Dynamics of International Security

In the case of security, the discussion is about the pursuit of freedom from threat. When this
discussion is in the context of the international system, security is about the ability of states and
societies to maintain their independent identity and their functional integrity.

(Barry Buzan)

Understanding the Evolving Concept of Security

The concept of security has long been a subject of debate among scholars, with many agreeing that
it is a “contested concept.” While there is a consensus that security implies freedom from threats
to core values, whether for individuals or groups—there remains significant disagreement about
the focus of security studies. Should the primary concern be the security of the individual, the
nation, the international community, or the global system? These questions have shaped the
discourse on security, particularly in the post-Cold War era, as the traditional understanding of
security has expanded to include a broader range of concerns.

The Traditional Notion of National Security

For much of the Cold War period, the idea of security was synonymous with national security,
primarily defined in militarized terms. The focus during this time was on the military capabilities
that states needed to develop in order to defend against perceived threats. Both academic and policy
discussions were centered on how nations could strengthen their defense systems and secure their
borders from external aggression. This narrow focus on military strength was considered the
dominant paradigm in security studies, as it reflected the tense geopolitical environment of the
Cold War.

However, this traditional view of national security faced criticism for being too narrow and
ethnocentric. Focusing almost exclusively on military threats and state actors, it ignored other
crucial security dimensions that affect both individuals and global communities. As the world
changed, especially in the post-Cold War era, scholars and policymakers began to argue for a
broader, more comprehensive understanding of what security entails.

The Expansion of the Security Concept

One of the leading voices advocating for a more expansive understanding of security is Barry
Buzan, who in his seminal work People, States, and Fear (1983), argued that security should
encompass not only military threats but also political, economic, societal, and environmental
concerns. Buzan’s framework suggests that security is not confined to national borders or military
might; instead, it must also take into account the well-being of people, the stability of economies,
and the health of the environment. According to Buzan, the interdependence of nations in the
global system makes it necessary to move beyond a narrow national security focus and consider
broader international and global security issues.

Buzan’s expanded concept raises critical questions about the compatibility of national and
international security. Can states pursue their own security while also contributing to international
cooperation? Is the global system structured in a way that encourages nations to think beyond their
own borders and act in a cooperative, rather than competitive, manner? These questions highlight
the complexity of security in the modern world, where threats are no longer confined to traditional
military conflicts but also include challenges such as climate change, economic instability, and
transnational terrorism.

Globalization and the Changing Nature of Security

The process of globalization has significantly altered the landscape of security studies. As the
world becomes increasingly interconnected, new risks have emerged that are beyond the control
of individual nation-states. Issues such as international terrorism, global warming, cyber conflict,
and the proliferation of nuclear weapons are threats that transcend national boundaries and require
a coordinated, global response. These global security challenges suggest that traditional notions of
national security, which focus on state-centered military power, are no longer sufficient in
addressing the complex risks facing the world today.

Some scholars argue that the emergence of a global society in the post-Cold War era diminishes
the relevance of national security. They point to the fragmentation of the nation-state and argue
that security studies should shift focus from state-level concerns to the global society as a whole.
The risks associated with globalization, such as economic instability and environmental
degradation, affect all countries and populations, making it imperative to think of security in global
terms.

Post-9/11 and the New Security Agenda

The events of September 11, 2001, marked a turning point in the global security agenda. In the
aftermath of the terrorist attacks, the focus of security shifted from state-on-state warfare to
addressing threats posed by non-state actors, such as terrorist organizations. Jonathan Friedman
notes that the post-9/11 era has seen an increase in globalized violence, with conflicts becoming
more fragmented and involving sub-state actors. This new era of violence, characterized by
globally networked and financed sub-state conflicts, presents a challenge for nation-states, which
are now just one actor among many in the security landscape.

In this context, security is no longer about wars between states but rather about managing a
complex web of conflicts that involve multiple actors and are often transnational in nature. The
post-9/11 world has introduced new risks and uncertainties, making it clear that security in the 21st
century is far more complex than the traditional state-centric view.

The Evolution of Security: Traditional and Non-Traditional Dimensions

Security has always been a central theme in international relations, shaping the interactions
between states for centuries. Traditionally, security was understood in terms of deterrence against
external aggression, with a primary focus on safeguarding a state's borders from military threats.
Throughout history, from Sun Tzu's teachings to Clausewitz's writings, this militaristic view of
security has dominated the thinking of rulers and governments. Monarchies, empires, and modern
states have built powerful militaries to ensure their sovereignty and independence. However, in
the modern era, the concept of security has expanded significantly, incorporating multiple
dimensions beyond mere military defense. Eminent scholars, like Barry Buzan, argue that security
today encompasses political, economic, societal, environmental, cyber, and human dimensions,
forming a comprehensive and multifaceted understanding of security.

Traditional Security: Securing Borders through Military Power

For much of human history, security was synonymous with military power. States invested in large
armies, sophisticated weapons, and modernized troops to defend their territories from external
enemies. The ability to secure borders and maintain independence was seen as the primary function
of the state, leading to the development of vast defense infrastructures. As Barry Buzan notes,
security in this context referred to the capability of a state to maintain its independence, ideology,
and functional integrity through the use of force, if necessary.

While traditional security remains relevant today, the exclusive focus on military strength is no
longer sufficient to address the complex and multifaceted threats facing modern states. Since the
end of the Cold War in 1991, scholars and policymakers have begun to question the narrowness
of traditional security concepts, particularly in light of the ever-changing nature of global conflicts
and the emergence of new security challenges that transcend national borders.

Non-Traditional Security:

Definitions

"Non-traditional security encompasses challenges to the survival and well-being of peoples and
states that arise primarily out of non-military sources and cannot be resolved by military force
alone.“ - Amitav Acharya

"Non-traditional security (NTS) issues are challenges to the survival and well-being of peoples
and states that arise primarily out of non-military sources, such as climate change, infectious
diseases, natural disasters, irregular migration, food shortages, people smuggling, drug trafficking,
and transnational crime.” -Mely Caballero-Anthony

Political Security: Stability and Governance

Political security refers to the stability and continuity of governance within a state, ensuring the
peaceful transfer of power and maintaining political stability. It is a crucial pillar of modern
security, as political stability often underpins a country's ability to project power and influence on
the global stage. For example, the United States has maintained global dominance largely due to
its long-standing tradition of political security, characterized by peaceful transitions of power since
1797. Similarly, China’s economic rise can be attributed to its political stability, which has fostered
business confidence and economic growth since the late 20th century.

In contrast, countries like Pakistan have faced significant political instability, with frequent
changes of government, weak political institutions, and polarization disrupting governance. As a
result, Pakistan has struggled to achieve the level of political security necessary for comprehensive
national security. For Pakistan, achieving political stability and ensuring a peaceful transfer of
power are crucial steps toward addressing its broader security challenges.

Economic Security: The Foundation of National Power

Economic security has become a cornerstone of non-traditional security in the 21st century. A
strong, stable economy not only improves the quality of life for a nation's citizens but also enhances
its standing in the international community. The economic reforms initiated by China's President
Deng Xiaoping in the late 20th century are a prime example of how economic security can propel
a nation to global prominence. China's rapid economic growth, with a GDP now standing at
approximately $19 trillion, has lifted 900 million people out of poverty and solidified China’s
influence on the global stage through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the
Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and BRICS Plus.

Conversely, Pakistan’s economic challenges—marked by deficits, inflation, and frequent reliance

on International Monetary Fund (IMF) bailouts—have weakened its position internationally.
Despite early economic successes in the 1950s and 1960s, poor fiscal management and
inconsistent economic policies have hampered Pakistan's economic security. To regain its footing,
Pakistan needs a robust and sustainable economic strategy that prioritizes growth, stability, and
poverty reduction.

Societal Security: Promoting Unity and Coexistence

Societal security focuses on the peaceful coexistence of various communities, ethnicities, and
religious groups within a state. In an increasingly interconnected world, fostering tolerance and
unity among diverse populations is critical for maintaining internal stability.

The concept of societal security has gained traction in recent years. This perspective focuses on
the security of communities, particularly ethno-national groups, rather than states. As globalization
leads to increased integration in regions such as Europe, and fragmentation in others like the former
Soviet Union , societal security analysts argue that more attention should be given to the stability
and security of communities within larger political frameworks.

Countries like Singapore have successfully promoted societal security through policies that
encourage peaceful coexistence and mutual respect among different cultural and religious groups.

In Pakistan, however, growing intolerance and polarization have undermined societal security.
Ethnic and sectarian tensions have eroded the fabric of national unity, leading to internal conflicts
and instability. To address these challenges, Pakistan must adopt a model of peaceful coexistence,
emphasizing tolerance, debate, and acceptance to achieve societal peace.
Environmental Security: Addressing Global Challenges

In the 21st century, environmental security has emerged as a critical component of national and
international security. Climate change, global warming, and environmental degradation pose
existential threats to countries worldwide. Rising temperatures, melting glaciers, urban flooding,
and deforestation are not only ecological issues but also drivers of political and economic crises.
Pakistan, ranked as the fifth most vulnerable country in the Global Climate Index (2023), faces
significant environmental challenges that could exacerbate its existing security concerns.

To mitigate these risks, Pakistan needs a comprehensive environmental security framework that
addresses climate change, food security, and water security. Both governmental and individual-
level efforts are required to combat environmental degradation and ensure long-term sustainability.

Cyber Security: Defending Against Modern Threats

In the age of artificial intelligence, big data, and biotechnology, cyber security has become a vital
aspect of national security. The increasing reliance on digital infrastructure makes countries
vulnerable to cyberattacks, which can disrupt political systems, spread misinformation, and cause
economic losses. Without robust cyber security measures, states are at risk of being destabilized
by external actors and internal threats.

Recognizing the importance of cyber security, Pakistan introduced its first National Cyber Security
Policy (2021). However, implementing this policy effectively is crucial for safeguarding the
country’s digital infrastructure and preventing cyberattacks that could undermine political stability
and economic security.

Human Security: Prioritizing Individual Well-Being

Human security, focuses on ensuring that individuals have access to basic necessities such as
education, healthcare, and other fundamental rights. Human security is closely linked to political
and economic stability, as a nation that fails to provide for the well-being of its citizens risks social
unrest and instability.

As security concerns have evolved, there has been growing interest in the concept of human
security, which shifts the focus from states to individuals. Scholars like Kofi Annan and Amitav
Acharya have emphasized the importance of viewing individuals as the central focus of security
analysis. Human security is concerned with ensuring freedom from fear and want for all people,
regardless of their nationality. This approach contrasts sharply with the traditional view of security
as something that is primarily the responsibility of states.

Unfortunately, Pakistan has seen a decline in human security since the 1990s, with inadequate
access to essential services and growing inequality. Without addressing these issues, Pakistan’s
long-term security and development prospects remain uncertain.
The concept of security has evolved dramatically from its traditional focus on military deterrence
to a more comprehensive understanding that encompasses political, economic, societal,
environmental, cyber, and human dimensions. As global threats become increasingly complex and
interconnected, states must adopt a holistic approach to security that addresses both traditional and
non-traditional challenges. For Pakistan, achieving comprehensive security will require political
stability, economic reform, societal unity, environmental sustainability, cyber resilience, and a
renewed commitment to human security. By addressing these multifaceted security concerns,
Pakistan can enhance its standing in the international community and ensure a more secure and
prosperous future.

Power Transition Theory

The international political landscape is continuously evolving, with emerging powers challenging
the status quo of global governance. One of the key frameworks to understand such shifts in global
dominance is Power Transition Theory (PTT), a theory that explains how rising powers can alter
the global order, often leading to significant geopolitical shifts.

Power Transition Theory was developed by political scientist A.F.K. Organski in the 1950s. It is
primarily concerned with the dynamics of conflict and cooperation between dominant and rising
global powers. According to PTT, international order is stable when the leading global power, or
hegemon, is clearly more powerful than any potential challengers. However, when a rising power
begins to close the gap with the hegemon, the likelihood of conflict increases. The theory argues
that this is because the dominant power (in this case, the United States) seeks to maintain its
privileged position, while the rising power (China) aims to reshape the international system in its
favor.

Power Transition Theory: Dynamics of International Relations

Power transition, as articulated in Kenneth Organski’s seminal work World Politics, is a crucial
concept in understanding international relations. It refers to the processes and dynamics that occur
when significant national power increases within a major nation, particularly in terms of territorial
and demographic size, driven by rapid economic development. This theory encapsulates several
vital aspects, particularly the implications of growing national power on the international system
and the hegemonic position of dominant nations.

Historically, the balance of power has shifted due to the ambitions of powerful nations striving for
dominance in the international arena. The resulting struggles among these nations have often led
to great power wars, fundamentally altering international leadership and the structure of global
systems. In an independent world of sovereign nations, power is unevenly distributed; some
countries possess greater power due to their size and developmental level. Organski notes that the
most powerful nation heads an international order that encompasses other major and minor nations.
Stability and peace typically prevail when the dominant nation, alongside its powerful allies,
maintains control over this international order through established political, economic, and security
institutions.
However, the nature of international relations is inherently dynamic. Changes in national power
can challenge the existing order, particularly when second-ranked nations express dissatisfaction
with the current international system. This dissatisfaction can spur efforts to alter the status quo, a
phenomenon that gained prominence during the industrial age as nations industrialized and
increased their power. Robert Gilpin, in War and Change in World Politics, expands on this idea,
positing that the ambitions of expanding nations inevitably lead to confrontations with the
dominant nation and its allies regarding the existing rules of the international system. When
peaceful negotiations fail, these confrontations can escalate into what Gilpin terms "hegemonic
war," a primary mechanism through which great powers resolve their differences or establish a
new international order.

The transition from peace to conflict in this context is illustrated by the relationship between
dominant and potential contender nations. Initially, the hegemonic nation enjoys a substantial
advantage, maintaining a state free from great-power wars. However, as the contender experiences
rapid economic growth, the power dynamics begin to shift, leading to increased tension. Organski
and Jacek Kugler suggest that these shifts in power distribution create conditions ripe for conflict.
When the gap in national power narrows, the likelihood of war escalates. The dominant nation
may choose to preemptively strike against the rising contender or, conversely, the contender might
initiate a conflict, believing that the dominant power is intent on hindering its ascent.

The outcomes of these power transitions are significant. Should the contender succeed in its
military endeavors and surpass the dominant nation, it can usher in a new international order. Thus,
power transition theory provides a lens through which to analyze the complexities of international
relations, particularly the inevitable struggles for dominance that shape global politics.

The Dynamics of Power Transition: A Focus on Contenders in the International System

Power transition, as articulated by A.F.K. Organski, is a critical concept that describes the
relationship between an established international system leader and a potential contender. This
relationship is characterized by the change or creation of an international order. It is important to
distinguish power transition from interstate rivalries, as the latter may not necessarily involve a
competition for control over the international system.
To understand the contenders for global leadership, we can apply a preliminary filter to separate
obvious non-contenders from potential challengers. Notably, European great powers, such as Great
Britain and France, as well as Japan, can be excluded from this pool of possible contenders. Great
Britain, having long surrendered its hegemonic position, has become a "loyal lieutenant" to the
United States. Similarly, France has lost its hegemonic status, often critiquing U.S. policies but
remaining a "loyal dissident" within the U.S.-led order. The European Union (EU) consists of
states that are largely allies of the U.S. and, by extension, supporters of the U.S.-led international
order, posing no significant threat to it. Germany and Japan have transformed into firm supporters
of this order and do not aspire to contend with the United States for global leadership.
Japan's historical context is particularly noteworthy. During World War II, Japan sought to
establish a regional order in East and Southeast Asia. This ambition led to a power transition
between Japan and China, historically the dominant power in the region. Japan's imperial
aspirations, fueled by industrialization, resulted in military conquests and a temporary shift in the
regional order. However, the current dynamic between Japan and China reveals that both nations
are now significant powers vying for influence in East Asia. Despite this competition, Japan
remains an ally of the U.S., indicating that the rivalry is secondary to the overarching U.S.-China
relationship.
The discussion extends to the second-tier nations, commonly referred to as the BRIC countries:
Brazil, Russia, India, and China. The BRIC nations gained prominence following a 2001 report by
Goldman Sachs, which predicted their rising significance due to their vast landmass, substantial
populations, and rapid economic development. However, questions arise regarding which of these
nations, if any, could realistically emerge as a contender for global leadership.
Russia, despite its historical status as a superpower, has transitioned from being a Cold War
adversary of the United States to a dissatisfied second-ranked nation. Its unresolved political
challenges and tenuous relationship with the West prevent it from being a viable contender for
global leadership. Similarly, India faces insurmountable challenges, including internal
fragmentation and regional tensions with Pakistan and China. While India may play a role in
balancing power dynamics in the region, it does not possess the unity or strategic direction needed
for global leadership.
Brazil, on the other hand, has a strong potential to become a leading power in South America. Its
abundant natural resources, stable political system, and lack of significant territorial disputes
position it favorably. However, Brazil does not aim to challenge U.S. leadership on a global scale,
focusing instead on regional prominence while maintaining cooperative relations with the United
States.
Ultimately, the only nation that emerges as a serious contender for global leadership is China.
Unlike the other BRIC nations, China is a dissatisfied second-ranked power that has historically
rejected the U.S.-led international order. With its rapid economic development and a projected
GDP growth that could dwarf that of the United States and the European Union, China presents
itself as a formidable contender. The Chinese government is poised to offer political, economic,
and cultural alternatives to the world, reflecting its aspirations for global leadership.
while several nations may emerge as influential players in the international arena, only China
possesses the necessary attributes and ambitions to contend for global leadership. The critical
question moving forward is not whether China can rise to power, but how it will navigate its ascent
within the existing power structure dominated by the United States.
References
Baylis, John, and Steve Smith. The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to
International Relations. 8th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
Bukhari, Sher Ali. "Non-traditional Security Threats." [Name of the Newspaper], July 15, 2024.
Opinions, Columns.
Lai, David. "U.S.-China Power Transition: From Potential to Reality." In The United States and
China in Power Transition, edited by Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College, 2011.]
Yilmaz, Serafettin, and Wang Xiangyu. "Power Transition Theory Revisited: When Rising China
Meets Dissatisfied United States." World Scientific Publishing, 2019.