Peace & Stability Journal Volume 2, Issue 4 | Page 21

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