Peace & Stability Journal Volume 2, Issue 4 | Page 14

Peace & Stability Operations Journal Online Ethical Considerations in Security Sector Reform by LTC Jeff Calvert The idea of a state security sector, or more broadly the systems and decisions around the control and legitimate use of force within any particular society, and civilization more generally, is central to the very concept of a functional and enduring modern world order. In the interest of collective security and peaceful coexistence of people with diverse individual interests and beliefs, each individual relinquishes a portion of their personal sovereignty and confers it to the state, expecting the state to provide protection, to keep in check the primal brutality that lies just beneath the surface of any society and threatens from beyond the borders of the state. Because of the central and enduring nature of security and its intimate and far-reaching association with nearly every aspect of modern life, the ethical nature of the security sector and of Security Sector Reform (SSR) is critical. Whenever the state or outside agents embark upon SSR, they must understand that they are operating upon a vital organ of state legitimacy where the stakes are invariably high with outcomes that are often hard to predict, and therefore the ethics of any such endeavor are of utmost importance. What are these ethics? What moral values must guide an understanding of what is permissible, what is essential, and what is prohibited in situations where leaders of good intention are working to build or reform the security sector, at home or in another country? Ethics of the Objective Security Sector: Stewardship & Legitimacy The range of potential scenarios—and thus the range of answers to the ethical questions—is extensive. All states undertake SSR in some form as they modernize, often on their own. Sometimes, assistance with SSR is requested by a cooperative partner and at other times it is imposed by intervening states. Often SSR means helping with incremental changes to improve an existing system in a relatively stable nation; other times it means implementing wholesale change in an unstable, dysfunctional, or tyrannical nation, or establishing a serviceable security system within a territory that has never enjoyed the benefits of a functional modern state. SSR is difficult even in developed states, and the range of cultural parameters and geo-political factors in each of these latter situations adds greater ethical complexity. In short, the scope of SSR is broad, its contexts vary greatly, and comprehensive ethical guidelines are elusive. Nonetheless, ethical thinking about SSR is improved by considering three broad frameworks: the ethics of the objective security sector, the ethics of getting involved in the security sector of another state, and the ethical obligations after involvement. In the 21st century world order, recognition of the primacy of the people of a state, and the state’s role as a steward and guarantor of their universal rights, are primary ethical requirements for any security sector. A legitimate democratic state accepts that all rights and all concepts of sovereignty begin at the level of the individual, and the state has only that sovereignty granted it collectively by its citizens. As steward of this collective sovereignty, it is the ethical responsibility of the state to ensure that security sector mechanisms act at all times in the interest of the people in pursuit of their inalienable rights, rather than in the interests of statism or elites. When the people of the state accept the ends, ways, and means associated with the security sector, and trust its conduct in the pursuit of the interests of the people, the security sector has internal legitimacy. When the international community recognizes a state’s proper stewardship as measured by its acceptance and adherence to widely accepted sets of international ethical standards with regard to security, for example the Geneva Conventions and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the state enjoys external legitimacy. 12 pksoi.army.mil Abdul Raziq, Kunar chief of justice, speaks to 70 mullahs and religious leaders Oct. 27, 2009, in Asadabad about the rule of law. Kunar province hosted rule of law training to teach influential people about legal rules and constitutional rights. The Kunar director of Hajjand Religious Affairs approached coalition forces for assistance to teach religious leaders about legal awareness, constitutional law and rights, as well as about anticorruption, anti-insurgency and anti-drugs.