The word security brings to mind armed military units in the streets, guns and barricades, soldiers and war in a country where war existed in a near past. It is natural in a land where several generations have had guns and bombs in-their-faces almost every day. It should bring to the mind at literally and figuratively the problem of political prisoners. Natural also in a world that has become small due to communication technology and therefore has war delivered to the front door so to speak, hence political prisoner is an entity known to everybody or obtained or learned in daily conversation. On the other hand, it is not surprising that ‘national security’ has mostly been associated with the protection of the regime or rather the incumbent government, even though it is frequently associated with ‘the people’ and ‘the nation’. Media creates much such pseudo equableness. So what is security in general?
Language experts tell us the word comes from the Latin ‘Securus’ meaning ‘free from care’ and evolved through the Latin word ‘Securita’ and the Old French ‘Securite’ to ‘Secure’ in English and also ‘Security’; so the dictionaries tell us. Essentially it refers in general to a state of being secure and free of worry. Now this could be private or public. Certainly is not just about protecting territory, from armed attack from within or without. It is about obtaining and protecting a law abiding, well behaved all citizens.
Safety of people and property
It offers a dimension that opens us to all sectors: education, health, nutrition, environment, sustainability and basic freedoms even as it speak to national boundaries and resources or the general safety of people and property.
If we were to take a comprehensive view of things, in the world dominated by the western world led by America then we would have to conclude that insecurity is sadly a constant; well, at least into the foreseeable future. There are imponderables (e.g. the price of oil, the maverick and destructive nature of US foreign policy and military ‘prerogatives,’ trade wars and a development model that pays lip service and nothing more to the health of the planet).
Lanka is a prisoner of agreements that contravene interest of ruling groups, but were signed under duress of HR campaigns or out of ignorance. On the other hand such leaders swallowed the development lie, compromised food security, and sneered at technologies that were developed over centuries. They placed trust on crooks, brigands, murderers, and such to run state affairs, and played a key part in the sustained development of impoverishment on all fronts.
Through fascistic rule people have collectively refused to recognize the greatest insecurity of them all: that which is resident in their minds and prevents them from recognizing resources and potentials. Instead masses allowed others to imprint in own consciousness other versions of realities. Security is not only about the ‘right now’ and certainly not about protecting the lifestyles and positions of privilege of the few. It is not about safeguarding systems made to rob, cheat, hoodwink, insult, humiliate and impoverish people. A war situation understandably pushes a lot of these issues to the back-burner, but even in such situations these cannot be forgotten. Perhaps the tragedy has been that even when ‘war’ was not a problem, these matters are not considered important. One American has said ‘your (Sri Lanka’s) food security lies in the wheat fields of North America.’ USAID was essentially writing the country’s agricultural policy at the time.
Political prisoners
That is, the USA doing what is in her interest. The tragedy is that Lankans have been happy to just tag along; not just in the agriculture sector but the overall paradigm of development which is essentially a recipe for continued underdevelopment and maldevelopment.
National security is above all intelligence. Yes, more than military hardware. National security means nothing if food security is ignored or compromised, if there’s no security against climate change. On the other hand National security is a failure if the dignity and self-respect of all citizens is not assured. People’s security is nothing if people have to second guess themselves before expressing opinions, nothing if people cannot live the lifestyles that give them meaning, nothing if laws and regulations can be bent by the powerful. Personnel security is nothing if institutions encourage wrongdoing and systems offer refuge to wrongdoers.
National security, most importantly, is bound to equality, autonomy and self determination of nationalities involved. Otherwise, will be a grotesque proposition if there’s no discussion and agreement on what ‘nation’ really means.
Also it will be a source of political prisoners!
Add new comment