The interconnection of International Security (IS), National Security (NS), and Internal Physical Security (IS) is a complex issue influenced by multidimensional factors. The understanding of this chained interconnection has evolved through the contributions of scholars who have shaped theories in the disciplines of International Relations, Security, Psychology, and Sociology.
The theories embraced by the author, the theories of Realism, the Human-Centred Security, the Building, and the Hierarchy of Needs, they provide a strong analytical framework to highlight the relationship between the Security Pillars. In the Southeast European region, and in particular in the geostrategic security axis between Greece and Cyprus, this interconnection is shaped by geopolitical, economic, religious and cultural factors, while at the same time being influenced through psychological and sociological causes.
The purpose of this article is to communicate the interdependence between the three pillars (SD, EA, FA) in order to help actors at every level of the sector to appropriate the multidimensional nature of the social good of security through the interactive – endogenous and at the same time exogenous[1] – influence it has. In conclusion, contributing to a universally expanded and rational way of understanding and managing professional status in the contemporary working environment.
Realistic Approach
Realism as a school of thought in International Relations was established by thinkers such as Thucydides, Thomas Hobbes and Hans Morgenthau. It focuses on the struggle for power and the pursuit of security, by actors, unfolding within an anarchic international system.
In the dialogue of the Miles, the strong impose their will on the weak[2]. This view reflects the quintessentia[3] of power (as a generator of security)[4] in international relations, where states seek to strengthen their position vis-à-vis their opponents. Hans Morgenthau[5] argues that politics is a struggle for power, embedded in human nature, complementing the pursuit of EA as central to the behaviour of actors by guiding their decisions and actions in the international arena.
Therefore, SS – as an extension of PA – is inextricably linked to SD, as the pursuit of the former often leads actors (governmental & private) to actions that affect international stability and balance of power. International stability is disrupted through systematic or sometimes deceptive pursuit of increased power and security by one state leading to scepticism by other actors. Consequently causing “SecurityDilemmas” as identified and developed by John Herz[6].
Psychological and Sociological Background
The interconnection between the Safety Pillars is analysed in more detail through Psychological and Sociological theories. These disciplines examine how the perception of threats and the sense of security influence the behaviour of actors and societies as a whole. The theory of Human-centred security theory (Human Security)[7] focuses on the security of the individual and the community, recognising that EA is incomplete without the protection of individual rights(Human Rights) and social well-being which starts from the level of the individual’s PA against threats such as violence, conflict, and economic and social threats such as poverty, unemployment and natural disasters.
Abraham Maslow[8], with his psychological theory of the Hierarchy of Needs, can be included in this context, recognizing security as one of the basic human needs. Security in Maslow’s pyramid includes protection from physical and psychological threats, economic stability, health security and protection of property. In other words, security as a social good presupposes the fulfilment of basic needs. Its lack stimulates fear, insecurity and social disintegration, negatively affecting (in the medium/long term) the EA & SD.
In addition, influential sociological theories contribute a more thorough understanding of security, focusing on the organizational frameworks and operational methodologies of social cohesion and political stability. Anthony Giddens[9], with hisStructurationTheory, points out that social order and stability is the result of the interaction between individual actions and social structures. Therefore, it can be said that security at both the national and international level depends on the ability of actors to maintain high levels of PD through social cohesion and political-economic stability.
Interconnection of Safety Pillars
- International Security – The main focus of IC is on the prevention and management of conflicts and threats that arise between actors. At the international level, crises and conflicts directly affect SS & SD of states. As mentioned earlier, international relations is a constant struggle for power, and the actions of one actor at this level can trigger chain reactions from other actors. The crisis in Ukraine and the situation in the Gaza Strip illustrate how international developments affect the wider region of South East Europe and, by extension, the EA & FTA of the Greece-Cyprus axis.
- National Security – EA focuses on protecting the sovereignty and integrity of a state. Its pursuit includes security actions at the economic, political, and diplomatic levels to enhance state power and internal stability. Greece’s national security policies, through participation in organizations such as the UN, the WHO, NATO, transnational alliances, and participation in international initiatives such as the Montreux Document[10] are indicative of efforts to ensure EA in an unstable international environment with the ultimate goal of international stability, utilizing institutions, organs, and within the spheres of the IA & FA.
- Physical Security – Physical Security concerns the protection of citizens and infrastructure from threats such as terrorism in all its forms, organised and non-organised crime and all kinds of disasters. Barry Buzan‘s theory of security [11] stresses that the good in question is not limited to one dimension but includes forms such as political, economic, social, military, and environmental security. As an extension of Buzan’s theory, FA, shared between the public and private sectors, as an integral subset, concerns the protection of citizens and critical infrastructure from threats that can disrupt social stability and daily life with national and international consequences.
The approach to security in the Human Security theory of Ken Booth and Richard Wyn Jones[12] focuses on the security of the individual and the community. Citizens’ sense of security and trust in security institutions and structures affect social cohesion and national stability. As we have seen in Maslow’s theory , the lack of it can cause fear, insecurity and social disintegration, negatively affecting EA & AD.
In conclusion, FA shows vice versa interactio[13] with EA & DA linking all three pillars under the umbrella of “Pan Security“[14]. It influences and is influenced in a multidimensional way by National and International factors potentially increasing effectiveness against natural threats.
Conclusion
The interconnection between DA, EA, & PA is a complex phenomenon, which is influenced by a variety of factors. The realist school of thought emphasizes the struggle for power and security as central to state behavior, while psychological and sociological theories offer a deeper understanding of the individual and social dimensions of security, with an emphasis on the protection of rights and social well-being.
The analysis leads to the conclusion that FA is alapis angularis[15] for EA and AD. The ability of states to maintain internal stability and promote social cohesion is critical to address threats at all levels. Security is not unidimensional but multidimensional, influenced by political, economic, religious and cultural factors, particularly in the South-Eastern European region.
Finally, the interdependence and interactive nature of the three security pillars is highlighted, resulting from a holistic approach to understanding them, as anachronistic individual approaches prove inadequate to address the multidimensional challenges of the modern world. Achieving stability and prosperity requires coordinated efforts and collective cooperation of actors at all levels.
One-way approaches are the only way to achieve the universally expanded and rational way of thinking and management in the field of security. As it turns out, what unfolds today at international and national level will affect our working environment tomorrow and vice versa. Every executive, regardless of rank, is an essential part of the “All Security” chain mechanism.
“Be prepared and the competent sciences.”
Bibliography
Barry Buzan, Ole Wæver, Jaap de Wilde (1998) Security: A New Framework for Analysis, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Booth, K. and Wyn Jones, R. (1995) ‘Security and Emancipation’, Review of International Studies, 17(4), pp. 313-326.
Giddens, A. (1984) The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Huntington, S.P., 1996, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, New York: Simon & Schuster.
Hobbes, T. (1651). Leviathan. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Maslow, A. H. (1943).’A Theory of Human Motivation’, Psychological Review, 50(4), pp. 370-396.
Maslow, A. H. (1954) Motivation and Personality, New York: Harper.
Morgenthau, H. J. (1948) Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Switzerland & International Committee of the Red Cross, 2008, The Montreux Document.
Thucydides (431 BCE), History of the Peloponnesian War, Translated by R. Warner (1954), New York: Penguin Books.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (1994) Human Development Report 1994: New Dimensions of Human Security, New York: Oxford University Press.
Waltz, K. N. (1979) The Theory of International Politics. reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
[1] The physical security space is endogenously influenced by internal processes, phenomena and changes that are diffused to the external spheres of EA and MA, while exogenous actions from EA and MA systems exert a reverse influence on physical security.
[2] The Dialogue of Miles, one of the most famous passages in Thucydides’ History. The dialogue remains timeless, offering valuable lessons in understanding power relations, political ethics and the nature of international relations.
[3] Latin term (quintessence).
[4] Without Power we cannot create Security.
[5] Hans Morgenthau, a leading theorist of Political Realism, in Politics Among Nations analyses politics as a struggle for power, stressing that the pursuit of national security is central to the behaviour of states.
[6] John Herz introduced the “security dilemma,” where the pursuit of security by one state causes insecurity in others, creating a cycle of insecurity. His work is fundamental to understanding the relationship between EA & SD. A recent example is Russian skepticism about the provision of NATO weapons to Ukraine, linking the PA (NATO) level to the EA (member states) level vis-à-vis Russia.
[7] The concept of people-centred security was developed by the United Nations in the 1990s. It was formally introduced in 1994 in the UNDP’s Human Development Report, which emphasized the importance of the security of the individual over and above the security of the state.
[8] Abraham Maslow, an American psychologist, is known for his Hierarchy of Needs theory, which describes five levels of needs in the pyramid of self-actualization. The theory was published in 1943 in the article “A Theory of Human Motivation”.
[9] Anthony Giddens, one of the most important modern sociologists, developed the theory of Structure, which points out that social order and stability are the result of the interaction between individual actions and social structures. His theory explains how social structures and human actions interact and co-shape social reality.
[10] The Montreux Document provides guidance on the legal obligations and good practices of states regarding security services and private militaries (PMSCs) in armed conflict.
[11] Buzan, a leading security theorist, in “People, States, and Fear”, argues that security goes beyond the military dimension and includes many aspects, contributing to a broader understanding of the interconnection between National, International and Physical security.
[12] Ken Booth and Richard Wyn Jones, through Critical Security Studies, promoted “People-Centred Security,” focusing on individual and community security, extending and critically analysing the concept of human security introduced by the UNDP in 1994.
[13] Latin term (reverse interaction).
[14] Term attributed by the author (Total Security).
[15] Latin term (cornerstone)