2
democratic deficit (Held 2004: 161; 163).
2
As such, a renewed and reinvigorated global cosmopolitanism,
culminating in the basis for a new global covenant with “guiding ethical principles” and “institutional
goals”, is presented as the viable antidote to confronting the myriad of issues facing the international
community (Held 2004: 164).
3
Since its first formal articulation in the 1994 United Nations Development Programme Annual Report and
its subsequent re-articulations in the related literature– as well as in security practice such as with the
1999 NATO intervention in Kosovo– human security has been positioned as an integral component in the
transformation of political mobilization, governance, and regulation towards a more just and humane
global order based on the kinds of cosmopolitan principles, norms, and institutional structures identified
by Held. In broadening the range of issues to be prioritized under the rubric of security and deepening the
referent of security theory/practice to the level of individuals and the communities they belong to, a
growing collection of states, by explicitly promoting human security agendas, have asserted that the
needs of common people are being addressed by security regulation. Yet, despite the boldness of these
claims, mainstream critiques of human security theory/practice have largely centred on how human
security is being conceptualized, with a specific focus on how the absence of a ‘precise’ and ‘universally
accepted’ definition hinders its practical application (Paris 2001; Security Dialogue Special Section 2004).
However, from the perspective of critical security studies, there has been an awareness of the need to
interrogate the assumptions, values, and principles of human security and to evaluate how human
security has translated itself into practice from perspectives primarily concerned with ethico-political
content/consequences. Thus, a call has been made for an assessment of human security theory/practice
2
Held defines social democracy as being “committed to the principles of social justice and social
solidarity, on the one hand, and, on the other, to the core principles of liberal democratic politics: the rule
of law, political equality, and citizenship” (Held 2004: 15).
3
Equal moral worth, equal liberty, equal political status, collective decision-making about public affairs,
amelioration of urgent need, development for all, and environmental sustainability are presented as the
guiding ethical principles of this order while, rule of law, political equality, democratic politics, global social
justice, social solidarity and community, economic efficiency, and global ecological balance are defined
as the primary institutional goals (Held 2004: 164).
Convention