Why should a professional military engage withissues clustered under the label of

“Non-Traditional Security”?

INTRODUCTION

Security–Insecurity is defined in relation to vulnerabilities – bothinternal and external – that threaten or have the potential to bring

down or weaken state structures, both territorial and institutional, andgoverning regimes1

September 11 attacks, 2001; Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARs),

2003; Boxing Day Tsunami, 2004; Mumbai Terrorist attack, 2008; Global Financial

Crisis, 2009.

Since the end of Cold War in 1991, the world has been confronted with new

security challenges and have forced nation-state to view “security” with a new set of

lens. Juxtapose that with the effects of globalisation, legitimate governments are

finding the task of providing a secure environment for her people getting more and

more complex.

Traditional/ Realist view of security has always been narrowed. It has always

viewed security in “geo-political terms, encompassing aspects such as deterrence,

power balance and military strategy”.2 It concerns itself with the preservation of a

nation's territorial integrity against other state actors and against an foreign military

force. It is the preservation of a state sovereignty through the prosecution of a full

conflict war, and other than the traditional foreign policy, the primary state institution

to maintain that state sovereignty is a legitimate, professional military.

However, with war being a less likely scenario in our globalization world, and

with Nation-States preferring to wield other elements of national power to further its

1 Mohammed Ayoob. (1995). The Third World Security Predicament: State Making, RegionalConflict and The International System. Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder, CO.

2 Andrew T.H. Tan, J.D. Kenneth Boutin, (2001), Non-Traditional Security in the Asia Pacific, TheDynamism of Securitisation, Selected Publishing, pp1.

1

political agenda, liberalist have lobbied for employment of the military, along with

other state institution, to handle Non-Traditional Security (NTS) threats. Indeed, a

legitimate, professional armed body these days are more often than not called upon

to perform a multitude of operations, ranging from defence diplomacy, to maritime

security, peace enforcement and peace keeping, combating terrorism, and

humanitarian assistance disaster relief operations.

Due to the complexity in the emerging field of “Non-Traditional Security”, this

paper will first (1) provide an understanding of the term “Non-Traditional Security” by

examining the effects of globalisation to security, and by defining what traditional

security is. This would be followed up by offering 6 major characteristics of NTS. (2)

It will then look at a professional military in terms of its purpose and organisation,

and the Clausewitzian view of the military's utility to the state. After having

understood what NTS is and the purpose of the military, (3) this paper will conclude

by examining military's involvement in the NTS realm and provide further thoughts on

the role of the military in negating NTS threats that confronts the world today.

While many literature opined that NTS are non-military concerns and requires

a non-military response, this paper will draw linkages to illustrate that the military

can, and should, and have a role to play in minimising the effects of NTS threats.

2

NON-TRADITIONAL SECURITY IN TODAY'S GLOBALISED WORLD

Globalisation and Security

“Globalisation is a complex process, driven by a mixture of politicaland economical influences. It is changing everyday life, particularly in

the developed countries, at the same time, as it is creating newtransnational system and forces. It is more than just the back drop tocontemporary policies: taken as a whole, globalisation is transforming

the institutions of these societies in which we live in”3

Up till the end of Cold War, security has always been addressed in the

tradition sense. However, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, globalisation has

witnessed unprecedented rise and have brought the world meteoric economic

progress and affluence. Globalisation has also created an nexus of shared interest

between states, societies, and individuals, and have increased international

economic liberalization, trade and financial flows4.

Globalization has made the world interconnected. To this end, globalisation

has made inter-state wars a less likely scenario. But that does not mean

globalisation has eliminated the possibility of an inter-state war. It just means that

disincentives for waging war has emerged.5 It has created a “poisonous shrimp”6

syndrome where it would be a high price to pay, not just in military terms, for the

adversarial military and country to wield military actions against another country.

3 Anthony Giddens, (1998), The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy, Cambridge: PolityPress, pp 33.

4 Ralf Emmers, (Mar 04), IDSS Working Paper, No. 62: Globalization and Non-Traditional SecurityIssues. A study of Human and Drug Trafficking in East Asia, Institute of Defence and StrategicStudies, Singapore, pp 2.

5 Abdur Rob Khan, (2001), Globalisation and Non-Traditional Security in South Asia, AcademicPress and Publisher Limited, Dhaka, for Regional Centre for Strategic Studies, Colombo, pp16.

6 “Poisonous shrimp” was used and explained by the current Prime Minister, Mr Lee Hsien Loongback in 1984 during an interview with ASEAN Forecast, Vol 4, No. 10 (pp 164). He describeSingapore needing a strategy like a “poisonous shrimp, where a potential adversary would pay a“high price for trying to subdue me (Singapore) and you may still not succeed”.

3

Traditional vs Non-Traditional Security

“Security, is about survival. It is when an issue is presented as posingan existential threat to a designated referent object (traditionally but

not necessarily the state, incorporating government, societal andpolitical security)”7

While it is clear that globalization has enhanced security in the traditional

sense, globalisation has also brought other security challenges. It has, for one,

broaden the understanding of security and added a non-traditional dimension to the

mix. Human security and environmental degradation have become hotly discussed

security topics.

Globalisation has also brought advancement in information technology and

mass media. While information technology and mass media have “shrunk the

world”, it can have a destabilising effect as can be seen in the recent uprisings in the

Arab regions (Egypt, Libya etc). NTS threats remains an “iffy” term to define and

academic literature review only offers a limited list of examples. To provide a clearer

understanding of NTS, it is inevitable to talk about “traditional” security.

As highlighted earlier, traditional security concerns with issues such as

territorial integrity, preservation of state boundaries and sovereignty. Traditional

security is a military-centric concern about power balance and providing a secure

environment for her people within the nation state, to provide a secure way from life:

a freedom from fear against a geographical neighbour. It is also very clear that,

other than foreign policy, a professional military is the only state institution

7 Barry Buzan, Ole Waever, Jaap de Wilde, (1998), Security: A New Framework for Analysis,Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, pp 21

4

established to preserve and protect a nation-state's national interest, her territorial

integrity and her sovereignty, failing which, the nation-state cease to exist.

If “Traditional” and “Non-Traditional” Security are 2 diametrically opposing

concepts, then it can be inferred that any security threats that do not fall into

traditional security realm would hence be considered as Non-Traditional Security.

The Copenhagen School identifies 5 categories of security8, both traditional and non-

traditional (see Table 1), and each category poses a first-order threat to a referent

object directly.

Category of Security Referent Object Type

Military State Traditional

Environment Species or habitats Non-Traditional

Economic Economy Non-Traditional

Societal Collective identities Non-Traditional

Political National Sovereignty/ Idealogy Traditional

Table 1: 5 categories of security threats (Buzan).

As the list of threats is inexhaustive, another way to add clarity to Non-

Traditional Security threats is to review the characteristics of NTS. NTS exhibits the

following 6 attributes:

(1) NTS threats are contextual and lies in the “eye of the beholder”,

that is what one nation-state view as an NTS threat, may not be an NTS

threat to another nation-state. Take for example a developed country like the

United States which considers terrorism and proliferation of weapons of mass

destruction as NTS threats, while less developed regions such as countries in

8 Barry Buzan, Ole Waever, Jaap de Wilde, (1998), Security: A New Framework for Analysis,Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, pp 22-23

5

the Middle East would be more concerned about the lack of fixed income and

water supply.9

(2) NTS threats are transnational in nature, and hence affect more

than one state at the same time. The issue also need to be large in

magnitude and of sufficient importance to a country or a region. Recent

examples of medical pandemic such as the H1N1 outbreak in 2008/ 09

caused 18,449 fatalities in 214 countries10, while a case of food poisoning

affecting a few individuals would hardly be considered as a state-level

concern.

(3) NTS threats “often occur quietly and inconspicuously in the form

of faint signals masked by noises and are often hard to detect, causing

surprise when they are detected”.11 The financial crisis that started with the

9 Wang Yizhou, Defining Non-Traditional Security and Its Implications For China, pp 4.10 World Health Organisation, (Aug 2010), Global Alert and Response (GAR): Pandemic (H1N1)

2009 – update 112, available from: <<http://www.who.int/csr/don/2010_08_06/en/index.html>>,[12 Apr 11].

11 COL Ong Yu Lin, (2011), The Utility of Military Force Against Non-Traditional Threats, Pointer, Vol.36, No. 3-4, pp 15.

6

Figure 1: Spread of H1N1 in 214 countries (World Health Organisation).

governmental take over of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac resulted in the

collapse of the stock market leading to a global recession.

(4) While Copenhagen school offered 5 distinct categories, NTS

threats have 2nd order, 3rd order effects that impacts other referent objects.

The tsunami in Japan (Environment: species and habitats) resulted in a

human security issues in the form of nuclear radiation scare and lack of basic

amenities (Social: collective identities). The tsunami has also caused the

Japanese economy to suffer as a result12 (Economic: economy). See also

Figure 2.13

12 Tim Webb (13 Mar 2011), Japan's Economy Heads Into Freefall After Earthquake And Tsunami,available from The Guardian, UK: <<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/13/japan-economy-recession-earthquake-tsunami>>, [16 Apr 11].

13 Ben Rooney (11 Mar 2011), World Market Falls (CNN Money), available from CNNMoney.com:<<http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/11/markets/world_markets/index.htm?cnn=yes&eref=edition>>[16 Apr 2011]

7

(5) NTS focuses on non-military challenges to security14 and extend

beyond the military sphere. Consequently, military options alone will seldom

achieve the required effects. During Humanitarian Assistance Disaster Relief,

the military can provide the first-level “on-scene responder role” but have to

quickly transfer the responsibility to other civil agencies and NGOs after the

initial disaster relief phase is over. Similarly, the Maritime Security Task Force

framework that Singapore adopts to combat maritime piracy involves not just

the Republic of Singapore Navy, but also civil agencies such as the Police

Coast Guards, the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA), the

Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) and the Singapore Customs.15

(6) NTS threats are frequently interwoven with traditional security

threats and usually emanate from non-state actors.16 The recent Egyptian

Uprising, social network such as Facebook and Twitter, were used to rally

mass demonstrations. And when the Egyptian government shut down the

internet, the “Friday of Anger” protest began and resulted in civil unrest. The

situation in Libya was no different. The “Day of Rage” demonstrations against

Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's regime, again, organised by youths using social

media17, resulted in the employment of the Libyan military against the

demonstration. This triggered an international military coalition response

against Colonel Gaddafi's regime.

14 Ralf Emmers, Mely Caballero,-Anthony, Amitav Acharya, (2006), Studying Non-TraditionalSecurity in Asia: Trends and Issues, Marshall Cavendis Academic, pp XIV

15 Mindef, (23 Feb 2009), Fact Sheet: Maritime Security Task Force, Available from Mindef: <<http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_events/nr/2009/feb/23feb09_nr/23feb09_fs2.html>>, [20Apr 2011].

16 COL Ong Yu Lin, (2011), The Utility of Military Force Against Non-Traditional Threats, Pointer,Vol. 36, No. 3-4, pp 15

17 Kim Sengupta, (17 Feb 2011), Gaddafi sweats as wave of Arab unrest reaches Libya, availablefrom The Independent: <<http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/gaddafi-sweats-as-wave-of-arab-unrest-reaches-libya-2217151.html>>, [17 Apr 11].

8

While it is much easier to conceptually differentiate Traditional and Non-

Traditional Security, in practise, they are not 2 separate dichotomies. Very often,

they exhibits certain “spill over effects” as seen apparently in attributes (4) and (6).

As such, a professional military, established to provide traditional security, is often

employed to handle non-traditional security issues. Is this diluting the true role of a

professional military?

WHAT IS A PROFESSIONAL MILITARY

Having understood the effects of globalisation to security and characterising

Non-Traditional Security, the paper will focus on the organisation and purpose of a

professional military, and its utility to a legitimate government.

Organisation of a Professional Military

There are many ways an organisation is considered “an armed force”, but not

all armed forces can be considered a “professional military”. Militias and

mercenaries, while armed, are not considered a professional military due to their lack

of legitimacy, while a police force, though recognized to be a legitimate, armed force,

is also not considered to be a one as well. According to Rupert Smith, a legitimate

professional military force exhibits the following 4 attributes.18 They should

(1) Be an organized military body;

18 Rupert Smith, (2008), The Utility of Force: The Art of War in Modern World, First Vintage BooksEdition, pp 10

9

(2) Possess a hierarchical structure answerable to the highest in the

entity or the state;

(3) Have a legal status to bear arms and to have a separate

disciplinary code;

(4) Have a centralised funding for the purchase of warlike material.

The most important of all is that a legitimate, professional military force must

be “employed to serve a political purpose decided upon by a lawful government,

which instructs the military, as a legally sanctioned and formed body answerable to

the government, to apply that force.”19 This is also in congruence with Clausewitz,

that military is to serve a political purpose.

Purpose of a Professional Military

Category of Security Referent Object Type

Military State Traditional

Environment Species or habitats Non-Traditional

Economic Economy Non-Traditional

Societal Collective identities Non-Traditional

Political National Sovereignty/ Idealogy Traditional

Table 1: 5 categories of security threats (Buzan). The military is entrustedwith preserving the referent object associated with the State and National

Sovereignty/ Ideology.

While globalisation have reduced the possibility of an interstate war, no

country would dissolve her military. Referring back to Table 1, a professional armed

body is tasked to preserve the referent object of the State and National Sovereignty.

19 Rupert Smith, (2008), The Utility of Force: The Art of War in Modern World, First Vintage BooksEdition (Feb 2008), pp 9

10

It is entrusted with the sacred task of defending the sovereignty and territorial

integrity of a country, and if necessary, wage a full conflict war: a confrontation

where organised armies lock horns in sustained combat operations with the ultimate

aim of defeating the adversary.20 Military institutions and war fighting doctrines have

also traditionally emphasised and reinforced this biases, that “real” war is primarily a

conventional one.21

However, increasingly, a professional military, more often than not, would be

called upon to perform a multitude of Military Operations Other Than War (MOOTW),

ranging from Combating Crimes, Peace Keeping Operations, Peace Enforcement

Operations, to Counter Insurgency Operations, and Combating Terrorism and

Humanitarian Assistance Disaster Relief.22

So, what then is the true purpose of the military, given that they are used in a

multitude of operations today? When vom Kriege was first published in 1832,

Clausewitz provided an indication to the question.

The Clausewitzian Axiom

“The political objective is the goal, war is the means of reaching it, and the means can never be considered in isolation from their

purpose”23

- Carl von Clausewitz

20 MAJ Tay Kwang Leong, (2011), Should the Armed Forces be Employed To Fight The War Or WinThe Peace? - A Look At The Military's Involvement In Humanitarian Assistance Disaster Relief,Pointer, Vol. 36, No. 3-4, pp 22

21 Lawrence A Yates, (2006), The US Military’s Experience in Stability Operations, 1789 – 2005,available from: <<http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/army/csi_yates_stab_ops_hist.pdf>>, [14Apr 2011], pp 1.

22 MAJ Tay Kwang Leong, (2011), Should The Armed Forces be Employed To Fight The War OrWin The Peace? - A Look At The Military's Involvement In Humanitarian Assistance DisasterRelief, Pointer, Vol. 36, No. 3-4, pp 20

23 Carl von Clausewitz, (1984), On War, trans. and ed. Michael Howard and Peter Paret, PrincetonUniversity Press, pp.119.

11

Clausewitz theorised that war should serve politics. Indeed, war and politics

go hand in hand. To understand this relationship, one would first need to understand

that the strategic level of war derives from political and policy objectives, and is the

sole authoritative basis for military operations.24 The ultimate objective at the

strategic level of war is to coordinate and focus all the elements of national power to

achieve the policy objectives.25

Politics, Policy and War

Politics and policies are inter-related, with one being an “enabler” of the other

(see Figure 3). Politics deals with the activities associated with inter and intra

governmental issues and the decisions made by the government. Simply put, politics

lays down the “who”, “what”, “where”, and to a certain extent, “when”. Policies, on

the other hand, are the selection of goals26 or formulation of “rules-of-the-game” to

operationalise those decisions made (a means to an end, the “how”).

24 Department of the Navy, United States Marine Corps, (Sept 2001), MCDP 1-0: Marine CorpsOperations, US Government Printing Office, pp. 1-8

25 US Marine Corps, (June 1997), MCDP 1: Warfighting. U.S. Government Printing Office, pp 28.26 Victoria University of Wellington, School of Information Management (2005). Policy Development

Process, Online, available from: <<http: //www.sim.vuw.ac.nz/activities/mfat/workshops/workshop1/ day-1.ppt>> [28 Dec 2009], pp2

12

Figure 3 Policy must satisfy Politics.

PolicyPolicyPoliticsPolitics

Employs “policy” Employs “policy” as a “means”as a “means”

Must serveMust serve

And if war should serve politics, and policy is the “how” of achieving a political

aim, then it follows that war (a means), must satisfy policy (enabler to the end) which

is to serve politics. In essence, war, as carried out by the military, is just a means to

an end, and it is a continuation of politics as theorised by Clausewitz (see Figure 4).

13

Figure 4: Clausewitzian axiom that wars, as carried out by the military, are a “continuation of politics, by other means”.

PolicyPolicyPoliticsPolitics

MilitaryMilitary WarWar

Must serveMust serve

carries outcarries out

Employs “war” as Employs “war” as a “means”a “means”

Employs “policy” Employs “policy” as a “means”as a “means”

Military - one element Military - one element of national power of national power

available to a countryavailable to a country

Must serveMust serve

Figure 5: Extension of the Clausewitzian axiom, that actions by the military, not just war, are a “continuation of politics, by other means”.

Extension of the Clausewitzian Axiom

When vom Kriege was written, it was against the backdrop of the Napoleonic

wars and the military, up to that point in history, had been employed to wage a

interstate conflicts. Although the role of the military has evolved over the years,

Clausewitz's principle still hold true, that actions by the military should ultimately

culminate to serve politics (see Figure 5), be it through waging and winning wars or

preserving peace.

Full Spectrum Operations

“... in the future our military will not only be called upon to carry outtraditional combat operations, but will also have to respond to securitycontingencies that manifest in unexpected places and in unexpected

ways”.27

There is a distinction to be made regarding a professional military of a

developed nation-state viz-a-viz a professional military of a developing or a failed

state. Armed forces of developing states or failed states are concerned with issues

surrounding traditional security, and providing a safe and lawful environment for her

people. It is concerned with establishing legitimacy in the international political

arena.

Professional military of developed countries, however, are raised and

equipped to conduct a full spectrum of operations. The United States, recognized as

the sole military superpower immediately after the Cold War, and the Republic of

27 Speech by Minister of Defence, Teo Chee Hean (05 Mar 2007), “Trends in our SecurityEnvironment” at the committee of Supply Debate on Defence Budget 2007 , available from Mindef:<<http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_events/nr/2007/mar/05mar07_nr.html>> [5 Apr2011]

14

Singapore, both have an established professional military. The mission statement of

United States Army and the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) are as follows:

(1) US Army: The Army's mission is to fight and win our Nation's

war by providing prompt, sustained land dominance across the full range of

military operations and spectrum of conflict in support of combatant

commanders28.

(2) Singapore Armed Forces: Our Army is to deter aggression, and

should deterrence fail, to secure a swift and decisive victory. In peacetime,

our Army is to be ready and capable of conducting a spectrum of operations

to protect our national interests and the well-being of our citizens.29

The US Army included the need and ability to execute the “full range of

military operations and spectrum of conflict”, while the SAF included conducting a

“spectrum of operations”. Both military's have exhibited the need and desired ability

to conduct a full spectrum of operations (as shown in Figure 630), both traditional and

non-traditional in nature.

However, while it has been said that a professional military is raised,

equipped and prepared to conduct a full spectrum of conflict, it is still, first and

28 US Army, (20 Apr 2011), Organisation of US Army, available from US Army.Mil:<<http://www.army.mil/info/organization/>>, [21 Apr 2011]

29 Mindef, (01 Apr 2011), Our Army Mission, available from Mindef:<<http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/army/About_Us.html>>, [21 Apr11].

30 Department of the Army, (14 Jan 2006), Organsation of the United States Army, availablefrom:<<http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/p10_1.pdf>> [21 Apr 2011]

15

foremost, established to serve the primary purpose: that is to deter aggression and if

necessary, engage, and win, an interstate conflict.

However, as the most established state institution of a nation, the military is

often tasked to handle non-traditional security threats as well, and the need to deal

with both traditional and non-traditional threats has increase the burden of the

military.31 To alleviate this burden and to achieve a strategic outcome, an integrated

Whole-Of-Government (W.O.G) approach is required.32

WHOLE OF GOVERNMENT APPROACH

“You [military professionals] must know something about strategy andtactics and logistics, but also economics and politics and diplomacyand history. You must know everything you can know about military

power, and you must also understand the limits of military power. Youmust understand that few of the important problems of our time have,

in the final analysis, been finally solved by military power alone”33

- John F. Kennedy

31 COL Ong Yu Lin, (2011), The Utility of Military Force Against Non-Traditional Threats, Pointer,Vol. 36, No. 3-4, pp 13

32 Rupert Smith, (Jan 2007), The Utility of Force: The Art of War in the Modern World, KnofpPublishing, pp 378.

33 President John F. Kennedy (remarks to the graduating class of the U.S. Naval Academy,Annapolis, Maryland, 7 June 1961), (2011). Available from History Central:<<http://www.historycentral.com/JFK/Speeches/Naval.html>> [17 Apr 2011]

16

History has shown that prior to the start of any conflict, there are other acts of

statecraft at work. Economic sanctions were imposed on Libya Investment Authority

and the employment of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operatives to gather

intelligence were underway before the implementation of No-Fly Zone and

commencement of ground operations in Tripoli. Such W.O.G approach should also

be adopted when handling NTS issues as well, as a purely military-only option is not

going to be effective.

Military's role in handling traditional threats (Military and Political) has already

been established. As such, the paper will next address the military's participation in

the remaining 3 clusters of Non-Traditional Security threats (Environmental,

Economic, Societal).

Military's Role in Environmental Security

17

Figure 7: Level of involvement between the military and non militaryagencies along the Disaster Management Continuum.

The military has a role to play in Environmental Security. While there is not

very much the military could do to curb ozone gases emission or global warming, or

ensure resource sustainability and energy security, the military has a role to play in a

the aftermath of a natural disaster. This has been articulated by MAJ TAY KWANG

LEONG on the recent Pointer issue. Along the Disaster Management Continuum,

the military's involvement tapers down after disaster relief and recovery, and plays a

supporting role in disaster mitigation and disaster preparedness (refer to Figure 7)34.

Military's Role in Economic Security

The economic success of a nation

can only be founded on the backdrop of a

secure and stable society. Having a

strong military would boost the confidence

and attract foreign investors. And as the

economy grows, more budget can be

invested back into the military to

strengthen its defence capabilities. This

symbiotic relationship forms the military's

role in providing economic security (see

Figure 8).35

34 MAJ Tay Kwang Leong, (2011), Should The Armed Forces be Employed To Fight The War OrWin The Peace? - A Look At The Military's Involvement In Humanitarian Assistance DisasterRelief, Pointer, Vol. 36, No. 3-4, pp 27

35 Adrian Kuah, S3-01: Non Violent Approaches to Security – Singapore's Economic Strategies,presentation to 42nd GKS CSC, Slide #5.

18

Figure 8: Symbiotic relationship betweeneconomy and defense.

Military's Role in Societal Security

One may argue that the recent Libya's uprising is an anti-thesis to miltary's

role in Societal Security due to Colonel Gaddafi's military and their acts against the

Libyan citizens. This, however, cannot stand as the military at that point in time,

cease to act in the capacity as a legitimate, “professional” military. This is also the

case for the Rwanda Genocide in 1994. With a strong military, backed by a

legitimate government, crimes on humanity could be minimised. A conscript military

system can also be used as a nation building tool in galvanising Societal Security

and eliminate perceived ethnic differences. Increasingly, the military is involved in

maritime security, combating drug trafficking or preventing other transnational crimes

as these transnational crimes could destabilise the society and upset the social

fabric of a nation.

CONCLUSION

With the end of Cold War, the ambit of security studies have expandedto include human, environmental, social and economic security.

Military security is still perhaps the dominant paradigm, but it is beingincreasingly realized that military security cannot respond to some ofmankind's fundamental needs like freedom from poverty, threats to

individuals and groups from multiple source.36

The paper is in the opinion that a professional military should engaged with

NTS issues, provided the task of safeguarding the territorial integrity and sovereignty

of the country is satisfied. The reasons are:

(1) NTS often have a “spill over” effect and are often interwoven

with traditional security threat. As such, the military should divert part of her

36 Abdur Rob Khan, (2011), Globalization and Non-Traditional Security in South Asia, AcademicPress and Publisher Lmited, Dhaka, for Regional Centre for Strategic Studies, Colombo, pp12

19

resource, and contend with NTS as a secondary mission, provided her

primary mission is met.

(2) The military underpins traditional and non-traditional security

issues and has a role to play in the 5 clusters of security threats. As the most

established state institution, the military is well poised to offer the moral

obligation of providing a safe and secure environment for her people.

(3) As the military is an extension of statecraft of a legitimate

government, actions by a professional military should be a continuation of

politics, be it in the traditional or non-traditional manner.

While the paper holds the stance that the military should content with NTS

threats, one needs to be in cognisant that, in today's globalized world, for a solution

to be enduring and sustaining, a W.O.G approach, with the military working in

tandem with other civil agencies is necessary, and that a military-only option is not

going to be effective nor enduring.

Moving forward, however, as the list of NTS issues is seemingly infinite and

changes over time, more work is needed to critically examine the specific roles that

the military can play to deal with specific NTS issues. One thing is certain: That a

professional military should engage with NTS issues, either directly or indirectly, one

way or the other.

20

REFERENCES

Books/ Articles/ Periodicals

● Mohammed Ayoob. (1995). The Third World Security Predicament: StateMaking, Regional Conflict and The International System. Lynne RiennerPublishers, Boulder, CO.

● Andrew T.H. Tan, J.D. Kenneth Boutin, (2001), Non-Traditional Security inthe Asia Pacific, The Dynamism of Securitisation, Selected Publishing.

● Anthony Giddens, (1998), The Third Way: The Renewal of SocialDemocracy, Cambridge: Polity Press.

● Ralf Emmers, (Mar 04), IDSS Working Paper, No. 62: Globalization and Non-Traditional Security Issues. A study of Human and Drug Trafficking in EastAsia, Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, Singapore.

● Abdur Rob Khan, (2001), Globalisation and Non-Traditional Security in SouthAsia, Academic Press and Publisher Limited, Dhaka, for Regional Centre forStrategic Studies, Colombo.

● Barry Buzan, Ole Waever, Jaap de Wilde, (1998), Security: A NewFramework for Analysis, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.

● Wang Yizhou, Defining Non-Traditional Security and Its Implications ForChina.

● COL Ong Yu Lin, (2011), The Utility of Military Force Against Non-TraditionalThreats, Pointer, Vol. 36, No. 3-4.

● Ralf Emmers, Mely Caballero,-Anthony, Amitav Acharya, (2006), StudyingNon-Traditional Security in Asia: Trends and Issues, Marshall CavendisAcademic.

● Rupert Smith, (2008), The Utility of Force: The Art of War in Modern World,First Vintage Books Edition

● MAJ Tay Kwang Leong, (2011), Should the Armed Forces be Employed ToFight The War Or Win The Peace? - A Look At The Military's Involvement InHumanitarian Assistance Disaster Relief, Pointer, Vol. 36, No. 3-4

● Carl von Clausewitz, (1984), On War, trans. and ed. Michael Howard andPeter Paret, Princeton University Press.

● Department of the Navy, United States Marine Corps, (Sept 2001), MCDP1-0: Marine Corps Operations, US Government Printing Office.

● US Marine Corps, (June 1997), MCDP 1: Warfighting. U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office.

21

● Adrian Kuah, S3-01: Non Violent Approaches to Security – Singapore'sEconomic Strategies, presentation to 42nd GKS CSC, Slide #5.

Online Resource

● World Health Organisation, (Aug 2010), Global Alert and Response (GAR):Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 – update 112, available from:<<http://www.who.int/csr/don/2010_08_06/en/index.html>>[12 Apr 11].

● Tim Webb (13 Mar 2011), Japan's Economy Heads Into Freefall AfterEarthquake And Tsunami, available from The Guardian, UK:<<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/13/japan-economy-recession-earthquake-tsunami>> [16 Apr 11].

● Speech by Minister of Defence, Teo Chee Hean (05 Mar 2007), “Trends inour Security Environment” at the committee of Supply Debate on DefenceBudget 2007, available from Mindef.<<http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_events/nr/2007/mar/05mar07_nr.html>> [5 Apr 2011]

● Ben Rooney (11 Mar 2011), World Market Falls (CNN Money), available fromCNNMoney.com:<<http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/11/markets/world_markets/index.htm?cnn=yes&eref=edition>> [16 Apr 2011]

● Mindef, (23 Feb 2009), Fact Sheet: Maritime Security Task Force, availablefrom Mindef:<<http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_events/nr/2009/feb/23feb09_nr/23feb09_fs2.html>>[20 Apr 2011]

● Kim Sengupta, (17 Feb 2011), Gaddafi sweats as wave of Arab unrestreaches Libya, available from The Independent:<<http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/gaddafi-sweats-as-wave-of-arab-unrest-reaches-libya-2217151.html>>[17 Apr 11]

● Lawrence A Yates, (2006), The US Military’s Experience in StabilityOperations, 1789 – 2005, available from:<<http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/army/csi_yates_stab_ops_hist.pdf>>,[14 Apr 2011]

● Victoria University of Wellington, School of Information Management (2005).Policy Development Process, available from:<<http: //www.sim.vuw.ac.nz/activities/mfat/workshops/workshop1/day-1.ppt >>

22

[28 Dec 2009].

● US Army, (20 Apr 2011), Organisation of US Army, available from USArmy.Mil: <<http://www.army.mil/info/organization/>>[21 Apr 2011]

● Department of the Army, (14 Jan 2006), Organsation of the United StatesArmy, available from:<<http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/p10_1.pdf>>[21 Apr 2011]

● Mindef, (01 Apr 2011), Our Army Mission, available from Mindef:<<http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/mindef_websites/atozlistings/army/About_Us.html>>[21 Apr 11].

● President John F. Kennedy (remarks to the graduating class of the U.S. NavalAcademy, Annapolis, Maryland, 7 June 1961), (2011), available from HistoryCentral: <<http://www.historycentral.com/JFK/Speeches/Naval.html>> [17 Apr 2011]

23

BIBLOGRAPHY

Books/ Articles/ Periodicals

● Alan Collins, (2010). Contemporary Security Studies. Oxford UniversityPress.

● Amy Eckert, Laura Sjoberg, (2009). “New” Problems, “Old” Solutions:Rethinking the 21st Century, Zed Books Ltd, NY

● Ralf Emmers (2004), Non-Traditional Security IN the Asia Pacific: TheSynamics of Securitisation, Marshall Cavendish International

●

Online Resource

● J. Peter Burgess, (2007), Non-Military Security Challenges, available from:<<http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Digital-Library/Publications/Detail/?ots591=0c54e3b3-1e9c-be1e-2c24-a6a8c7060233&lng=en&id=38292>>

● Marianne Stone, (2009), Security According to Buzan: A ComprehensiveSecurity Analysis., available from<<http://geest.msh-paris.fr/IMG/pdf/Security_for_Buzan.mp3.pdf>>

24