|
* Chapter
summary from the SIPRI Yearbook 2002: Armaments, Disarmament
and International Security (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2002)
States aspiring
to democratic governance and strong economies require capable
administrative and political structures. A key element is a well
governed security sector, which comprises the civil, political
and security institutions responsible for protecting the state
and the communities within it. Reform or transformation of the
security sector is a growing focus of international assistance.
Past security assistance programmes were often ill-conceived
and poorly implemented and resulted in outcomes that were not
supportive of either citizen security or development goals. External
forces have often supplanted the local security apparatus or,
in some cases, explicitly sought to dismantle it where it was
considered to be part of the problem.
The international community is seeking to respond in a more integrated
manner to the violent conflicts and security problems facing
states. Security sector reform is part of an attempt to develop
a more coherent framework for reducing the risk that state weakness
or failure will lead to disorder and violence. Where states are
unable to manage developments within their borders successfully,
the conditions are created for disorder and violence that may
spill over onto the territory of other states and perhaps ultimately
require an international intervention. Restoration of a viable
national capacity in the security domain, based on mechanisms
that ensure transparency and accountability, is a vital element
of the overall effort to strengthen governance. Security sector
reform aims to help states enhance the security of their citizens.
There has been a shift from state- and military-centric notions
of security to a greater emphasis on human security. This has
underscored the importance of governance issues and civilian
input into policy making.
Security sector reform has potentially wide-ranging implications
for how state security establishments are organized and for how
international security and development assistance is delivered.
These implications are only just starting to be understood and
translated into policy and are eliciting mixed reactions from
both the international actors that provide security assistance
and the recipients of aid. The Central and East European states
have responded favourably to the reform agenda, which is seen
to complement the wider economic and political reforms in which
many of them are engaged. Crucially, the prospect of integration
into NATO and ‘the West’ has provided a powerful, additional
incentive for CEE states to reform their security sector. This
cannot be matched by regional and sub-regional organizations
in Africa, Asia or Latin America. In these regions the primary
incentive for reform has been based largely on persuasion and
the use of economic assistance.
Security sector reforms are a new area of activity for international
actors, and there is still not a shared understanding at the
international level of what this term means. This has limited
the debate on the subject. Assisting in the development of such
a shared understanding should be a priority objective for the
research community.
The response of states to the 11 September terrorist attacks
on the USA may delay the development of a security sector reform
agenda. Increased importance is being placed on developing cooperation
with the armed forces, intelligence services and law-enforcement
services of other states to identify and eliminate groups and
individuals engaged in terrorist acts. There is a risk that security
sector reform will become subordinate to anti-terrorism activities
in countries where the development of this cooperation is seen
as particularly important.
|
|
