Using Human Security to Harness Human Rights in the Post-COVID World

Facing Global Environmental Change

The article analyzes the problems of ensuring human security through the prism of international legal protection. Approaches to understanding the concept of «human security» in domestic research and in international law are revealed. Emphasis is placed on the special role of the UN in the field of ensuring and protecting human rights. It is noted that the ideas of human security began to develop thanks to the activities of the United Nations, a special group of researchers. In 1994, the report of the UN Development Program was devoted exclusively to human security. The report proposed to develop the idea of expanding the interpretation of the concept of personal security, distinguishing in it two interrelated factors: protection from unexpected and harmful disruptions of everyday life (known as «freedom from fear») and protection from constant threats of hunger, disease, crime and oppression (known as «freedom from want»). Seven separate components of personal security were further distinguished: economic, food, health security, environmental security, personal security (freedom from physical violence and threats), minority security, political security (protection of basic human rights and freedoms). In addition, the article raised the issue of ensuring human security in the conditions of armed conflicts, in particular, the war in Ukraine. Advantages and disadvantages of UN activities in this area are considered. Problems are singled out, without the solution of which it is impossible to fully ensure human rights, especially in the field of their unlawful restriction. Therefore, options for solving these problems are proposed. It was emphasized that in the current conditions, cooperation, support and mediation of international organizations in the settlement of the military conflict is important for Ukraine. The priority in the order of resolution of armed conflicts in Ukraine should belong to the United Nations - the main intergovernmental international organization that supports peace and security throughout the world. Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which took place on February 24, 2022, shook the security situation in Europe and around the world. This war has already been called the largest armed conflict in Europe since World War II.

In Kosovo, NATO prevailed over evil... The Alliance's intervention was an important step in the ascendance of human security as a norm for global action... However, Kosovo must not be held up as a precedent justifying intervention anywhere, any time or for any reason. It raises serious and legitimate questions. Lloyd Axworthy, 28 June 1999(1)THE WAR OVER KOSOVO IN 1999 continues to raise serious concerns. A tendency to portray the North Atlantic Treaty Organiation (NATO) as the victorious moral leader, with 'good' prevailing over 'evil,' does not help to clarify the situation. The conflict was much more complicated - Albanians and Serbs both incited violence and committed atrocities in varying degrees over many years. Moreover, the West has to take some responsibility for helping to create and to exacerbate what became a major crisis. Nor does the moral proclamation by Canada's then foreign minister, Lloyd Axworthy, address long-term conflict prevention or the contradictory dimensions of Canada's human security agenda. Instead, Kosovo helped 'rescue' Canada's beleaguered defence establishment, as some in the military see support for the human security idea as a new role for defence.(2) Officials in the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) have also reinforced the human security notion, built on 'success' in Kosovo, to justify possible 'humanitarian' military intervention elsewhere.(3) Something is askew here, given that the human security concept attained initial credibility in the development-oriented and largely non-military vision of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in its Human Development Report 1994. UNDP raised hopes for a post-cold war 'peace dividend' to be generated by new international aid for sustainable human development.(4)Before the war, some field observers with the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) mission in Kosovo believed a non-military solution to the emerging crisis was possible. The OSCE was authorized under United Nations Security Council resolution 1199 to monitor and verify ceasefire compliance, assist humanitarian agencies, and facilitate democratization for elections. Western governments and the media alleged Serb 'ethnic cleansing' or 'genocidal policies' against Kosovo Albanians. But some ground observers, such as Canadian Rollie Keith, disputed such claims. Keith suggested that the ceasefire deteriorated with increasing Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) attacks on Yugoslav security forces. Counter responses followed with human rights abuses (on both sides) in a spiralling vicious cycle. Keith, a former director of the OSCE's Kosovo Verification Mission, also stressed later that 'we require a better mechanism to counter national human rights violations than bombing... diplomacy has failed and the ongoing air bombardment exacerbated an internal humanitarian problem into a disaster.'(5) He believed war could have been avoided with enhanced OSCE or United Nations monitoring, an agreement with Yugoslavia to cancel economic sanctions, and support for restructuring to promote integration within Europe and to complement guarantees to address human rights concerns in Kosovo.Canada, with its reputation as a non-combatant mediator of disputes and innovator of United Nations peacekeeping, might have offered high-level leadership on conflict prevention, development support, and diplomatic alternatives to bombing campaigns to resolve disputed issues, not just in Kosovo but throughout the Balkans and at a much earlier stage. Canada's successful federal state - officially bilingual and multicultural - was attained through constitutional, legal, policy, and economic incentives. When the Soviet Union collapsed, and the future of Yugoslavia was unclear, Canada was uniquely positioned to offer leadership on self-determination, ethnic co-operation, and nation-building in Yugoslavia. Instead, a decade of disaster and lost opportunities followed as armed secession became the order of the day. …

Human security and human rights are universal phenomena, poor to rich and individual to all people in the universe. Human security and human rights are harmonious to inharmonious natures. Human security is state to people-centered notion, whereas human rights are human-centered more. Security and rights advocate individual freedom from fear, freedom from want, freedom to live in dignity, freedom to take action on one’s own behalf, freedom to inherit peace, and freedom to protect nature (environment). Human security is a derogation of certain human rights belonging to civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights. Human security underscores as inherent, inalienable, interdependent, multidimensional, and non-derogatory rights and freedoms whereas human rights are the core of them. Human security is exclusion of slavery, apartheid, injustice, inequality, indignity, insecurity, and inhibition similar to human rights. Human security puts security agenda at the top that strengthens humanitarian laws and their actions, respect human rights, disarm armed group, prevent or transform conflict, and defense citizen. Whereas human rights leave a significant impact for protection, promotion, and fulfillment of humanitarian action and such action realizes rights translating into practices, building up institutional capacity for its implementation. Human rights are guided by international treaties, legal instruments, and humanitarian laws whereas human security does not have any such definite parameters. Human security is a neologism, but integrated concept, however human rights have been a long history. Security protects human's basic needs and capabilities, whereas rights act to respect or preserve them. Security assists to reduce differences of rights implementation while State suppresses some rights in the name to maintain law and order. Human security tries to ensure safety to all including asylum seekers, whereas rights demand to implement international and national legal measures. There is a contesting (many cases) and reciprocate (some cases) relationship between human security and rights to advocate its spirit: survival, liberty, life, and dignity of person. Human security has three generations: Civil-Political Rights, Socio-Economic Rights, and Collective Rights similar to human rights. Human security follows four additional generations: Right to Peace, Right to Dignity, Right to Sovereignty, and Right to Shared Responsibility.Keywords: Human security, human rights, harmony, inharmony and generations.

Human security and universal health coverage: Japan's vision for the G7 Hiroshima Summit

This contribution analyses the interaction of human rights and human security. First, the author explains the emergence and conceptualisation of human security. By taking into account the actions on both research and policy levels and the human security initiatives by international organisations, such as UNESCO, by governments, NGOs and academia, the contribution sheds light on the potential of a multilayered and multi‐player approach to human security. In a second step the author identifies the interrelation and interdependence of human security and human rights. The results of this more theoretical part are then empirically tested in a case study on the interaction of human security and human rights, with a particular focus on the implementation of a human security approach to the right of education. Further, the contribution identifies human security‐related best practices. The conclusion argues that, in light of the interdependence of human rights and human security a more holistic and integrative approach is necessary. Their international dimension needs to be complemented by a local focus on human security and human rights. An important step towards this goal is the integration, by states, of human security in national human rights learning curricula.

Multilateral treaties on drug control predate the foundation of international human rights law by several decades. Over the last half-century, these two legal systems have exerted significant influence on state practice. Today, the impact of human rights norms can be seen in policy areas as disparate as warfare, terrorism, trade, intellectual property, the environment, and global health, while the three UN drug conventions influence domestic drug control policy and law in almost every country of the world. However, the two systems are in a position of tension. The human rights impacts of drug control are vast, spanning all regions of the world, engaging the full spectrum of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights, and affecting the health and welfare of people and communities, whether they have any involvement in the drug trade or not. International drug control law, meanwhile, has evolved largely absent any normative guidance that may be offered by human rights law. This commentary sets out a case for 'international guidelines on human rights and drug control', a project being spearheaded by the International Centre on Human Rights and Drug Policy and the UN Development Program in collaboration with the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network and other NGO partners.

ABSTRACTUnited Nations (UN) development agencies have been actively working to protect lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) rights in Nepal, despite having no official mandate to work on these rights. This presents an important example of how such agencies are able to act independently to set their own agenda and illustrates the “open system” approach to international bureaucracies. It also suggests that these agencies have the potential to be important instruments of LGBTI rights promotion outside the traditional human rights machinery such as the Human Rights Council and various committees. Based on extensive interview research as well as documentary evidence, this article traces the origins of the UN's engagement with LGBTI rights. It then discusses the work of UN agencies in South Asia, and Nepal in particular, focusing on the UN Development Programme, the UN Children's Fund, UNAIDS, and UN Women. Political changes in Nepal since 2006 have opened it up for change in its approach to these rights, and UN agencies have worked actively to change both legal norms and social attitudes. The conclusion considers whether these lessons are applicable to other states and whether the UN development machinery must be considered an important ally in pursuing LGBTI rights worldwide.

This book provides innovative thinking from a variety of perspectives on the important human rights, human security, and national security policy issues of today—and how these issues intersect. The issue of human security comes into play in nearly every important policy debate in global politics, and the protection of human rights is now recognized as one of the main functions of any legitimate modern state. How can the international community best ensure that human rights are protected while simultaneously protecting state security? Who should intervene in cases of mass, gross violations, and when are military actions justified? This book seeks to address and explore these difficult and pressing questions by presenting the differing views of commentators from various ends of the spectrum. Human Rights, Human Security, and State Security: The Intersectionconsists of three volumes, with each focusing primarily on one of the three broad areas while also drawing connections between them. A powerful resource for policy makers and practitioners in national governments, members of international organizations, and scholars, the innovative thinking presented will give readers a deepened understanding of the various international issues and help them to formulate effective policies in today's complex international landscape.

The factors that can make mankind successful and secure are human progress, human rights, and security. Human progress gives people the rights and skills they need to live happy, fulfilling lives. People are given support by human rights, which give them access to rights and skills. People have a right to the fundamental things in life, such as a sufficient level of living and entitlements for their existence. These rights, entitlements, and abilities may be fully fulfilled .if people are given the correct kind of authority, which will benefit everyone in society, but notably the poorest, exploited, and excluded. So, in order to develop policies and programmes for human improvement and security, it is vital to understand these ideas and how they interact. It is important to highlight the gap between "a right" and "a human right" here: A right is only one that society has the capacity to defend in order to enjoy it and to seek redress when it is abused. Being a human being must be a sufficient justification or reason for obtaining a right in order for it to be considered a human right, and only then. For instance, the "right to food" is a fundamental human right because everyone needs it to survive. The "Action Aid" brochure from 2004 provides the following succinct summary of human rights: “Regardless of their social, political, or legal standing, everyone has the right to live in dignity at all times”. Human rights are not a luxury, a gift, or a deed of kindness that may be granted on someone at their whim. All human rights are based on fairness and equality. It involves access to proper shelter, clean water, food, and health care, as well as freedom from slavery and reliable legal treatment. “The universal concepts of human rights are built on these fundamental human needs and ideals”. Keywords: Human progress, Evolution of Human right, Right to eat, Human security.

Upholding the highest standards of human rights enshrined and guaranteed in its Constitution, Japan has consolidated its democratic political system and has developed policies for the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms as universal values. Japan firmly believes that the promotion and protection of human rights is a legitimate interest of the international community . Therefore, grave violations of human rights need to be addressed in cooperation with the international community. Japan also affirms that the human rights of all people should be respected, regardless of their country’s culture, traditions, political and economic systems and level of socio-economic development, even if there are differences in their processes and speed of achievement with regard to human rights protection. Protecting human rights is the most fundamental responsibility of any nation. Based on its commitment to dialogue and cooperation, Japan will steer efforts to resolve human rights issues of concerns to the international community and to improve human rights situations through both multilateral fora, including the United Nations (UN), and bilateral dialogues. In addition, Japan is committed to extending necessary and feasible cooperation from the viewpoint of “human security”. Japan is also committed to contributing to realize world peace, stability and prosperity more actively than ever.

The ambiguity of the agreements made in situations of war between parties with differing interests, power bases and incentives to act is crucial political territory. Tracing the dynamics by which negotiations take place between aid providers and parties to the conflict and lead to particular outcomes is central to an improved understanding of the processes of aid. The articles presented in this Special Issue are brought together to examine and illuminate the ways in which the agendas and agreements promoted in countries in which there is violent conflict are pursued with various degrees of success or are subject to contestation, renegotiation, reneging and radical reinterpretation.

Human insecurity dominates today's headlines: ongoing conflicts in Palestine and Cote d'Ivoire; international terrorism and criminal networks; HIV/AIDS pandemic; growing economic inequalities; and apparent diminishing relevance of multilateralism. Perhaps starkest example of tension between rhetorical commitment to human security and imperatives of state security is military action in Iraq. Is it possible during this time of escalating tensions and international animosities to wholeheartedly embrace a fundamental reorientation in our thinking about security? Over last decade, debate about broadening conceptualization of security has been ongoing at United Nations (1) and among many governments, prominent individuals, international commissions, (2) scholars, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). (3) In 2000, some 180 states endorsed Millennium Declaration's goal of attaining freedom from fear and freedom from want for all people, capturing normative shift in security discourse. How can this commitment and these ideals be brought to bear on severe and multiple crises affecting people in twenty-first century? One answer comes from Commission on Human Security in its publication of Human Security Now in May 2003. (4) Work has focused on six broad interrelated areas of conflict and poverty: protection of people in violent conflict, on move, and in postconflict situations; and measures to overcome economic insecurity, improve health and health services, and impart knowledge and skills. To facilitate its work, commission organized regional consultations and hearings to solicit views of concerned individuals and grassroot organizations. (5) The commission's treatment of human security is suggestive rather than comprehensive; it serves as a catalyst for further thinking and practical applications. It is now incumbent upon governments, international organizations, scholars, and practitioners to move beyond commission's conceptual steps and recommendations. A Conceptual Shift The new security discourse has enveloped idea that security of people needs to be placed ahead of other security concerns. (6) The Commission on Human Security embraced this movement beyond traditional state-centric view of security. It defines human security as vital core of all human lives in ways that enhance human and human fulfillment. This means protecting vital freedoms--fundamental to human existence and development. Human security means protecting people from severe and pervasive threats, both natural and societal, and empowering individuals and communities to develop capabilities for making informed choices and acting on their own behalf. Vital freedoms refer to inalienable fundamental rights and that are laid down in Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other human rights instruments. They also encompass their practical realization. Efforts have been made to identify and categorize threats confronting people under varying conditions in different parts of world. Skeptics view such typologies as unhelpful and have raised questions about value of human security. (7) The commission argues that emphasis of these lists should not be on threats and defensive measures deemed necessary to guard against such threats, but rather on creative and integrative effort to prevent these threats from emerging, or to decrease their negative impact when they do by fulfilling all aspects of people's vital freedoms. Strategies, Protection, and Empowerment Human security expands and reinforces, in Amartya Sen's words, the real that people enjoy. (8) People protected can exercise choices, and people empowered help prevent and mitigate impact of insecurities and devise improvements in protection infrastructure. …

Problem setting. The problem of human rights in the context of globalization is complex and requires concerted and effective actions, which should be applied not only at the level of nation states, but also at the global level. Globalization has opened new challenges, related to the implementation, development and transformation of human rights, accelerated their universalization, and set new challenges for the world community. The purpose of the article is to analyze the essence of globalization and the impact of globalization processes in the world on the definition of the essence and approaches to human and civil rights and freedoms, analysis of the legal basis for their consolidation and guarantee. Analysis of resent researches and publications. Today, the interest of scientists to globalization in general and legal globalization has increased significantly. The problem of human rights has a worldwide character, it has been studied by such leading foreign specialists as Z. Baumman, in. Beck, K. Omaye, S. Strahej, E. Toffler, M. Foucault, Y. Habermas, J. Rola, F. Fukuyama, etc. Certain aspects of legal globalization were studied by domestic scientists – O. Petrishin, P. Rabinovich, O. Dashkovskaya, L. Wasechko, I. Zharovskaya, N. Onishchenko, O.Uvarova and others. However, consideration of the problem of human rights transformation requires a solidise analysis and a comprehensive approach. Articles main body. The issues of interaction between globalization and law at the present stage of society development are considered. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of the factors of interaction between globalization changes and human rights in modern society. The following signs of transformation of the institution of rights and freedoms are singled out: change of the content of human rights under the pressure of global problems of the present; emergence and legal development of new human rights and freedoms; universalization and regionalization of human rights; complicating the system of international legal regulation of human rights. It is determined that in the context of globalization processes human rights standards in the sphere of digital technologies and further development of human rights to prohibit discrimination in all spheres of relations, in particular on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity, also deserve special attention. Conclusions. Analyzing the different approaches to the legal opportunities of people in the era of globalization, it can be stated that given the diversity of relations of which everyone in the world is a member, international organizations and each country should not dwell on developing and improving the legal framework to guarantee and protect human interests and rights. . But they are obliged to continue the legal policy on the recognition and consolidation of human rights and freedoms that appear in the changing conditions of today in the modern world under the further influence of scientific and technological progress, as well as geopolitical challenges.

Women are half of the worlds total population. Their condition around the globe is drastic. Womens empowerment is much underscore issue of the 21st century. The West, which got phenomenal prosperity, is a direct result of empowering their women. It is a proven fact that without empowering the half of the population, a country cannot achieve prosperity in any field. Several governmental and non-governmental organizations are working intensively on womens empowerment issue, but the United Nations (UN) contributions are above all, as its charter ensures the basic rights of women. During the last two decades, the UN has held many conferences, seminars and workshops on women rights to launch a global strive. A number of the UN agencies are working on this issue, but most effective work on womens empowerment has been carried out by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP). It works throughout the world by advocacy, partnerships, and provides technical support and financial aid to government and non-governmental organizations. In Pakistan, women are 51.73 percent of the total population. The condition of female population specifically in rural areas is adverse. Women are deprived of their basic human rights, and the literacy ratio among women is also alarmingly low. Being a developing state, Pakistan depends upon financial aid and technical support from international agencies. After the 18th amendment to the Constitution, provinces receive all sorts of aid directly from the donor agencies. The UNDP operates throughout the country known as the UNDP Pakistan. Because of dire situation in rural areas, the UNDP is working for rural uplift. This study has highlighted the socio-economic impacts of UNDP initial program on women in detail.