A new northern security - Environmental and Human Security in the Arctic - page 43

Regional security
Previously, I have asked 'how and by whom is security to be defined from the
point of view of a region, and if it is defined, how can it be implemented?'
(Heininen 2004b:38-9). I continued by arguing that 'although a complicated
question and challenge, it is possible to define security based on a region,
which opens up the opportunity to discuss democracy, identity and culture
as a part of citizens' everyday security' (Heininen 2004b). This differs from
the regional security approach taken by Buzan and Wæver which relies heav-
ily on a realist-informed, state-centric framework (Buzan and Wæver 2004).
Perhaps not surprisingly therefore, they neglect the Arctic as a region of
study (Hoogensen 2005b). My approach here complements the work of Adler
and Barnett on international security communities where regions could be
understood as spaces of security composed of a 'region of states whose peo-
ple maintain dependable expectations of peaceful change' (Adler and Barnett
1998:30), where trust is high, based on social interaction and (often) demo-
cratic processes. Here, I would like to continue the discourse and ask: are local
people and regional governments real actors when defining and implement-
ing national security, i.e. are they involved in decision-making for security
policy, and even military policy? Furthermore, how is security from the view-
point of a (sub)region defined and, in particular, is it even possible to define
when dealing with an international cooperative region, such as the Barents
Euro-Arctic region?
Security from the perspective of a region, or regional security , can be under-
stood to mean the security of a regionalized space or a distinctive region,
such as the circumpolar North, which is claimed to be defined by regional
and local actors (Griffiths 1988; Young 1996), including citizens as well as
local and regional authorities. A consideration of both security and a region
also raises an opportunity to discuss people(s) and their identity/ies, needs,
other interests and culture(s), as well as development of societies' interactions
with regions and the environment. Further, as mentioned earlier, regional
security provides an opportunity to discuss democracy and citizens' rights,
either within a state or within a distinctive, international region transcending
national borders. Thus, the focus is not only (traditional) security of a state,
or environmental security or human/civil security, but security as a compre-
hensive way of including all the above-mentioned aspects of security from the
perspective of a region and its citizens.
A good example of a regional security issue, and the way it goes beyond
'traditional' security approaches, is the nuclear problem of the Barents Sea
area, as well as nuclear safety throughout the entire Arctic in the post-Cold
War period. Nuclear safety in the Barents Sea area is a legacy of the Cold War
period and its traditional security preoccupations between two central pow-
ers, the Soviet Union and the USA. Since environmental degradation and risks
of nuclear waste cross national borders, radioactivity was seen to threaten not