Ministry Of

Education

Moldova State University

International Relations, Political and Administrative Sciences

Essay
International security and peace resolution
in the XXIst century

Author: Voroneanu Cristina

Scientific supervisor: Andrei Ilaciuc

Chiinu 2015

International security and peace resolution

in the XXIst century
The end of the Cold War was marked by great expectations. Many believed in the beginning
of a completely different era and thought that the never ending conflicts that marred the previous
one would slowly, but surely, become a trait of the past. The people of different nations, cultures,
religious and political beliefs were counting on the growing relations between states and their
common policies, organizations and actions in preventing new conflicts and ending the ongoing
ones, forever assuring world peace and the international security. However, after more than two
decades, we can no longer deny that our safety and peace is constantly under threat by the numerous
existing conflicts and by the real possibility of their numbers increasing in the near future. In
addition to that, besides the traditional threats to security and peace resolution, new menaces have
emerged that are permanently attacking the integrity and safety of the national states and its people.
Thus, becomes evident the necessity of reanalyzing the concept of security and the methods of
assuring peace resolution in the terms and conditions of the XXIst century.
For centuries the national and international security was perceived in terms of political and
military strength. Political leaders, strategists and common people believed that peace resolution can
be assured through power and by imposing their own superiority or by keeping a constant balance
between the great powers. We are now living in the era of a multilateral international system, of
regional and world organizations, of super powers, which have at their disposal advanced military
technologies and strategies, yet conflicts still remain on the agenda of the modern society. And while
we may admit that to an extent the former mentioned are able to minimize and prevent the disputes
from different regions of the world, their military and political strength proves to be ineffective in
deflecting the new threats we are now facing, the so-called soft threats. In that regard, the
professor Bary Buzan, former Project Director at the Copenhagen Peace Research Institute
(COPRI), points out in his book, People, States and Fear that the traditional concept of security
was too narrowly founded. He asserts that the states are not a guarantee to security, because they
follow their own personal interests. Therefore, he states that security should be viewed as a threelevel dimension which consists from individuals, states and international organizations. In another
highly-praised work of his New Patterns of Global Security in the Twenty-First Century, the
professor argues that the concept of security is not limited to the political and military dimension,
but includes at least three more: the economical, societal and the environmental dimension. He

affirms that these dimension cannot be viewed separately, since they are linked together and should
be addressed as such.
Barry Buzans theory has been proved to be accurate in the light of the new soft threats.
Military altercations are not the only issue that the states, individuals and even international
organizations are struggling with today. We are permanently threatened as well by drug and human
trafficking, terrorism, organized crime, software attacks and other major risks. As Niklas Swanstrm
successfully points out in the 2010 research Traditional and Non-Traditional Security Threats in
Central Asia: Connecting the New and the Old

(conducted for the Central Asia-Caucasus

Institute & Silk Road Studies Program CACI-SRSP), these soft threats carry large societal, political
and economic consequences in many areas, affecting not only the soft, but the hard security as
well. In light of that, does it seem a coincidence that various organizations such as NATO, ONU and
so on, along with high developed states, are constantly investing in social, cultural, sustainable
development, environmental programmes? We should ask ourselves as well whether underdeveloped
countries, where these domains are poorly organized and have few support from the state and other
political and non-political actors, are more likely to become involved in conflicts on their own
territory or not. Thus, these organizations and states greatest merit consists in acknowledging that
low incomes, low standards of life, poor education, social tensions and environmental changes are
major risk factors to the national security and by default to the international security.
The enormity and diversity of the threats that individuals, states and organizations struggle
with today makes it impossible for them to deal with them separately and to assure peace resolution
by themselves. In this globalized era the states are dependent of each other: the national markets are
connected, organized crime has spread worldwide and can be dealt with only if the national security
forces cooperate, pollution recognizes no borders and the waters and air damaged by some of the
countries affects the whole planet etc. Thus, only by uniting their forces, by cooperating and creating
common strategies and guidelines can the countries of the world solve these major, global problems
that are greatly affecting their security and stability. In order for them to deal with the new threats
the traditional hard powers should be replaced by soft powers. Force and violence cannot lead
the path to international security and peace resolution. Negotiations, cultural exchanges and
lucrative platforms for discussion for youth, politicians, researchers and academics are the way of
the future of assuring world peace.
Even though the human mentality and lifestyle changed drastically in the last decades, many
of the pasts problems still maintain to endanger our safety and security. We have learned how to
cooperate in order to achieve common goals, how to develop through joint efforts our economies,

technologies, healthcare systems etc., yet we are still unable to assure world peace and the
international security. How is it possible that after so many talks, papers, antiwar campaigns caused
by the catastrophes of the XXth century world wars people are still fighting among each other for
nations, religion, power? This is undeniably a signal that the world is either not doing something
right or isnt trying enough. For us to optimize our efforts and make our actions more effective we
need to update our views on international security and peace resolution to the realities of the XXI st
century. Therefore, our focus point should move from the military dimension towards social,
political, economic and environmental cooperation between all states of the world. Only by assuring
through joint efforts that these domains have a high level of stability and prosperity we can prevent
and minimize the soft and hard threats that are endangering our future.

Bibliography

Barry
Buzan,
People,
States
and
Fear,
p.
8,
online
source
https://defenseetsecuriteinternationale.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/people__states__and_fea
r__an_agenda_for_international_security_studies_in_the_post_cold_war_era__ecpr_classics
_.pdf ;
Barry Buzan, New Patterns of Global Security in the Twenty-First Century,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/203240647/New-Patterns-of-Global-Security-in-the-TwentyFirst-Century#scribd ;
Niklas Swanstrm Traditional and Non-Traditional Security Threats in Central Asia:
Connecting the New and the Old,
online source http://www.isn.ethz.ch/DigitalLibrary/Publications/Detail/?lang=en&id=120740.