THE RELEVANCE OF ‘NATIONAL SECURITY’ IN THE POST-COLD WAR WORLD

This article provides a conceptual analysis of the relevance and the changing meaning of "national security" in the post-Cold War world. It argues that the traditional, state-centric, and militarized definition of national security, which was dominant during the Cold War, is no longer adequate to capture the complex security challenges of the contemporary era. The study explores how the security agenda has been "widened" to include a range of non-military threats, such as terrorism, environmental degradation, and pandemics, and "deepened" to include a concern for the security of individuals ("human security") and not just the state. The research engages with the critical security studies literature and assesses the ongoing debate about whether the concept of national security should be abandoned or redefined. The paper concludes that while the concept remains a central organizing principle of state policy, its meaning has been irrevocably broadened, requiring a more holistic and multi-dimensional approach to its analysis and practice.

Is the concept of "national security" still relevant in a globalized, post-Cold War world? This paper tackles this fundamental question of security studies. The study begins by deconstructing the traditional, realist definition of national security, which equated it with the protection of the state's territorial integrity and political sovereignty from external military threats. The core of the article is an argument that this definition is now dangerously narrow. It provides a detailed analysis of the two major conceptual shifts that have challenged the traditional view. The first is the "widening" of the security agenda. The paper demonstrates how a range of non-military issues, from climate change and infectious diseases to transnational crime and terrorism, now pose direct threats to the well-being of nations and their citizens, and thus must be considered as security issues. The second shift is the "deepening" of the security agenda. The paper explores the rise of the concept of "human security," which argues that the ultimate referent object of security should be the individual, not the state, and that the greatest security threats often come from one's own state. The findings suggest that the old paradigm of national security is in a state of crisis. The paper concludes that while states will continue to be concerned with their own security, the concept itself has become much more complex and contested. A relevant understanding of national security in the 21st century, the paper argues, must be one that is comprehensive, multi-dimensional, and attentive to the security of both the state and its people.