan and Wæver 2003) increases security cooperation, while rivalry between major powers in the region (Colaresi et al. 2007) limits it. Security governance •‘an international system of rule, dependent on the acceptance of a majority of states that are affected, which through regulatory mechanism (both formal and informal), governs activities across a range of security and security-related issue areas’ (Webber 2002: 44). Security governance •SG functions: institution building and conflict resolution • SG employs two sets of instruments: • the persuasive (economic, political and diplomatic) •and the coercive (medium to high-intensity military interventions and internal policing. •four categories of security governance emerge: assurance, prevention, protection and compellence. Security governance Instruments • Persuasive Coercive • • •Institution building • • •Conflict resolution • • • • Prevention (e.i. Democratisation promotion, civil-military relations,mediation migration,aid, poverty,root causes of conflict) Protection (health security,terroris, OC, environment) Assurance (policing missions, border missions, economic reconstruction) Compellence (projection of force, military doctrine, ability to use force) Global security governance 5 conditions Jervis 2002 •national elites must: • eschew wars of conquest and war as an instrument of statecraft; •accept that the cost of waging such a war is perceived as outweighing any conceivable benefits; •embrace the principle of economic liberalism rather than conquest or empire; •establish domestic democratic governance; •and respect the territorial status quo. While these conditions are met in the Atlantic security community, they are lacking in the wider international context. Global security governance 3 barriers by Keohane 2002 •cultural, religious and civilizational heterogeneity on a global scale. •absence of a consensus on beliefs and norms at global level. •absence of an institutional fabric that is thick enough to meet the challenge of governance. New era of Globalisation •global financial crisis of 2008-09 •the spread of swine flu • the rise in the price of oil to $140 per barrel • the breakdown of transatlantic solidarity over Iraq •the effects of the Indian Ocean tsunami and Hurricane Katrina • the terrorist attacks of 9/11 •COVID-19 rendering obsolete the old dividing lines – East-West, North-South, developed-undeveloped, aligned-nonaligned – that had helped define the international order for half a century Main sources of threat •territorial conflicts •the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction • regional rivalries • terrorist activities, •the fall-out from ‘failed states’ •organised crime Main sources of threat •Asia •Latin America •Africa •Europe A case in point is Asia, with the occurrence of territorial conflicts, such as between India and Pakistan, nuclear proliferation, such as North Korea, and regional rivalries, such as between China and India. In contrast, pivotal states in Latin America suffer less from such a wide spread of threats, but face disproportionately greater problems with drug trafficking and organized crime. A major problem for pivotal states in Africa is territorial conflicts/disputes and the fall-out of ‘failed states’. Regional security providers? •USA •EU, NATO •BRICS •MINT • Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa (makes up 43% of the world’s population, accounts for 17% of global trade and spends $240 billion on defence; comparative defence budgets for the EU and the US are respectively $250 billion and $664 billion (Gross, 2013:2). Two of these countries are also permanent members of the United Nations Security council (UNSC). The other grouping is MINT- Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria and Turkey. With few exceptions the eleven pivotal states suffer from domestic instability, such as drug trafficking and organised crime (e.g., Mexico), or religious and ethnic tensions/disputes (China, Egypt. Nigeria, Russia, Turkey) or high levels of inequality (e.g., Brazil, India and South Africa). This is often linked with low levels of political (democratic) development. The MINTs have been grouped together because of their large populations, favorable demographics and emerging economies. The MINTs have smaller economies than the BRICs—Brazil, Russia, India and China, a group of emerging-market economies that enjoyed strong growth for a number of years—but as the BRICs’ growth slowed (with the exception of China), investors turned their attention to MINTs, which analysts expected to be the next big thing. BREAKING DOWN 'MINTs (Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria, Turkey)' Despite their prospects for becoming part of the top 10 global economies by 2050, MINTS are far from a surefire investment. These countries are still troubled by corruption and political instability, and may have experienced significant problems in the not-so-distant past. USA – approach to security • USA´s approach to security •Cold war, bipolarism, usa role •But yugoslavia •But 9/11 and war on terror •Obama – return to multilateralism •Clinton vs. Trump vs. Biden The old security paradigm, born of a bipolar military standoff between two superpowers, is no longer valid But the attacks of 9/11 had a profound psychological effect on a country that had not been attacked on its home territory since the war of 1812 In the first days of his administration, President Obama set a date for the withdrawal of US combat forces from Iraq, ordered the closure of the prison camp at Guantánamo Bay within a year, declared the end of the US’s use of torture, pledged US leadership in addressing climate change, and set as a goal a world without nuclear weapons. The ambition of the agenda was tempered by the reality of overstretched capacities, NATO – approach to security • NATO´s approach to security •Cold war •Art. 5 – common commitment •IFOR, SFOR, Kosovo war, KFOR, Macedonia, ISAF •Afghanistan,Libye • EU – approach to security • EU´s approach to security •New threats, non-conventional •terrorism, OC, migration,proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, regional conflicts, state failure •Post-conflict state and institution building •Ambition to become global player but •ESDP vs. NATO vs UN Brazil – approach to security • Brazil ´s approach to security •On the path to become great power •Little war experience (19th century) •Defence ministry under civilian control in 1999 •Region on the margin of the world significance •3 crucial areas for Brazil security:cybernetics, nuclear technology, space technology, also indigenous production of military hardware •Prioritize permanent membership in UNSC •Participation on UN peacekeeping missions (haiti) •Tries to act as mediator in regional disputes On the margin: Exception cuban missile crisis Precedent – brazil left in 1926 league of nations as it did not get the permanent membership in council Brazil ´s approach to security •UNASUR 2009 •South American Defence Council (CDS) 2012 •Strategic partnership with the EU 2007 •Successful story in attracting FDI –BRIC •Energy security: the cleanest energy mix in the world in 2008 48% of energy came from renewable resources •Environmental security: deforestation of amazon • • • Ministers of defence of all 12 unasur members met in santiago de chile Hydroenergy, biofuels (light vehicles use ethanol from sugar cane more than petrol, heavy vehicles use blending biodiesel from vegetable oil from farms to mineraldiesel Amazon- sovereignity, non-intervention Russia – approach to security • Russia´s approach to security •Recognition changing nature of security threats but hard security dominates the agenda •Rejects good governance, promotion of democracy and rule of law leads to destabilisation •Human security absent •State sovereignity and non-interference •system of global governance in the form of a concert of great powers based on national interests rather than on shared values. India – approach to security • India ´s approach to security •‘strategic partnerships’ with the US, Russia, China, Japan and the EU, •‘Look East’ policy •and engage with the world as ‘a responsible power’ •Modernisation of armament, poverty reduction •Security agenda:1.Pakistan,2.China,3.poor training and equipment India's Look East policy represents its efforts to cultivate extensive economic and strategic relations with the nations of Southeast Asia in order to bolster its standing as a regional power and a counterweight to the strategic influence of the People's Republic of China. Initiated in 1991 Kashmir and JAmma, nuclear tests, pakistan based terrorist attacks on india China – approach to security • China´s approach to security •Multilateralism and UNSC •regional security dialogue •Concern – nuclear programme in the regional countries, north korea •Cyber security In China’s view, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is the only body with the right to make decisions on the use of force and should be regarded as the core of a common security regime. South Africa – approach to security • South Africas ´s approach to security •Regional power, rule maker •Threats: poverty, unemployment, the HIV/Aids pandemic, poor education, the lack of housing, the absence of adequate social services, and the high level of crime and violence, • the ‘defence of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and the promotion of regional security in Southern Africa’ •external threats are largely non-conventional They are transnational in nature or the indirect result of political instability in the region. Seminar: Presentations •time for one presentation is 10 - 15 minutes •the content •presentation skills •sources and •ability to accelerate discussion are under assessment consideration. Seminar – sketch security analysis of selected region • •European Union •Visegrad countries •USA •Central Asia •Andean region •South-East Asia •Balkans •Caucasus •Middle East •Korean peninsula • • •Actors, motivations, capabilities, threats, issues Military/political/societal/economical/environmental dimensions •Higher level/lower level security complex •security interdependence •-amity/enmity •-polarity •-buffer zone •-subcomplexes •-domestic spillover •