Security Essay Revision

In my security essay I argued that national security should remain the definition of security and not be modified to include human rights and environmental issues. Instead of expanding the definition of security to contain these issues, I argued that those issues should be simply elevated in standing and viewed as just as or more important than national security by governments and citizens alike. After taking this class, I am now arguing that security should move away from national security to focus more on global security, and that human rights should be included in the definition of global security. However, the global community should never completely override the sovereignty of the state in which it is working, but should include that state in all decisions. I am changing my argument after learning about the Sierra Leone blood diamond conflict and the after effects of the earthquake that destroyed Haiti in 2010. Both countries were unable, by themselves, to effectively deal with the ongoing devastation occuring in their country, and needed the help of the international community. However, in the case of Haiti, the global community did not include Haiti in the efforts to restore the country, and ending up doing more harm than good. For my revision, I am using “Blood Diamonds” by Pervenia P. Brown published in Worldpress.org and The Big Truck That Went By: How the World Came to Save Haiti and Left Behind a Disaster by Jonathan M. Katz.

            Every human has rights that should be upheld and maintained by their government. However, not all governments are able to properly ensure these rights. Therefore global security should be maintained over national security so that countries with power, money, and resources can help those countries where humans are suffering and the country in which they live cannot properly deal with the humanitarian crises. Human rights should be deemed as a security issue because every person should be given the opportunity to flourish, and without this opportunity society will stagnate. However, the global community cannot support a failing country indefinitely and should work with that country to create a stable lasting government that is able to independently deal with its own human rights issues in the future without help from the global community.

            Pervenia P. Brown’s essay on Worldpress.org regarding the blood diamond situation documents the progression of the Sierra Leone conflict that eventually led to the death of “upwards of 50,000” people, the displacement of nearly half of the population, and the destruction of nearly two thirds of the country’s infrastructure (Brown). The conflict was mainly between rebel forces known as the R.U.F. and the National Provisional Ruling Council of Sierra Leone. However, as Brown describes, the N.P.R.C. failed to drive out the R.U.F. forces, leading to the death of thousands of Sierra Leoneans. The global community failed to intervene in Sierra Leone until 10 years after the war began despite the severe casualties and human rights violations that were being committed. This document clearly demonstrates how the government of Sierra Leone was unequiped to properly deal with the enemy combatants who were pillaging villages and killing innocent civilians, and how they needed the support of the international community to end the violence and suffering.

            Jonathan M. Katz’s book on the Haitian earthquake and the after effects of the global communities engagement in helping Haiti overcome the devastation. Unlike with Sierra Leone, Katz describes how the global community jumped in right away, sending millions of dollars, and hundreds of aid workers into Haiti to help the country after the earthquake. Katz explains that Haiti was hit so hard by the earthquake because of the fact that this third world country was unable to create the infrastructure and policies to build buildings that could withstand a 7 magnitude earthquake. Although Haiti was flooded with support, Katz describes how barely one percent of the the money raised for Haiti actually reached the Haitian government. Furthermore, most of the humanitarian aid worked to provide immediate relief to the Haitian people instead of creating lasting infrastructure that would help the government and the people of Haiti endure earthquakes in the future. While the global community attempted to help the people of Haiti they ultimately undermined its government and failed to create a system that would allow the Haitian government to support itself and its own people when the next earthquake hits Haiti.

            Sierra Leone saw the death of thousands of people as the Government failed to rid the country of the enemy combatants. Haiti was wrecked by a earthquake that killed hundreds and left thousands homeless with the government unable to provide the support that its country needed to help its citizens survive the devastation of the earthquake. Both of these are examples of humanitarian issues where the security of a person’s human rights was endangered and their governments could not be the ones to fix it, as they were too weak. Therefore, it was up to the international community to step in and help. However, the international community still needs to include the country that it is helping in the process so that that country can become more stable and in less need of help in the future.  For these reasons the definition of security, and the argument that I made in my original paper should be revised to encompass global security and human rights.