The analysis of the relationship between a state and a country is an essential component to understanding the nature of human security with respect to international relations. The evaluation also assists in contrasting views between state-centric and traditional mechanisms of national security. The traditional approach is a referent of the ability of a nation to protect itself from external threats. Therefore, interests involving sub-national groups and individuals are subordinate to those of the state. National interests help in affirming the “other” as a significant element of understanding the self and foreign aspects. David Campbell in his article Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and Politics of Identity assesses political and philosophical implications of the emergence of the U.S. Foreign Policy in an intriguing depiction of the role that identity plays in shaping global relations. This essay exacts a compelling inquiry into the nature of the identity of the United States as an international leader in global relations.
According to Campell (36), identity is a crucial dimension of a human being or legal entity. It is necessary and inescapable for self-existence. He adds that identity is as a result of repetitive acts instead of one founding activity. When assessing the issue of foreign policy it is clear that a state’s identity is embedded in the representation of insecurity or danger. Sociology outlines that a nation does not emerge before the state rather it is the state that comes before a country. The identity of the people is used to construct the legitimacy of a nation as well as its subsequent practices.
Human security must be people-centered to understand the elements of international insecurity. The approaches in human security focus on protecting a country from external threats as well as internal aggressions such as infectious illnesses, transnational terrorism, economic deprivation, and environmental pollution (Campbell, 39). State identity and the interpretations of danger and security are utilized to evaluate the content of the United States foreign policy. Occurrences such as the collapse of Russia and the September 11 attacks have forced America to reorient its international relations to address the Post-Cold War challenges and the ongoing issues of terrorism.
The ultimate directive of the analysis instituted by David Campbell is to create a concise and viable examination of the depiction of fear created in national security. The role that terminology, symbolism, and ideology play in establishing the material practice of state policy and identity are the basis for formulating a foreign policy that coincides with the interest of the country. The crisis of identity is the root cause of many problems in the national and local governments as well as the modern-day dilemmas that plague individuals. The ability of a society to live as a state is only possible when the members conduct themselves as an imagined community (Campbell, 43).
The human security approach tries to solve the security problem by re-conceptualizing the ideology of the imagined society. It acts as an attempt to redefine the postulates of otherness that develop the identity of the nation and allows a substantial mechanism to attain security for the state and individuals. The examination of America as an entity that utilizes its traits and practices to formulate foreign policies helps in breaking down the different components of an identity such as otherness, fear, and danger. Campbell’s conclusions provide an unconventional analysis of international political transformations that have taken place over the last decades (Campbell, 51). The human security approach is a global concept that will reconcile urgent needs to change traditional security notions to address crucial problems involving vulnerable groups and world poverty.
Work Cited
Campbell, David. Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity, pages 35-52, 1998. Print.
