An Eastphalian Way of Human Security?

The rise of Asian countries in world politics creates conditions for the possible emergence of an Asian-influenced international system and an Asian perspective on international law and global governance, which can be called an “Eastphalian order”. The Eastphalian order will not only challenge the existing bodies of international law and global governance based on Westphalian system but also suggest the blue print of the brave new world reflecting Asian philosophical heritage, political principles, and material interests. The idea of human security has been fueled by the convergence of the latest phase of globalization and the strengthening of the global human rights movement. Human security makes a strenuous effort to bring fresh air into dialogues of security concerns by placing individual human beings at the center of security concerns. This attempt of human security is sharply contrasted with the view of conventional security concerns stressing the security of states. In this sense, the emergence of the Eastphalian order has a special meaning to the fate of human security because the Eastphalian order is more conservative than the prevailing concept of human security pushed in the West. To explore the attitude of the Eastphalian order towards the idea of human security is an important work to forecast the fate of the Eastphalian order as a leading philosophy for international law and global governance in early 21st century. Because Asia contains the best of the first world and the worst of third world, Asian region will be a fascinating potential laboratory for global governance on human security. However, this prospect is undercut by Asian countries’ embrace of strong principles of sovereignty and nonintervention, which run counter to the thrust of the human security norms. In this context, the strategy for making a right place for human security within the Eastphalian order should be sought for the future of the world which the Eastphalian order would like to make. Considering the importance of this strategy, the Confucian thought might provide an Asian philosophical perspective to create an Eastphalian version of human security in Asian region. Empirical studies point out that Asian countries make a contribution to advancing freedom from fear and freedom from want, which constitute the heart of human security concept without diluting sovereignty and engaging interventions. Progress on reducing extreme hunger and poverty and the absence of interstate wars within Asian region might be understood as half success in terms of human security because Asian countries strengthens freedom from fear within this region. However, the hostile attitude of Asian countries towards the responsibility to protect principle, which is witnessed in the case of cyclone Nagis, leaves no room for anticipating another half success concerning the idea of human security. In this sense, the Eastphalain order and the prevailing post-Westphalian nature of the human security concept do not share much common ground. In short, the Asian perspective offers little for advocates of human security to embrace.