Human Security - development of the policy#3Then, the Commission on Human Security was created and started in operation in
2002. I was frequently asked questions on the definition of human security. I pointed
out that human security does not stand against the nation-state, and that it should
complement what the nation-state cannot do in protecting people. And we started tofind ways to realize it. Notable scholars, politicians, and others from all over the world
gathered and had discussions for one and half years and held various hearings. Some ofthem actually went to Africa and asked the members of NGO or local leaders, “What isyour greatest concern?” If this had been asked in New York, the answer would havebeen the terrorist attack on September 11th, but when they asked this question inAfrica, their answer was how to face a lack of human security caused by economic
instability. Some of those answers were: “I don’t know about my life tomorrow”; “I may
easily die, if I get sick tomorrow”; “I don’t know if I can work tomorrow or not”. We felt
we needed a working definition for human security. We therefore proposed twoapproaches, considering various situations from a broader perspective.
One is “protection from top authority”, a top-down approach. The roles of thenation-state, as everyone expects, are terribly important in that the nation-stateadministers and governs, recognizing the importance of protecting basic human rights
and freedom, promoting law and order as well as enhancing administrative ability.
Establishment of the dominance of law, expansion of juridical institutions and police
power are counted as being of vital importance. The other approach is bottom-up, which
focuses on reinforcement of human abilities. These include education, free access toinformation, expansion of health management systems, and establishment of socialsecurity. People can act on their own by employing various forms of these services. We
regarded reinforcement of human abilities as essential factors for human security,
maintaining the philosophy that humans are so free that the purpose of human life liesin the fulfillment of the free human’s abilities and possibilities. In other words, I think
this is a combination of “govern” and “autonomy”. We regarded this idea as a key
principle and tried to search for specific ways to realize it.
One such solution was establishing human abilities after defining the various roles of
the nation and its administrative functions. We considered that a combination of
already-existed socioeconomic development theories and new administrative studies’

theories could bring about human security. This proposal has been widely adopted sincethen. Reports from the Committee on Human Security have been widely read in Japan,
and human security has been recognized as an important today’s issue. They wererevised and published as fifth and sixth editions and translated into six languages,
including English, Japanese, French, Spanish, Russian, and Arabic. They have beenread very broadly and understood as well. The important thing here is not just theories
but specific strategies, and how they have been developed. They are currently conductedin several ways, in which Japan started to contribute to economic and social
development through UN organizations by donating human security funds for UN
programs. When projects which directly impact human security are proposed, Japan
assists them financially. When it comes to the question of whether individuals orcommunities are more important than the other, we thought communities are moreimportant. Although individuals’ safety is important, from an administrative viewpoint,
communities, which are made up of individuals, versus governments are also considered
important, and we have tried to work for integral development which servescommunities. In the case of Japan, the concept of human security has been adopted in
our ODA scheme. Within the Japan International Cooperation Agency’s (JICA), ODA
scheme and human security have been the key concepts in its outline of service. But
how can they be put into actual use?? JICA has implemented many technical supporting
projects, and the concept of human security has been included in their objectives as aform of contribution for community development.
On the other hand, security in the entire community cannot be guaranteed even if
only educational programs are developed. Rather, a combination of efforts in different
sectors, such as education, security, highways, social insurance, and security for women,
is effective. The term, “cross-sectoral” is used, and JICA had adopted such an approachas mixing different sectors and then letting them stimulate each other to improvevarious problems in the community.
Additionally, I would like to talk about how human security has been widely
considered. We consider that the transitional period from peace-keeping topeace-building is a significant phase to achieve human security. Although there havebeen various conflicts over the years, many of them sprung from warfare between
nations or from domestic conflicts. In many cases there have been difficulties in goingback to a peacetime situation even after the end of those conflicts. From my 15 years
experience in many fields, there was only the case of Cambodia where peace wasestablished after conflict and a peace treaty was concluded, but I think this case isexceptional. When the conflict in Cambodia ended, an international conference was heldin Paris and a peace agreement was concluded and implemented. Other cases were
ambiguously resolved, peace-keeping forces entered the scene, and gradually a peacefulsituation was established and partial reconciliations were made, and consequently
conflicts started to vanish. I feel the best example of this is the Balkan Conflict.
Conflicts in Bosnia were really bloody domestic conflicts. At last, with American andother nations’ interventions, a peace agreement was concluded at Dayton. Before
conclusion of the peace agreement, 30,000 UN peace-keeping forces in that region
helped as many people as possible, and gave as much food as possible and led people tosafer places. After the peace agreement was concluded, NATO, substituted for UN
peace-keeping forces, supplying 60,000 troops. I hope you will understand how difficult
it is to build peace after conflicts. 30,000 peace keeping forces, 60,000 NATO troops, andthough gradually the size of NATO forces decreased, and there are still 15,000 NATO
troops there. Establishment of peace after the end of conflicts of this kind is reallydifficult. The reason is that people fight against people.
What I still remember is the breakdown of the federation where Serbian, Croatian,and Islamic people, who had formerly lived together in peace, now wanted their own
independent nations. It was rather natural that people fought against neighboring
people when the majority was Serbians in one area while there were Croatians inanother area. While I was taking care of returnees, I asked a woman, “Did you returnwith a sense of relief when you finally came back to your home?” she replied “What I felt
was shock that most of my neighbors would not talk to me at all”. That is to say, warfare
left behind something. Besides, this was warfare after separation of a nation which used
to have mixed ethnicity. So, peace-building really takes a long time. Meanwhile, what
can we do to prevent the deterioration of the situation? The situation in Afghanistan
was really like that. In 2002, a peace conference was held in Bonn, and finally agovernment was established, then international peace-keeping forces were dispatchedaround its capital, Kabul, to protect its government. Although a government was being
built, it was still difficult to oust the Taliban, so the continued presence of peace-keeping
troops was required. What these peace-keeping forces do, for one simple example, is toprovide public safety by acting as a police power. In a process of providing safety, more
reconciliation was made. Schools were built in a course of gradual rebuilding ofdevasted nations. Six million refugees came back to their homes. We made efforts to letreturnees find a place to live, and to have something to eat. People who had difficulties

in attending school were now able to attend. During times, such as these, police powerin some form is necessary to stifle any new conflicts.
Under such circumstances, we felt strongly that we had to target people themselves
and to put human security as our central issue. But here, how can we prove to themthat there is a better life ahead? JICA sent fifty people there to help recovery, but thebest way of proceeding is to show them the benefits of peace as soon as possible. We
must build a peace in which there is a quick ending of conflict and life gets better. Apeace in which people can attend school, cook meals for themselves, build homes, andhave plenty of food. However, the benefits of peace cannot be felt easily by people whenconflicts are being resolved by police power and military power. When people cannot see
the benefits of peace, distrust arises. If foreign armies protect their lands and there is anatural distrust of foreign nations, then a stable situation cannot be created.
Recently, I have been worried about Afghanistan. It is because the Taliban’s power isgetting stronger and threatening the rule by the government. Therefore Japaneseexperts cannot move around freely. As a result of their activities being limited, they
can’t carry out projects to show proof of peace. This creates a vicious circle. Under suchcircumstances, much more efforts are needed to establish security where humansecurity is not guaranteed.