CHAPTER 2CLIMATE CHANGE AND SECURITISATION ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY: A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK The United Nations Conference on Human Environment at Stockholm in 1972 triggered a debate regarding various environmental issues. It induced the people to think of unconventional security issues and sought various ways to tackle it. The International on Relationship between Disarmament and Development convened by United Nations General Assembly in 1987 and United Nations Human Development Report discussed the nature of non-military security threats in detail (United Nations Study series 2004:11). These conferences reached a conclusion that non-traditional threats are creating crucial repercussions in the livelihood of humanity as a whole (Welzer 2012:60-61). This heralded a vibrant discussion on the nontraditional security issues of nation-states. Moreover a comprehensive approach to the concept of environmental security was adopted in the Earth Summit of 1992 held at Rio De Jenario at the World Summit on Sustainable Development at Johannesburg 2002.Since the end of the cold war, many factors have given a momentum for adopting alternative definitions of security other than military threats like international terrorism, pandemic diseases, global meltdown, natural catastrophes, inflating food and energy prices etc. This provoked the academicians , policy makers and heads of the state to go beyond the military security concerns and addresses the other crucial issues of international importance (2009:2). In the modern times, Asian and African countries were ruthlessly threatened by climate change (Fussel 2010:48). The recent researchers testify that these countries will continue to be affected by ill effects of the vagaries of nature. While not ignoring traditional security threats, the “ecological security” paradigm, which traces its diplomatic origins to the Stockholm Conference, emerged as a non-traditional security threat in the recent times. (Pirages 2011:9). This chapter aims to deal with debates in regards to the concept of security with special reference to traditional and non-traditional security (NTS) debate. Traditional concept of security – Realism and Neorealism The end of the cold war heralded a change in the political environment both in theoretical as well as in political sense. This change has been also visible in the realm of security studies. Several academicians started to consider the very concept of ‘security’ and tried to analyse an apt definition for it. They tried to analyse the question ‘whose security is to be addressed?’ (Biswas 2011:1, Williams 2008:8-9) This small group of academia started to reevaluate the traditional concept of security which describes only about external aggressions or military threats. They tried to give a broad framework for security which includes non-traditional threats like poverty, malnutrition, economic security, climate change etc. This actuated a debate between the traditional security nontraditional security threats (NTS) in the realm of security studies. The proponents of the traditional security perspective want to maintain the cold war concept of security i.e. state-centric and military centric. Those who advocated non-traditional security The deepeners on the other hand . (Sheehan 2004:44). major world powers entrusted to the security of their nation to a balance of power among states. For almost half a century . States are deemed to be national identity . The prevalence of this theory reached a peak during the coldwar. . then the security of the citizens will necessarily follow. Moreover there are two views among the non-traditionalists regarding the inclusion diverse security concerns. ask the question whose security is being threatened.perspective has attempted to widen and deepen the concept to include such other issues as economic security. poverty. The wideners agree that military security may not acknowledge the greatest threats to the human survival like economic crisis. environmental security etc. Traditional security relied on the anarchistic balance of power. a military buildup between the United States and Soviet Union (the two superpowers). In this sense international stability relied on the promise that if state security is maintained. As a result of this discourse the very concept of security became more normative. The “Wideners” and “Deepeners” forms the sub-category among the non-traditionalist and there is disagreement between them as well. environmental crisis etc. and on the absolute sovereignty of nation state. (Tarry 1992:2) The traditional security paradigm refers to a realist construct of security in which the referent object of security is the state. They are trying to redefine the concept to use individual as referent object against the state. national interests and policy driven for the desire for absolute power. social security. The emergence of a number of non-state actors. These approaches address these basic threats to human safety are paradigms that include cooperative. Traditional security policies had effectively masked these underlying basic human needs in the face of state security.Security was seen as protection from invasion. More recently. drug cartels and maritime piracy networks. for the state. Through neglect of its constituents.g. disease. as a result . in the 21st century. this is no longer the case. civil wars) have assumed importance as new-age threats to the national security of . NON-TRADITIONAL SECURITY Unlike the preceding centuries. Civils wars were increasingly common and compounded existing poverty. nation states had failed in their primary objectives. the traditional state-centric notion of security has been challenged by more holistic approaches to security. such as terrorist networks. aimed to ensure security for the individual and. violence and human right abuses. executed during proxy conflicts using technical and military capabilities. hunger. Realism And Neo-Realism Concept Of Security Inadequate? It became clear that the security of citizen was threatned by hardship arising from internal state activities as well as external aggressors. comprehensive and collective measure. in which the gravest security threats that a nationstate faced were invariably the armies of other states. and intra-state conflicts (e. drug cartels) and terrorist groups in the 21st century has led to a scenario where such non-state actors pose a greater threat to a state’s national security than the military forces of other states. have facilitated the emergence of cyber-warfare and cyber-espionage. especially acute in the Western developed countries. going by this definition. When the UN was established. According to World Bank. triggering the slow shift of the battlefield from land. 2. has emerged as a credible and serious threat to the future existence of modern-day nation states. have emerged as the one social factor that might influence global power politics in the future. air and sea to cyberspace. modern conflict is no longer restricted to only wars between the military forces of states. such as an aging and/or shrinking population. Finally. numerous proxy wars. the impact of environmental degradation on the future of the nation-state. as identified and legitimized by passing a UN resolution. Apart from such non-state and transnational actors. Demographical changes. Drug cartels have especially gained importance in the last few decades because of their greater access to resources (both financial and organizational) and use of sophisticated technological advancements in order to improve their risk . especially the implications of global climate change. Thus. arms smuggling groups and maritime piracy networks can be classified as some of the major organized crime networks. the frequency of inter-state and civil wars has now reduced. international drug cartels.1 Transnational organized crime networks These are especially a potent threat to a state’s national security because of a number of reasons. it was primarily structured to deal with states. Rise of Non-state Actors The world underwent seismic shifts in the 20th century in the form of two resource-draining world wars.present-day states. The World Bank (2013) defines an organized crime network as one that uses force and coercion for pursuit of wealth by criminal means. The formation of the United Nations in the aftermath of World War 2 and its ensuing proclamation that the military forces of member-states could be deployed only for self-defense. end of the Cold War and emergence of the US as the sole superpower.g. the creation of a bipolar world order. has resulted in effective “outlawing” of the use of offensive military force by the UN member-states. However. 2. in comparison with those that were fought in the 20th century. particularly with respect to the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) revolution. collective self-defense or collective security. technological advancements in the 21st century. The rise of organized crime networks (e. which ensures the “protection” of the leaders. they do not conform to the international laws and treaties that govern a state in its use of force. the transshipment states (which can be one or more states that are involved in the transit of the drug shipments). by default. but many states and also may bribe the authorities involved of multiple states in the process. thus cultivating a Stockholm Syndrome-like attitude in the general public. high crime rates and the lax attitude of government authorities in addressing their grievances. portraying themselves as more efficient and “welfare-oriented” than the local elected government. such organized crime networks thrive well in these regions. Thus the networks flout the sovereignty of not one. As a result. charismatic leaders of the organized crime networks even publicly involve themselves in philanthropy and charity. The organized crime networks assume the identity of a generous benefactor and protector of the people. It has become increasingly difficult for the state authorities to nab the leaders of such networks. In some cases. thereby undermining the local police and military force and contributing to the overall degeneration of the national . nor do they recognize the concept of sovereignty. categorized by Williams (2014) as follows: “home” state (where the drug originates). One reason is institutionalized corruption in the state system (e. Because these networks are non-state actors. where the people usually suffer from poverty. The US and European Union serve as the two biggest markets for drugs. However. Non-state actors are neither limited by territorial boundaries. They also use bribery as an effective instrument to attract and/or coerce the very personnel who are employed by the state to combat them. international drug cartels and illegal arms sales networks flout all international rules during their operations.g.management strategies and thus evade capture by the state security agencies. in Colombia). weak regulatory framework for protecting business activities and a corrupt judiciary. which are characterized by ineffective government control. A number of states are “involved” during the trajectory from production to reaching the final destination. Since state security agencies and police forces in developing and impoverished countries are more susceptible to the lure of bribes. this is not to arrive at the conclusion that organized crime operations flourish only in these regions. thereby extending their web of influence and threatening the national security of multiple states at the same time. poor law and order control situation. Organized crime networks usually mushroom and thrive in “weak” or “failed” states (mostly underdeveloped and developing countries). the host or market states and the service state (which usually act as safe havens for illegal financial transactions). who begin to view the state with mistrust and gravitate toward these crime syndicates with their problems. This is usually effective in the “home” state. The same applies for other organized crime networks such as arms smuggling or the transport of illegal migrants. and the drug cartels can reap in profits by exclusively focusing on these markets alone. “legitimizes” the former’s influence. Also. might be thought of as irrational or brain-washed. while terrorist groups target the civilian population in order to seek attention to their political demands. The one commonality between transnational organized crime networks and terrorist groups that is also the major source of security threat to a state that harbors such groups is that both are nonstate actors. As a result. sleeper cells (especially in India) and phantom cell networks have made it increasingly difficult for the governments to wipe off terrorist groups. in a way. sovereignty or international norms and regulations on the use of force. The effective use of suicide bombers to target civilians in crowded places. the leader of the terrorism network is a completely “rational” person. as is the case in Mexico Drug War. invariably. terrorist and insurgency networks always have a political goal. civilians. Although terrorist and insurgency groups are similar to organized crime networks in their use (or threat of use) of force to achieve their stated objectives. usually fighting the established local government or foreign power. terrorist organizations that do not have a visible leader). especially suicide bombers. diplomats and media persons are routinely targeted by terrorist groups. terrorist groups do not recognize the concept of state boundaries.2 Terrorism and insurgency It have emerged as the most widely recognizable and visible threats to a nation’s security. organized crime networks manipulate state machinery to ensure that their businesses flourish. As a result. governments find it increasingly difficult to track down and annihilate terrorist groups and their leaders. which. who they perceive to be illegitimate occupying forces. The situation is exacerbated when there is inter. Hoffman (2013) defines terrorism as the “deliberate creation and exploitation of fear through violence or threat of violence in pursuit of political change”. the employment of sophisticated technology and tactics such as leaderless movements (i. the state is perceived to be in a weaker position. Also. The major obstacle to a combating an organized crime network is that. Moreover. 2. until the security situations spirals into chaos and the prospect of a civil war may become imminent. Thus the state is made progressively weaker.e.security of the state. along with the conflict between the drug cartels and the state government. especially after the 9/11 attacks. and like the former.drug-cartel rivalry for supremacy. insurgency groups differ from terrorist groups in their quest for self-determination and hold over territory. while the members of a terrorist network. Terrorist groups such as the Shining . the most important and fundamental difference is in their objectives: while drug cartels and arms smuggling networks primarily operate to increasen their wealth. Apart from wars that are occasionally fought between other states outside the security community. It would be of note here that the last inter-state war between Israel and an Arab state was nearly 30 years ago. Thus the threat of terrorism still remains a very important factor that shapes a state’s sense of national security. the recent wars that Israel waged were against non-state actors (i. intrastate wars (most importantly. which also weakens the state’s response to tackle this global threat to security and peace. sometimes. especially if they use a neutral territory to conduct a terrorist attack. comprising a group of nations who fought the previous world wars (i. Annan (1998) states that “[m]ost wars are now civil wars”. Hezbollah and Hamas). which might prevent spiraling of the conflict. Combating terrorism has been hampered by the increased organizational efficiency of terrorist groups (e. US. Civil War and Regime Change Although the post-World War 2 period saw the establishment and strengthening of the United Nations and the formation of what Jervis (2002) defines a “pluralistic security community” (a term initially coined by Karl Deutsch). to a blurring of lines between organized crime and terrorism. The Syrian civil war is an example of how the UN and the member-states failed to effectively stop . 3.g.e.Path (Peru) also tap into the organized crime network in order to set up a highly successful drugs smuggling network to fund their terrorist campaigns. The most important advantage of a terrorist group is their effective use of the element of surprise. placing additional pressure on the governments in their combat against such intertwined networks. Civil wars are more destructive that inter-state wars because of their duration (they usually last longer than inter-state wars). instances of the inability of the government to emphatically defeat the rebel groups (if the civil war is between state and non-state actors) and the involvement of different ethnic groups in the conflict. leaderless networks) and ineffective use of brute force and targeted killings by the state (in Chechnya and Palestine). among whom the breakout of inter-state war is unimaginable. the high number of civilian deaths. 89 of the 113 conflicts in the period between end of cold war and beginning of the 21st century were purely civil wars. This leads.e. Since civil wars are usually fought between intra-state groups (usually the government and one or more non-state actors). they are classified as internal affairs of states. civil wars) still threatens the lives of thousands of civilians caught in conflict. Doubts over whether terrorism can completely been annihilated have plagued the minds of counterterrorist operatives. this does not literally translate to a peaceful international community. catching the public and the government off guard. the EU and Japan). hence hindering UN intervention during the initial stages. According to Nye and Welch (2013). Thus climate change is a serious cause for concern to . Climate change has assumed critical importance to world security in the last few decades. 2011). such as malaria and cholera. About 40% of states that endured a civil war and a resulting regime change imposed by a foreign power suffered a relapse within a decade. civil wars are inherently recursive in nature. Impact of Environmental Degradation One of the most critical issues concerning a nation’s security in the 21st century is environmental degradation. with rise in crimes and murders.arms and ammunition into the adjacent states. Global warming due to climate change has been predicted to have a cascading affect.the strife. Rising temperatures also have the capacity to foster the spread of communicable diseases. as it happened in Libya (Downes. When UN intervention is not found to be effective enough. and in particular. There is also the possibility of “spillover”. However. where a combination of intra-state war and foreign intervention has resulted in the state government losing control and power over the military establishment or the state in general. wherein the increasing temperatures will facilitate more frequent formation of cyclones and storms in the tropical regions and the melting of polar ice caps. In civil wars. as Nye and Welch (2013) argue. has led to the excessive depletion of natural resources. usually such conflicts end only when one group has a resounding and complete victory over the others. Thus civil wars are difficult to end through UN or foreign intervention. One of the disadvantages of the way the UN has been structured is that it authorizes the use of force to respond only to situations where there is a clear evidence of aggression. such as Iraq. In the meantime. at a rate much faster than it can be replaced. thereby resulting in the escalation of war to the extent where chemical weapons were used against innocent civilians. identification of the aggressor is not always easy. due to increased number of air-borne and water-borne vector carriers. sometimes foreign intervention occurs. Rising population and burgeoning energy needs. climate change and its impact. usually through violence. There are a number of examples of civil wars resulting in failed states. especially in developed and developing countries. rebel fighters. Afghanistan and Rwanda. where a civil war in one country affects the stability and peace of the neighboring countries as well due to inflow or outflow of refugees. 4. the law and order situation is thrown into disarray. This leads to a situation of “failed states”. which might take decades. threatening their very existence. which the group might object to. in turn leading to rising sea levels and possible submerging of low-lying areas and island nations. usually when the situation spirals out of control. Regime change is usually not effective because of the sudden reversal of fortunes of a particular group involved in the conflict. Thus civil wars invariably lead to regional instability and a degenerating security situation. Since oil.nation. For example. Thus environment protection and nurturing is an urgent need of the hour. especially in developing countries which have dense populations. This will lead to the problem of nuclear waste disposal and protection of the nuclear fuel from non-state terrorist and criminal organizations which might misuse it to manufacture nuclear weapons. gas and coal are non-renewable sources of energy. as states might not hesitate to use offensive force in order to secure its energy needs for the future. wherein overpopulation and a “free-riding mentality” may result in the degeneration and pollution of a resource. Climate change may also affect agricultural production due to disruption of normal climate caused by increasing temperatures. Thus water scarcity is a critical national security issue for states. Dupont (2013) points out that China has resorted to diverting fresh water resources from Tibet to the water-scarce Northern China region. a region which is being eyed by many states. states are expected to resort to nuclear energy in the future in order to fulfill their energy needs. such as increase in the number of natural disasters. such as the US. due to the unexploited resources that it holds (Dupont. Dwindling fresh water resources has led to many scholars predicting inter-state “water wars” in the future. Such endeavors may not only affect the environment but also lead to deteriorating relations with the neighboring countries that would be adversely affected by one state’s quest for fresh water resources. as a destabilized environment can lead to a tipping point. this cannot be ruled out in the future. after which catastrophic and irreversible consequences. thereby affecting millions of livelihoods in the riparian regions from which the water was redirected. since it is the fountainhead for various other natural and related phenomena that may threaten the very existence of the human race in the decades to come. An example is Russia’s recent stunt at “claiming” the Arctic seabed. 2013). Energy security is and will be one of the primary factors that will drive the foreign policy of nations. Resource wars cannot be ruled out. and is the best example of a “tragedy of the commons” as postulated by Hardin (1968). Although predictions of a food deficit have not yet turned true. may threaten the survival of the state and its population. . Environmental refugees may soon become a reality. as environmental degradation and food and water scarcity may lead to mass migration of populations from the affected regions. Food scarcity is an issue that has been touted to be the most important problems that will be faced by the states in the future. Norway and Denmark. contributing to the instability of the host states. as a rapidly increasing population will place additional strain on the finite land resource and the excessive use of fertilizers might result in soil infertility due to chemical imbalance. Canada. Inflation in food prices is already a reality. even with the development of sophisticated weapons technology. due to the prospect of ethnic tensions and religious extremism. the one-child policy that has been rigorously enforced by the ruling Communist Party of China for the past four decades has resulted in the premature aging of its population. As a result. Also. 6. This demographic transition may be partially assuaged by the migrant working population from the developing and underdeveloped countries. by 2030. Howe and Jackson (2011) predict that. China would have surpassed the US as the country with the greater proportion of the elderly population. in some cases. it is only logical that a dynamic change in the age and size of population directly affect a state’s national security. such as Sub-Saharan Africa might have a burgeoning young population. however. they expect Russia to face the sharpest decline in population among the large states. Demographic Changes and Their Consequences While over-population is a legitimate concern and.5. An aging and shrinking population would also translate into a reduction in the military capacity of a state due to shortage of personnel. with a simultaneously ageing and shrinking population. China’s rise as a possible challenger to the US hegemony is being advocated by many scholars. a consequence of decreasing fertility rates and increasing life expectancy over the last few decades. the combination of political instability and impoverishment would prevent the population from effectively contributing to their nations’ economies. Thus. Although some regions. the population in Western Europe and Japan will predominantly comprise the elderly. however. their integration into the society may not be smooth. which might directly impact the defense spending of the nation and compromising national security. the developed world is at the threshold of a sweeping demographic change. A greater proportion of the national budget will be allocated for social welfare. by 2025. Cyber-conflict and National Security . already a reality in the developing and underdeveloped regions of the world. which will need to be diverted to provide care and assistance for the ageing population. Howe and Jackson (2011) expect that. while at the same time being constrained by a shrinking working-age population being unable to offset the deficit. This will increase the strain on government resources. with a rapidly decreasing workforce. 2013). this is not the case in cyber-warfare. once cannot predict what . the difficulty is determining the perpetrator (which could be state or non-state actors) adds to the confusion in determining the legal course of action once a cyber-attack is discovered. Also. Unlike TKC. Drug cartels. using the illegal wealth to further strengthen their influence. As a result. as civilian computer systems may be used to launch offensive cyber-war against an “enemy” state. Cyber-war is especially a serious threat to the national sovereignty and security because it transcends national borders and involves use of civilian resources (such as broadband networks and electric grids) and. a new battlefield has opened up: cyberspace. especially in the last few years: China. The reverberations of an intrusive cyber-attack are hard to predict. absence of explicit UN legislation on cyber-warfare (unlike TKC) and the possibility of escalation of cyber-conflict. However. since there has been no precedent. the enemy can be “seen” or “identified”. intra. transmitted and stored not only by the civilian population but also the state military and intelligence agencies. Also. in many cases without being discovered. dissuasion and defense are said to be more advantageous than offense. Cyber-conflict need not necessarily be restricted only to those between states or between non-state actors and states. there are no clear lines between the civilian and military. arms smuggling networks and many other illegal businesses routinely use ICT to carry out under-the-radar financial transactions. A spate of cyber-attacks have been reported by the media. where deterrence. sometimes. During a cyberconflict. in cyber-conflict.e. malignant non-state actors such as organized crime networks and fringe extremist groups that hack into national databases and steal classified information. cyber-exploitation) or prevent/stun rival military systems from functioning properly (i.e. Israel and the US are thought to routinely engage in cyber-conflicts with other states in order to siphon confidential business or military information (i. where civilians are being able to have unprecedented access to information. cyber-defense has to work every single time whereas cyber-offense needs to work only once. As Lin (2013) states. both offensive and defensive acts take place in the cyber-arena (Lin.or inter-state wars.The 21st century has been labeled as the Information Age. they still pose a credible threat to the national security of 21st century states. cyber-conflict). in TKC. And similar to a traditional kinetic conflict (TKC). Although the number of instances of cyber-attacks and cyber-exploitation by state and non-state actors is low at present compared to. contributing to a weakening of the state’s security. it is the opposite. Cyber-conflict and cyberexploitation are the new threats to a state’s security. say. mainly because of the relative anonymity of the perpetrators. Also. the information and communication technology (ICT) “revolution” has transformed the way information is used. ” At present India is the sixth largest energy consumer in the world and is projected to emerge as the fourth largest consumer after the United States. which may not necessarily involve only states. resulting in increased import dependence. Within the last decade India has emerged as the fourth largest economy of the world in the purchasing power parity terms. “Energy independence has to be our nations’ first and highest priority. as the National Intelligence Council (NIC) in the US underlined recently. including Africa and Latin America. the need for energy security emanates from the growing imbalance between the demand for energy and its supply from indigenous sources.J. by 2020 in economic size. Abdul Kalam said. Moreover. Currently. As far as India is concerned. Due to stagnating domestic crude production. Recently the country’s Oil and Natural Gas . In more absolute terms. India’s energy consumption has grown at a faster pace than its economy and it appears this trend will continue. This essentially involves ensuring uninterrupted supply of energy to support the economic and commercial activities necessary for sustained economic growth. Highlighting the issue PresidentA. For more than a decade. and in its wake will be a substantial increase in demand for oil. Its dependence is growing rapidly. around 65% of its crude oil imports are from West Asia and the rest from various parts of the world. One of the major security challenge facing is that of energy security. projects that India's dependence on oil imports will grow to 91. In the short term there appears little likelihood of reducing its energy imports. China and Japan by 2010. Non-traditional security concerns India also faces a number of non-traditional security concerns. India imports approximately 70% of its oil. India will begin to overtake all the Western nations except the US. published by the International Energy Agency (IEA). Hence energy security is crucial for the sustaining the current growth rates.6% by the year 2020. The World Energy Outlook. the demand for oil in the transport sector shows no sign of abating. It has also started acquiring oil and gas assets in different parts of the world from Sudan to Sakhalin. even if India reduces the use of oil in its power and manufacturing sectors.P. Its economy is projected to grow 7%-8% over the next two decades.might be the possibility or consequence of a cyberworld war. While globalisation has resulted in the softening of borders. Similarly. respectively. Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) is known to have trained the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA) and Maoists from India and Nepal. terrorism has claimed 34. The best known of these groups is the Dawood Ibrahim network. the Pakistan-sponsored terrorism has paralysed normal life since the 1980s. Such criminal groups are linked to a number of trans-national criminal enterprises such as small arms.Commission (ONGC) has identified 22 countries to pursue exploration.Q. . 1-In the long term.000 terrorists. originally a Bombaybased criminal enterprise. 3-Linked to this issue is the issue of transnational crime networks. drug trafficking and moneylaundering and have been utilised by the A. Many of these networks are not purely criminal but have become involved in Indian politics. Nevertheless. India will have to shift its energy sources from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources like bio fuels. pipeline transportation and the refining of hydrocarbons.is now the new threat. Ibrahim remain at large in Pakistan and his network intact. terrorism has moved centre stage in the security discourse. and Dawood Ibrahim himself is known to be based in Karachi and travel on a Pakistani passport. enabled many security problems to attain dangerous dimensions. Indians have suffered cross-border terrorism for decades. In Jammu and Kashmir. providing them with certain levels of immunity from Indian law enforcement. According to Indian estimates. it has been reported that Maoists in Nepal also work closely with the People’s War Group (PWG) of Andhra Pradesh. 4-Further. Pakistan has also been involved in the supply of arms and financial assistance to Naxalites and separatist groups active in India. Khan network.Apart from Pakistan. But Ibrahim’s activities have become so widespread that he is now on US and UN lists of wanted ‘global terrorists’ for his role in financing and supporting Al-Qaeda. though some of these networks have been proscribed as a result of the ‘war on terror’. The network receives active support from Pakistan’s notorious Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). which is today involved in everything from extortion to terrorism\ in India. A threat that has gone global. unfortunately.000 civilians and 18. Another crucial security challenge that India faces today is terrorism. solar and nuclear power. it has also. 2-The spectre of international terrorism is one such phenomenon. The shadowy non-state actor – a terrorist who was in the fringes of security discourse . and it is difficult for it to make commoncause with international partners to address them. production. Post 9/11. wind.000 lives since 1990 including over 12. India is the principal target. with large numbers of immigrants and great difficulties in regulating flows. there are about 15 million illegal Bangladeshi citizens in India. Some of these criminal networks are also thought to have been used by the Pakistani government and its agencies. This spread. but is now becoming a more widespread problem. which is now linked to Nepali Maoists. Money laundering is another activity linked to these criminal groups. This link between criminal enterprises and WMD proliferation makes it particularly necessary to develop international cooperation on these issues. there is greater international cooperation in fighting these networks. for Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) trafficking. especially the A. and has encouraged a resurgence of left-wing extremism. The market for weapons is big and accessible. But unlike the various other trans-national criminal enterprises mentioned earlier. Bangladesh of course. India is bracketed by two of the world’s three largest narcotics producing-exporting regions. hawala networks came under the scanner of the international community because of their links in financing or supporting global terrorism. of the crime and violence in India’s Northeastern region is linked to this factor. refuses to accept the immigrants as Bangladeshi citizens. South Asia is at present a transit point for drugs. According to official Indian estimates.Small arms trafficking in the region began as blowback from the Afghan war. if not most. as Indian and other South Asian countries prosper. also explains the growth in the number of violent rebellions in various parts of the country.5. Though the seriousness of this problem in well recognised. There are indications that the narcotics traffic. This proliferation of small arms is changing the character of insurgencies in India. although it has shown a decline in recent years. However. These networks are also connected to drug-trafficking. Bangladesh in particular. India became a passage country (directly and via Nepal) and some. Illegal immigration into the country occurs through its huge porous border. poses a problem for India. Though by no means eliminated. Illegal immigration is one of the most serious non-traditional challenges confronting India. Khan network. Willynilly. the so-called ‘hawala’ networks have become extremely powerful and dangerous. first affecting Pakistan. at least partly. making them more violent and less susceptible to resolution. from what is euphemistically referred to as the ‘Golden Triangle’ encompassing Myanmar-Thailand-Laos. . constitutes the major source of illicit heroin and opium. rather than a consumer. Though originally serving a social function for poor migrant international labour of South Asian origin in West Asia.Q. it is nevertheless difficult to tackle because it is entangled in domestic political issues. there is the potential for this to change and governments in the region are ignoring this risk at their peril. 6. the discovery of Al Qaeda operatives in a container in January 2002 has brought to light the importance of container security. natural disasters like Tsunami and Hurricanes such as Katarina. These ships are registered under the Flags of Convenience (e. As the fighting in Nepal between the Maoists and the government has picked up. setting off inter-ethnic violence. Indian police and security agencies believe. With the dramatic increase in container transport by sea this problem has grown. The use of sophisticated weapons and increasing violence is particularly distressing. The US-launched Container Security Initiative (CSI) is a welcome initiative. The Indonesian waters. those registered in Panama. Bay of Bengal and Horn of Africa are among the worst affected areas of the world. the Indian Ocean region has become another theatre for trafficking of drugs from the golden crescent and golden triangle region in Asia. in particular. Also many of the terrorist organizations have merchant fleet of their own.1 million. The increasing non-traditional maritime threats in the Indian Ocean region are also an area of concern. The LTTE. unlike the Bangladeshi migrants. Liberia or Cyprus) making it virtually impossible to track them down. Most importantly.480 refugees have entered Indian territory since 1983. The island territories in the east are 1. According to the official figures. are linked to terrorism. nearly one percent of India’s adult population is now carrying the deadly .g.Piracy particularly has been on the rise.Illegal Bangladeshi immigration is a significant cause for ethnic conflicts in northeastern India. have brought the area of disaster management to the forefront. More alarming.Let us now shift gear to an issue that is not often conceived as a security challenge for India. has been accused of such acts in past. the vast majority of these are formally registered as refugees). But Bangladesh is not the only one of India’s neighbours that is a problem: tens of thousands of Sri Lankan Tamils have fled the fighting in that troubled island and settled in India (though. 278.600kms and an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of over 2 million km2 . Moreover. though it is surely emerging as one. India can expect another bout of unwanted population flows into it. To compound it all. India has a coastline of about 7. The Indian Maritime doctrine provides an indication of the emerging security threats. According to the India’s Home Ministry.300km away from the mainland. Over the last two decades India’s HIV/AIDS infected population has shot up from two people to 5. some of which. Should the situation in either of these countries worsen. is the news that various terrorists groups have resorted to maritime terror in the form of hijacking commercial vehicles. But illegal immigration has also become a source of trans-national criminal enterprises. where it has shifted the balance of ethnic communities. hundreds of thousands of Nepalese have also shifted to India. political. the National security problem in international relations. The country’s aspirations for the future will be severely impacted by the epidemic. The primary book of the Copenhagen school is security. A new framework for analysis. As such . certain reports suggest that the disease has reached military personnel. the average age of the HIV-positive population in India is currently between 25-30 years. By 2020 an estimated 64% of the total population would be in economically active age bracket.andJaap de wilde. people . The Copenhagen school places particular emphasis upon the social aspects of security. While there is no comprehensive data available on the extent of the infection on the armed forces. Ole Waver. though the numbers are limited at present.States and Fear. . first published in 1983. However. Also certain Indian cities and regions are reporting more than 5% infection rates.virus. A severe epidemic would imply 140 million new HIVinfections that would lead to the country losing almost 100 million of its workforce. The biggest negative impact would demographic. Many of the school’s members worked at the Copenhagen school is Bill Mesweeny. The socio-cultural impact of such an eventuality will be immense. Widening School Of Thought. this theory can be regarded as ‘Widening’ traditional materialist security studies by looking at security in this ‘new’ sectors. the author list the following sectors: military/state. societal. Theorist Barry Buzan’s book . Theorists associated with the school include Barry Buzan. economic and environmental.The Copenhagen School The Copenhagen school of security is a school of academic thought with its origins in international relations. The very concept of non-traditional security and the debates centered around has been initiated by Barry Buzan . This menifests that securitization is a Speech Act. Despite this. Speech act is a term borrowed from John L. not necessarily because a real existential threat exists but the issue is presented as a threat (Buzan 19998:24). political security. In this practice an issue becomes a security issue. that particular issue becomes an agenda for the national and international security. (1) as an action or sequence of events that threatens drastically over a relatively brief span of time to degrade the quality of life for the inhabitants of a state or (2) threatens significantly to narrow the range of policy choices available to the government of a state or to private. Barry Buzan in his work. The three levels that he system (Buzan-1983:21).’ Tries to examine a broader understanding of the concept of security. Another important figure in this discourse is Richard Ullman. Consequently. A kind of potlitical manipulation takes place to securitise the issue. The concept finds elaborations in his edited volume with Waever and Wilde “Security: A New Framework for Analysis” (Buzan 1998). He defines security. ‘ people.states and fear: A n agenda for international security studies post-cold war era. Ole Waever and Jaap de wilde of the Copenhagen school. His definition of security is more comprehensive. In a nutshell “security “ is self referential practice. he further widened the scope of security to include military security. societal security. npn-governmental entities (persons. economic security (Buzan 1998:2). In “New patterns of Global security in the 21 st century”. Austin’s book “How Do Things with Words” pulished in 1955. Within the first . This theory says that an issue can be securitise by the process of the repeated usage of the term in the public domain. the Copenhagen school developed a new framework called “securitization” to conceptualized security. corporations) within the state (Ullman1983:7). groups. Understanding Climate Change and Security So why should we care if climate change is being linked to security? The short answer would be: because producing climate change as a security issue has very specific implications for the way(s) with which it is dealt. catastrophic floods or massive and pervasive drought. Even though these concepts are discussed mainly in the theory chapter. The process of securitization is intersubjective meaning that it is neither a question of an objective threat or a subjective perception of a threat. from blockades and boycotts to raw material shortages and devastating “natural” disasters such as decimating epidemics. Yet. The description adopted by Ayoob has also been very pertinent in this stage as the peripheral countries had to face new challenges and not just military insecurity. is probably the most prominent concept of Copenhagen school. . the threats they have to tackle are transitional in character like frequent ethnic clashes and boundary disputes resulting in inter-state conflict (Ayoob 1983:41-51) SECURITISATION: Securitization. and the one that has generated the most literature. I shortly introduce the concepts of „securitization‟ and „climatization‟. This definition clearly broadens the concept of national security which incorporates all issues that threaten the life of citizens.category are included a spectrum of disturbances and disruptions ranging from external wars to internal rebellions. Moreoer. as they constitute important cornerstones of this thesis. to answer this question in greater detail and in order to show what we can make of climate change as a security issue. developed by Ole Weaver. I would like to familiarize the reader with the concepts already. (1998) consider securitization as an indicator of a failure to address an issue within „normal‟ politics. which can involve traditional security/military means (Peoples and Vaughan-Williams 2010: 77). in which an issue is expressed as a security concern that requires extraordinary means. an issue can be constructed discursively as a threat to security. Once an issue is commonly referred to as an existential threat to security. indicating that a securitization of climate change might be at play. which might include more funds being made available to it (Nyman 2013). to understand how climate change is produced as a security concern. as shown above. by not relying on a fixed understanding of security. and is accepted as such by a relevant audience. However. the process of securitization is essentially a negative development. Through securitizing speech acts and securitizing moves. more politics!” Nonetheless. Yet. An advantage of such securitization is the increased attention paid to the issue. According to the Copenhagen School. The Paris School offers another framework. The Paris School argues . helping to understand the production/construction of climate change as a security issue. climate change commonly has been expressed as a substantial threat to national and human security. the Paris School has tried to move beyond the Copenhagen School.Securitization and Climatization The Copenhagen School and Paris School both represent critical security approaches. Buzan et al. The Schools respective concepts of securitization and climatization provide the theoretical basis. the so called „climatization of the security field‟. the particular issue can be considered „securitized‟. and Waever (1995) has called for “less security. securitization also is used to justify “exceptional political measures” to deal with the securitized issue. the security field is being expanded because climate change professionals and their practices. such as risk management or climate modeling.e. Moreover. Since the Paris School relies on a broader understanding of security. Climate Change Complexity 5 At the same time. migration and development. Furthermore. the Paris School adopts a crucially different understanding of the concept of security. and also includes fields such as migration and development. whether the production of climate change as a security issue should be considered a positive or negative development depends on the employed strategies and policy implications (Oels 2012: 190-191). the „security field‟ is more than just the defense sector. intelligence.that the discursive construction of climate change as a security issue certainly hints that “professionals of (in)security (i. which transform the security field and its practices (Oels 2012: 185). the Paris School argues that to understand how climate change is produced as a security issue we need to assess not only the discourse but also the policy implications and practices. Consequently. Unlike the Copenhagen School. In doing so. the Paris School understands processes of security as not necessarily negative – it depends on the practices. defense ministries) are producing climate change as a legitimate threat in their everyday practices” (Oels 2012: 185). . however. police. in contrast to the Copenhagen School. military. The Paris School contends that evidence of security transformations can so far be found within the policy fields of defense. are being included. securitization rhetoric is not inextricably linked to extraordinary measures. 2005 5.References for second chapter: 1. Indian Maritime Doctrine Integrated Defence headquarters.2005” 4. The Financial Express August 11.PR Chari. Terrorism and Indian response in NS Sisodia and C Uday Bhaskar in Emerging India.325 7. “ Security Environment” at http: //mod. 9th July 1993. Security and foreign policy perspective.nic. Ministry of Defence. “Address to the nation on the eve of the 59th independence day.David Albright and Corey Henderson. 2005) p. Alternative approaches to security (Samskriti. Spring 2005) 9. ed.332 6. “Unravelling the AQ Khan and future proliferation. 2004) . Vohra committee report submitted to Ministry of Home affairs.4) 8.in 3. p.Martin van Creveld. Third World Quarterly. Afsar Karim.194 2. government of India. On Future War (London: Brassey’s. New Delhi. 1991 p. (IDSA. 2005) p.