Vad ca nimeni nu prea sa reflecteze si apoi sa comenteze?! Poate ca numai subiecetele de scandal sunt gustate pe lsita. As dori sa am macr o parere avizata asupra acestei incercari de a gasi niste valori comune tuturor cetatenilor Europei si de ce nu ai planetei. --- Romanescu Salomeea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > A Challenging project of Global Humane Security > Governance for sustainable development > > by Salomeea Romanescu > > This essay would like to introduce concepts; as > Humane > security, sustainable development and humane > governance commun values of able to curb the ignored threats, in a > feminine perspective. > > 1. New humane security paradigm as a common > denominator of all European actors against common > challenges > > > This chapter deals with the concept of Humane > security > and his potential positive impact on the quality of > life; first section put the security redefinition > need > in the international context, second tries to define > humane security and third shows the importance of > humane security in transforming the losers of > European > Integration in winners, as a potential modality for > a > positive scenarios of Integration, as win-win game. > World politics should not be viewed as a > historically > frozen process of power-hungry states, but rather as > a > dynamic process of interaction among individuals, > groups, states and international institutions, all > of > which are capable of adapting their sense of > self-interest. > After the Cold War the militarised conception of > security was challenged by multifaceted and holistic > conceptions like humane security, concept which > lacks > a clear definition and any agreed upon measures on > it. > We have to notice that the Military security failed > to > ensure the territorial security of a nation-state. > The > collapse of so called communism and of Soviet > hegemony > in Central and Eastern Europe, removed the immediate > military threat. The replacement of the major > military > threats from the East by the multilevel and > multidimensional threats has lent great instability > to > the European Security System, which was not prepared > to deal with it, in term of competences, policies > and > institutions. > Because Europeans face so many security challenges > and > promising opportunities, all of which compete for > higher attention and resources, it will be difficult > to deal with non-traditional threats. However, some > of > them will not be ignored for long time. Individual > security of the community or of the individual can > no > longer be satisfied only through military measures; > it > needs multidimensional understanding. > > Humane Security is difficult to be achieved in > actual > existing international system mainly dominated by > sovereign states. A current state - centred system > has > been inadequate to provide security and welfare as > we > have analysed in the first and second chapter. > Nation > states risk losing their external and internal > sovereignty. In our logic of humane security nation > states have to reorder priorities, problem is what > criteria? These could be: > - The sovereignty of the Human Person, > - Participation in decision- making and > - Response to Unmet Human Needs. > > The following issue needs the priority of > governments > and international organisations: hunger, housing, > health care, education, employment, environment, war > prevention, crime prevention, care of the aged, > racial > justice, womens rights, religious freedom, penal > reform, urban planning, population, democratic > participation, prevention of alienation and > addiction. > Most of the leaders would insist that they > personally > embrace the above agenda. Pragmatically, however, > these issues are subordinated to national security > priorities. In the present world system, national > policies developed primarily around the above > criteria > would threaten the ability of their nations to > survive. > The lights of Humane development will remain out for > a > majority of humankind until the emergence of a > world-order system. It is important to emphasize > that > we are not advocating constant mobilization for > national security. It is rather a question of > recognizing the reality that present corporate > priorities and elite rule are not primarily due to > ideological or personal demons. The world does not > need more demonology. What is needed is objectivity > - > not the rationalize, fatalistic acceptance of the > status quo, but to identify the all sources of > powerlessness: of leaders as well as of citizens. > The > surest way to entrench the status quo is to focus > too > exclusively on the powerlessness of the people and > to > rely on demonology at the cost of a more holistic > analysis. > The definition of security issues, the way in which > they were analyzed and the policies that resulted > were > the fruits of the dominant geopolitical and > ideological atmosphere during the Cold War period. > Security concept has a strong political base and it > changes according to it > Security continues to be calculated by the degree of > destructive capacity possessed in relation to an > expected enemy. The achievement of security in a > global setting is largely reduced to the management > of > boundaries of the territorial state- the degree of > capacity to keep unwanted persons, ideas, things > out, > and to keep what is wanted within. > To extent that security is globalised, it is > associated with establishing the conditions that > best > enable the expansion of gross planetary product and > stimulate the growth of world trade within a > framework > stabilized by policies that produce the triple > indictment > What is remarkable about this geopolitical image of > security is its durability, one that traverses the > distinction drawn earlier between modern, > state-centric geopolitics and post-modern > market-geared geopolitics. The absence of critical > self-reflection is terrible. What needs to be > acknowledged here, among other challenging > perspectives, is the relevance of feminist voices > from > around the world in fashioning other possible > responses to the actual. The revision of security is > crucial to the all enterprises of global civil > society > and the shaping of the global polity in accordance > with the criteria of humane governance. > Subrahmanyam clearly identifies this element of > necessity in the following passage: > Either humanity unites to survive, or it is bound > to > face a bleak future. The strategy of a non-violent > and > nuclear free world has no alternative, if future > generations are to survive in condition of > sustainable > development. We of this generation have to stark > choice before us. Either we become saviours of our > posterity or its executioners. Either we opt for > life > or shatter the future of mankind. > This sense of urgency is here affirmed. Also to be > underscored in the idea that continued > democratisation > depends on the establishment of a security, which > radically breaks with perceptions and practices that > have given substance to geopolitics throughout > modern > history. > It is obvious that to initiate a discussion of > security on this radical note is to highlight the > distance separating such a position from the > mainstream thought in the North and from the outlook > of most governing elites in the South. And it is > equally predictable that it will be dismissed > thereby > as utopian. To respond helpfully to the challenge > ahead it is necessary to summon the intellectual and > === message truncated === Asociatia/The Association"Proeducatia Rromilor Europeni in Contextul Integrarii Euro-Atlantice si Mondiale"Vizitati pagina http://www.geocities.com/survivor1977roVisit the web page http://www.geocities.com/survivor1977ro ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469
