Rwanda's Path to Human Security: A Critical Evaluation with PASH Framework

In this essay we will discuss about human security and below are the summaries point:- The essay evaluates Rwanda's development of human security using the PASH framework. Human security focuses on defending communities against factors that diminish their quality of life. Despite progress in certain areas, Rwanda faces challenges in terms of power, agency, and civil liberties.

Introduction
This essay aims to critically evaluate Rwanda's path in developing human security whilst including elements
of the PASH (Power, Agency, State, History) framework.
The concept of security is usually related to the defence of something such as the state and its sovereignty,
infrastructure, and territory. When the cold war ended in 1990, it led to several changes, one of which was
perceptions (Hanlon, 2013), and it was at this time that the United Nations published its first Human
Development Report (HDR), introducing the notion of human development (Aradau, 2013, p85). Although
Human Development can be traced back to the 1970s, these new annual reports concentrated on the
Human Development Index (HDI), combining the indicators of life expectancy, education, and income
(Johnson and Farooki, 2013, cited in Aradau, 2013, p 85). In 1994, just four years after the initial HDR, the
concept of Human Security became significant in understanding Human Development further due to the UN
Development Programme (UNDP) believing it an important supplement to human development (Aradau,
2013, p85).
The conventional notion of security is to defend against aggression or military forces; human security is
centred on communities and people defending against factors that may diminish their quality of life. Once
they have this security, they can develop and enhance their lives to lead a more fulfilling life.
Human Security
The 1994 HDR report identified that following the Cold War, most people experienced insecurities due to
worries about daily life such as income, health, job security and crime rather than huge cataclysmic events.
(United Nations, 1994, p.3 cited in Hanlon, 2013 p24). They also define seven key areas of human security (as
shown in Figure 1.1)

Following the Rwandan genocide of 1994, in which 800,000 men, women and children were killed over 100
days (Newey, 2019) there are reasonable grounds to assume that all of these securities were affected
negatively. Under the London School of Economics (LSE) definition The country would most likely have been
deemed as a failed state due to there being no basic security and development functions over its territory or
borders (LSE, 2006, cited in cited in Hanlon, 2013 p26).
The current President (Paul Kagame) has been in power since 2000 but has effectively run Rwanda since
1994. Despite being the architect for its revival has been accused of being involved with organising killings of
opponents and suppressing civil liberties (Newey, 2019) He is viewed by some as a visionary leader, others as
a despot with a questionable human rights record, criticised for trampling on freedoms, building an army to
assert authority and using anti-genocide legislation to clamp down on opponents (BBC, 2018). It could be
considered Rwanda is now a fragile state in that they are gradually improving, with occasional setbacks.
(Department for International Development (DfID), 2009, cited in Hanlon, 2013 p26).
Despite the authoritarian nature of President Kagame, Rwanda still claims to be a democracy with an
impressive sixty one percent of the parliament being female as well as females being leading members of
the business elite (Newey, 2019). But it is not clear just how much power or agency these actors can exert
over an authoritarian figure who has an alleged chequered history when it comes to dealing with opponents
in a country where self-censorship of journalists is commonplace (BBC, 2018)
Following the horrific events of 1994 there has been a significant turnaround of fortunes for Rwanda, for
more than two decades it has had one of the fast rates of economic growth of any country in the world
(Newey, 2019).
 Spending in healthcare has increased from just $21 per person in 1995 to $125 per person in 2014.
 Life expectancy has increased by a third with 10% of GDP being spent towards healthcare.
 Unicef has said their decline in infant mortality (halved since 2000) is one of the most significant in
human history.
 Treatment of Cancer and infectious disease is better.
 GDP per person has increased from $205 pre 1994 to $765 in 2017
 Improvements in infrastructure and sanitation.
 Improvements in human capital through education
 High ranking in the global gender gap, nine places above the United Kingdom
(Newey, 2019)
Whilst these successes are important for the areas needed for human security in fig 1.1, it should be
considered whether the freedom and security the Rwandan government has created is legitimate or not and
what effect it has. The 1994 HDR stated that there are two major components of human security. Freedom
from fear and freedom from want (United Nations, 1994, p.3 cited in Hanlon, 2013 p24). When you consider
Berlin's distinction between positive and negative freedom (Berlin, 1969, cited in Aradau, 2013, p 89) it could
be argued that although free to develop and not be interfered with how they want, they do not live without
the fear of external forces from the state limiting them. If they are compliant with the regime, they may feel
free but by requiring to be compliant they are not.
This is an example of social contract theory in which politics is deemed to be a contract between rulers and
the ruled or the states and the citizens (Brown, 2013, p50). The political theorist Hobbes suggests in
Leviathan that without power to keep them in awe, there would be war, he also argues that freedom needs
limits because left to their own device's individuals can harm each other, too much freedom is insecurity and
without security development is impossible (Hobbes, 1651, cited in Brown, 2103, p. 50).

Whether the successes are a by-product of good fortune or good planning is not clear, but Paul Kagame's
authoritarian regime is certainly far from perfect. Poverty still dominates with two thirds of the population
surviving on less than $1.25 per day (Newey, 2019). This would suggest that the social changes brought in
following the war are not committed to poverty reduction. This is deemed to be a further indicator of a
fragile state (DfID, 2009, cited in Hanlon, 2013 p26). When you take into consideration that poor people are
more likely to be ill and die younger than their richer neighbours (Hanlon, 2013). This statistic is in
contradiction of the successful numbers mentioned earlier. Hanlon, (2013, p 208) indicates that poverty and
inequality are linked but not the same, describing poverty as a lack of something and inequality as a lack of
access to something. He also goes on to share a common debate among the developmental community:
Does development' and a general increase in income make everyone better off – characterized as 'a rising
tide raises all boats' – or does growth only benefit the better off and increase inequality, leaving the poor
behind – characterized as 'a rising tide sinks leaky boats? Given the ratio of those living in extreme poverty
versus those who are not it would seem that the rising tide in Rwanda is sinking leaky boats and will
continue to do so unless they address inequality and poverty.
When you are reminded of the history of the country it is reasonable to assume there is a desire to avoid
further conflict hence the compliance of its citizens and perceived security in comparison to the past, but
when you consider the post war outcome of the country it appears that the war although awful for the
participants and those who survived has not been bad for the country in the long term. Rwanda is an
example of how war can be as developmental as it is destructive. Warfare can be seen – perhaps
paradoxically – as having a developmental impact on society by uprooting the previous forms of government
and economy and stimulating social change (Brown, 2013 cited in Brown and Hanlin, 2013, p15).
If Rwanda does not address this, there could be a risk of a repeat of the violence and conflict that were
experienced in the past especially if the inequality grows, and citizens feel that the security of the social
contract is not offered. If they do address it then the reduction of inequality will give the citizens living in
poverty the chance to enhance their lives, which in turn will offer more human security and human
development opportunities
Conclusion
Given the awful experiences of the 1994 war it is understandable that people want to do all they can to
avoid further conflict. When you consider the components of human security, freedom from fear and
freedom from want, Rwandan citizens (although they may disagree) are not living free from want and fear
therefore have no real security. The current circumstances however are better than it was before President
Kagame. Without real security and the reductions of poverty and equality they will not be able to develop or
enhance their lives at all.
Reference List
BBC (2018) 'Rwanda country profile' BBC, 17th September. Available at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-
africa-14093238 (last accessed 28th March 2022)
Newey, S. (2019) 'From Horror to health: How Rwanda rebuilt itself to become one of Africa's brightest stars'
The Telegraph, 6th April. Available at https://advance-lexis-com.libezproxy.open.ac.uk/document/index?

crid=7390f505-a8a5-439e-88b2-5525db48ca1b&pdpermalink=dce3f6f7-4c2c-4f7c-9dfd-
5d4846e49909&pdmfid=1519360&pdisurlapi=true (last accessed 28th March 2022)
The Open University (2021) 'Block 4: Week 3: Human Security' TD223 21J International Development:
Making Sense of a changing world [Online]. Available at https://learn2.open.ac.uk/mod/resource/view.php?
id=1797512 (Last accessed 29th March 2022)
Aradau, C. (2013) 'Human security and human development in a world of states' in Butcher, M. and
Papaioannou, T. (eds), New Perspectives in international development' Milton Keynes, The Open University,
pp. 85-111.
Hanlon, J. (2013) 'Fear and development' in Butcher, M. and Papaioannou, T. (eds), New Perspectives in
international development' Milton Keynes, The Open University, pp. 5-30
Brown, W. (2013) 'War, states and development' in Butcher, M. and Papaioannou, T. (eds), New Perspectives
in international development' Milton Keynes, The Open University, pp. 31-57.
Brown, W and Hanlin, R. (2013) 'Introducing international development' in Butcher, M. and Papaioannou, T.
(eds), International development in a changing world' Milton Keynes, The Open University, pp. 5-29.
Department for International Development (DfID) (2009) 'Government: building states that are capable,
responsive and accountable to their citizens – fragile states' [online]. Available at
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dfid.gov.uk/fightingpoverty/fragile_states.asp
(National Archives snapshot taken on 22 April 2009, Last accessed 29th March 2022).
Hanlon, J. (2013). 'Inequality – does it matter?' in Butcher, M. and Papaioannou, T. (eds), International
development in a changing world' Milton Keynes, The Open University, pp. 207-234.