stakeholders.’ Thus, sitting on coordinating bodies that include one side of an armed conflict and not
another may jeopardize the ability of these civic groups to consent to join an evolving human security
roundtable. Sometimes civil society develops its own representative/coordination body in order to insulate
itself from direct combatants.
Because of their intimate and often localized perspectives, civil society groups are diverse and regularly
disagree on key issues. However, the key benefit for outsiders expending time and effort in developing
these fora is that the process of listening has a validating effect. To be listened to and have one’s opinion
considered addresses the last of the human security pillars: dignity. That will have a positive ripple effect
on more effective humanitarian programs which meet human need and ultimately lead to a reduction in
violence and fear.
Recommendation:
Understanding the principles of human security will help reframe discussions and actions toward a ‘people
first’ approach, through resources including case studies of human security and a training manual entitled
Handbook on Human Security: A Civil-Military-Police Curriculum. Jointly written by civil society and
members of the police and military security sector, this curriculum provides a helpful starting point for all
sectors wishing to explore human centered security. Specific recommendations…
1. . . for the military, understand the operational requirements, limitations, and constraints of civic
groups in conflict affected areas by using the above-mentioned curriculum to develop multi-
stakeholder human security processes.
2. . . for civil society, use the above-mentioned curriculum to become familiar with various
approaches to security. In addition, seek to understand the points of contact and liaison with
the security sector. If it is too risky to engage these actors directly, develop representative
structure whose role it is to represent the local perspective on any security coordinating body.
Implications:
To ignore a people centric human security approach is to make security decisions based on an incomplete
perspective and understanding of any given location. To do so increases the risks of not addressing civilian
fears, ignoring their basic needs, and exacerbating the indignity they feel. This will, in the best case, fail
to secure the peace and, in the worst case, exacerbate an already violence-prone situation.
Event Description:
This lesson is based on personal experience in Afghanistan working as a peacebuilding mentor, researcher,
and trainer for Oxfam GB (Great Britain) between September 2011 and October 2012 in Afghanistan.
While in Kabul, I was contracted with Oxfam Novib to conduct a training and baseline study in the first
half of 2012 for the Building Afghan Peace Locally (BAPL) project.
As Senior Advisor for Human Security at the Alliance for Peacebuilding, one of our main reference points
is the Human Security Curriculum and Case Studies that were developed in conjunction with police,
military, and NGO personnel and released in December of 2015.
Lesson Author: Jonathan Rudy, Peacemaker in Residence at Elizabethtown College;
Senior Advisor for Human Security at the Alliance for Peacebuilding
Table of Contents | Quick Look | Contact PKSOI
6