Abstract/Summary

This post explains why NATO sees Human Security as a useful tool and how the concept can be an enabler, improving NATO’s legitimacy and effectiveness. Noting Dan Stigall’s recent post in this symposium, we argue that NATO’s conceptual frameworks of Human Security, the Protection of Civilians (PoC) and Civilian Harm Mitigation (CHM) do not compete. We suggest that Human Security is a unique method of principled decision-making and can guide planning processes to improve outcomes on all of NATO’s cross-cutting topics (CCTs), including PoC and CHM. The post also highlights areas for future development in NATO’s current approach, arguing that NATO must establish its own evidence base for how to conceptualize and operationalize Human Security.