Peace & Stability Operations Journal Online
Economic Security and Security Sector Reform
by Mr. Rick Coplen
“Afghanistan’s security cannot only be measured by the absence
of war. It has to be measured by whether people have jobs and
economic opportunity, whether they believe their government
is serving their needs, whether political reconciliation proceeds
and succeeds.”
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
Tokyo Donors’ Conference: July 8, 2012
Broad “Security” Construct, Rising Public Expectations, and the Role of the State
The lead article in this journal, written by Dr. Harry R. Yarger
long before Secretary Clinton’s statement above, perceptively
asserts that in an age of increasing globalization a population’s
expectations of the state extend beyond the traditional defensecentric view of “security” to include “...the social freedoms of
economic opportunity, employment, education, health care,
intellectual freedom, and social mobility.”
Populations increasingly hold their government leaders accountable for providing, or at least enabling, the conditions
that support this broader security construct, especially the
economic component. Well governed states can simultaneously
achieve the strategic imperatives of Security Sector Reform
and economic security, especially if their leaders understand
the context in which these interdependent imperatives operate.
Understanding this context can be enhanced by conceptualizing
it as a “competition” between the government and those seeking to undermine and/or replace it—including a competition
for economic resources/factors of production (land, labor, and
capital), legitimacy, and the people’s loyalty.
Government leaders should periodically re-assess public perceptions of the appropriate role of their state, recognizing that
achieving a broader security construct requires not an exclusively governmental approach, but a community network approach
that integrates the efforts of government, security and police
forces, businesses, and civil society, including education and
training institutions, service organizations, and religious leaders.
The wickedly complex problems of the 21st century, operating
in the context of a globalized economy, cannot be solved by
governments alone---they require effective integration of efforts
across community networks.
Security Sector Reform and Economic Security are interdependent; therefore, they can and should be approached simultaneously, not sequentially. Increased physical security supports
enhanced economic activity, including the security of markets,
agricultural fields, and critical economic infrastructure (transportation, energy, water, and telecommunications). Meanwhile,
economic security provides the state the revenues needed to
fund the security sector, while offering military aged males productive work other than planting improvised explosive devices.
“Economic Security”—Defined, Measured, and
Interdependent with Security Sector Reform
Before designing effective strategies for achieving a broader security construct, governmental leaders need to fully understand
their operating environment and how their population defines
“economic security.” It is also important to distinguish between
economic security from the perspective of the individual and
the state----as well as the linkage between the two. Not surprisingly, self interested individuals focus primarily on their own
economic well-being while state leaders focus on the continued
economic viability of the state, including the ability to fund
security and police forces. First and foremost, both individuals
and states seek to ensure that their income/revenue covers their
living/essential services expenses. Individuals do so by securing
and maintaining a job or financial assets that provide a reliable
stream of sufficient income; governments do so by securing
and maintaining an adequate source of public revenue through
taxes, fee