Human Security and the Disaffected of Central Asia
| Published date | 01 December 2003 |
| Date | 01 December 2003 |
| Author | John Glenn |
| DOI | 10.1177/0047117803174004 |
| Subject Matter | Journal Article |
International Relations Copyright © 2003 SAGE Publications
(London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi), Vol 17(4): 453–475
[0047–1178 (200312) 17:4; 453–475; 038933]
Human Security and the Disaffected of Central Asia
John Glenn, Southampton University, UK
Abstract
Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Central Asia has witnessed a precipitous
decline in the population’s welfare. This article argues that in order to ensure stability
within the region, the human security of the peoples of Central Asia must be improved.
To achieve such an outcome, it is argued that a Marshall Plan for contemporary times is
required. Such a plan would involve the implementation of two major strategies. First,
the policies of the international financial institutions and the trading practices between
the Central Asian states and the industrialized countries should return to the principles
of ‘embedded liberalism’ that guided the post-Second World War international economy
for three decades. Second, the debt of these countries should be substantially reduced
and, at the same time, welfare provision by these states should be raised as a result of
this debt relief.
Keywords: aid, Central Asia, economic decline, human security, Marshall Plan,
welfare
Introduction
A decade ago many analysts regarded the end of the Cold War as an opportunity
for a renaissance in security studies. During the ‘heart[-]warming afterglow of the
breaching of the Berlin Wall’, there was a general optimism that new thinking in
security could match the new times that confronted the world.1Prior to this,
security studies had been dominated by the realist school of thought with its
emphasis on the state and the attainment of security primarily through military
power.2Although there had been calls for the extension of the security agenda
from the 1970s onward, the promotion of new understandings of security was
limited by what was thought to be possible in such an antagonistic environment.3
The renaissance of security studies since the dissolution of the Soviet Union has
led to a plethora of competing perspectives. For a decade, it appeared that we were
in the realms of ‘moving from the kingdom of the Cold War and political Realism
to one whose landscape and Big Idea is not yet clear’.4However, the events of
9/11 are likely to place realism at the top of the security agenda once again, pos-
sibly preventing alternative security perspectives from influencing governmental
policy-making.5
But the events of 9/11 do not necessarily imply that we are going ‘back to the
future’ or that it is business as usual concerning our understanding of security.6
There is today an increasing awareness of the particular security issues
confronting others throughout the globe and the interdependent nature of
contemporary security issues – ‘In the modern age security cannot be obtained
r
i
unilaterally. Economically, politically, culturally, and – most important –
militarily, we live in an increasingly interdependent world. We face common
dangers and this must also promote our security in common’.7Not only is the
nature of contemporary security interdependent, but it is also complex, incor-
porating economic, environmental, military, and other aspects. The absence of
security in any one of these aspects for one community may therefore have
unintended consequences for the security of another community. The complex and
interdependent nature of security has led to calls for the promotion of a human
security approach that seeks to ‘prevent conflict and war and to maintain the
integrity of the planet’s life-support systems by eliminating the economic, social,
environmental, political, and military conditions that generate threats to the
security of people and the planet’.8
This article argues that in order to obtain stability within Central Asia and
security in the wider realm, the human security of the peoples of the region must
be improved. After 10 years of transition the Central Asian states (Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan) continue to be confronted
by similar security problems to those faced by other ‘developing’ states. The
inability of these states to provide basic welfare has led to widespread disillusion-
ment among the population, in some cases leading to a crisis of legitimacy for
their governments. Such crises have in some cases developed into full-blown civil
war or have generated insurgency movements. In 1992, Tajikistan descended into
a five-year civil war and the past few years have witnessed the birth of several
insurgency movements operating within the Central Asian region: the Islamic
Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), Hizb ut-Tahrir al-Islami (Islamic Liberation
Party), and a splinter group from this movement, Akramiyya.9
The instability within the region arises primarily because these governments
lack a sufficient degree of ‘output legitimacy’, that is, legitimacy derived from
promoting ‘the welfare of the constituency in question’.10 This article therefore
examines the economic decline and concomitant increase in levels of poverty
within Central Asia since the dissolution of the Soviet Union. This economic
decline is partly due to the disruption caused by the dissolution of the Soviet
Union, but it is also a result of the Central Asian states’ position within the world
economy, that is, their status as primarily primary goods producers. This article
takes its cue from the recent proposal by the United Kingdom’s Chancellor of the
Exchequer, Gordon Brown, for a substantial increase in aid and a new deal, a
Marshall Plan for contemporary times, for developing countries.11 His speech to
the Federal Reserve Bank has been interpreted as a commitment by the UK
government, in the aftermath of 9/11, to tackle ‘both the causes and symptoms of
terrorism’.12 Although the increased aid to the region is to be welcomed, it is also
paramount that a ‘Marshall Plan for contemporary times’ be implemented. This
would entail a relaxation of the structural adjustment policies pursued by the IMF
and World Bank as well as an exemption from the free-trade rules promoted by
these international financial institutions.
454 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 17(4)
To continue reading
Request your trial