Non-traditional Notion of security is known as:

Question

Accepted Answer

The correct option is 4:

The correct option is 4: Security of humanity.

The field of International Relations often divides the concept of security into two broad categories: Traditional and Non-Traditional. The **Traditional Notion of Security** is state-centric and military-focused, primarily concerning the protection of a country's sovereignty, territory, and government from external military threats. In contrast, the **Non-Traditional Notion of Security** represents a fundamental shift in focus, moving "from the security of the state to the security of the individual." This person-centric approach is encapsulated by the term "Security of humanity" or, more commonly, **Human Security**. The concept of Human Security was notably popularized by the UNDP's 1994 Human Development Report, which defined it as encompassing seven aspects: economic, food, health, environmental, personal, community, and political security. It is about protecting the vital core of all human lives from critical and pervasive threats, such as poverty, disease, hunger, natural disasters, human rights violations, and internal conflict. By focusing on people's safety and well-being rather than just the state's military capabilities, the non-traditional approach views threats as non-military in nature (e.g., pandemics, climate change, transnational terrorism) and emphasizes cooperation and development over confrontation. Therefore, when discussing non-traditional security, the ultimate reference point is the safety, survival, and dignity of humanity.

The incorrect option is 1:

Security of territory (territorial security) is the cornerstone of the **Traditional Notion of Security**. This approach prioritizes the defense of a nation's borders, physical integrity, and sovereignty against military invasion or external aggression. The traditional model assumes that the biggest threats to a nation's survival come from other countries, and thus emphasizes military buildup, alliances, and deterrence. Non-traditional security, however, broadens the scope far beyond geographical defense to include threats that are internal, environmental, or related to human welfare, making territorial security a too narrow and state-focused definition for the non-traditional paradigm.

The incorrect option is 2:

Security of institutions refers to the stability and continuation of a country's governance structures, such as the legislature, judiciary, and executive branches. While stable institutions are crucial for a functioning state and certainly contribute to overall security, they are primarily objects of security within the **Traditional** or state-centric framework, alongside the government itself. Protecting these structures often involves internal security measures, but the concept does not fully capture the breadth of the non-traditional security agenda. Non-traditional security is concerned with threats that institutions may fail to address (like poverty or environmental degradation), rather than simply the protection of the institutions themselves.

The incorrect option is 3:

Security of government is closely linked to the Traditional Notion of Security, as a secure government is essential for maintaining state sovereignty and order. In the traditional view, the survival and authority of the ruling regime are often equated with the security of the state itself. However, the non-traditional security perspective frequently critiques this view, arguing that a government may be secure while its citizens are deeply insecure (e.g., due to poverty or oppression). Human Security, the non-traditional concept, sometimes even views a government as the *source* of insecurity for its people, such as in cases of civil war or state repression. Therefore, protecting the government is a characteristic of traditional security, not the defining principle of the non-traditional approach.