POSITIONING PRIVATE SECURITY ORGANISATION
IN ANTI - TERRORISM CAMPAIGN
PAPER PRESENTED
BY
ADE ABOLURINPh.d, OFR
POSITIONING PRIVATE SECURITY ORGANISATION IN ANTI - TERRORISM CAMPAIGN
1.0 Introduction
Security has become one of the most urgent issues for many organizations. It is an essential requirement for doing business in a globally networked economy and for achieving organizational goals and mission. But it is no small task in line with the increasing tension of terrorism. The technical and environmental complexity of today’s organizations and the ever-increasing dependence on technology to drive and automate processes and create competitive advantages make security a challenging activity. Adding to this complexity is a growing list of vulnerabilities and increasingly sophisticated threats to which organizations are subjected on a daily basis.
Organizations can no longer be effective in managing security from the technical sidelines.Terrorism lives in an organizational and operational context, and thus cannot be managed effectively as a stand-alone business of governmental agencies. Because security is a business problem, government and private organizations must activate, coordinate, deploy, and direct many of its existing core competencies to work together to provide effective solutions. And to sustain success, terrorism at an enterprise level requires that the organization move toward a security management process that is strategic, systematic, and repeatable, in other words, efficient at using security resources and effective at meeting security goals on a consistent basis. Managing for enterprise security defines a disciplined and structured means for realizing these objectives.
1.1 Background
No government has the wherewithal to provide one hundred percent security for her people, hence the need for corporate or private security organisations (CPSOs) to supplement efforts of state actors not only in petty crime prevention but also in the emerging acts of terrorism. It is in this regard that criminologist and other experts in the field of security and conflict studies have agitated for more advanced mechanisms of intelligence that place premium on prevention of security crisis rather than post-hoc detection and responses to them are needed in today’s society development and dynamism (Odinkalu, 2004). As a result the scope of security needs include governmental, non-governmental, industrial, civil, economic, communications, general infrastructural and environmental security within the new security challenges which must be prioritise. Governmental security agencies face many challenges today in accomplishing their missions and in providing value to their stakeholders. What was once achievable by developing and implementing sound strategic and financial plans is no longer guaranteed in a world where terrorism is fast spreading to all nooks and corners. Instead, security organizations must join hands together to consider how best it is going to succeed in the face of increasing organizational and technical complexity and in an ever-changing risk environment.
For private security organizations that aspire to be around in the next few years, adaptation and evolution are the mantras. Success in meeting these challenges depends in large part on reducing the effects of complexity and change on the productivity of the organization. When unencumbered from interruption, an organization’s critical assets and processes (those that most contribute toaccomplishing the mission) can perform their intended functions and propel the organizationtoward achieving its goals, satisfying its critical success factors, and realizing its purpose andvision. Such are the emerging objectives of global security in today’s security organizations irrespective of the ownership: to enable theorganization to thrive in a threat-rich environment. Security as used in this paper is intended to describe the broad range of security activities that include the disciplines of information security, network security, application security, physical security,
2.0 ISSUES IN GLOBAL SECURITY
Global security intelligence is an emerging need. Changes in technology, societal organization, and the security challenges and arrangements within and among states demand novel approaches and structures to ensure human security. Terrorism, insurgency, and trans-national crime challenge traditional security and intelligence structures. In this 'not crime-not war' operational environment, non-state actors, trans-national criminal enterprises, gangs, warlords, terrorist and insurgent networks, and private armies intersect with traditional state organs and emerging elements of civil society. New security structures and legal regimes are potentially evolving, yet traditional structures are slow to adapt. The security framework is more sophisticated today than in the past. It has been observed that the Nigerian Police Force could not always guarantee Nigerians security as an important part of proactive crime prevention because of inadequate manpower, advanced technological and programmatic means for fear reduction; therefore the continuous agitation for Corporate Private Security Organisations to assist the Nigeria Police in safety business (Ekhomu, 2004). Reasons are not far fetched as evidences are bound showing the technological means under their kitty for proactive crime control such as intruder alarms, close circuit monitors, access control to mention just a few.
Another issue is the common knowledge of the ratio of the Nigeria Police to Nigerians, which is put at 1:600. This has been found to be inconsistent with United Nations standard ration of 1:400 (UN, 2000). Thus the vacuum created by this inadequacy alone for government to provide security will certainly be filled by private individuals, the private sector and ethnic militias in some cases. The inability of the organised private sector to completely fill in the gap has been attributed to their legal prevention from carrying arms. It therefore calls for questioning in the in the light of the proliferation of small arms and light weapons in Nigeria and her neighbouring countries (Eselebor, 2007).While the CPSOs are clearly here to stay, their existence and growth have created new opportunities and challenges. For instance the mushrooming of private security groups with inadequately trained personnel have the capacity of complicating the present security scenario. This might be further compounded by the fact that unlike state actors, CPSOs are not directly accountable to the public or the electorate but to a combination of weak regulators and the corporate companies.
2.1 SOME CONCEPTUAL DISCOURSES
Key concepts germane to this discourse are security, security organisationand anti - terrorism campaign. however attempt is also made to throw light on security in Nigerian borders, and management of crime. It is important to note that the above concepts are interrelated and have links in multidimensional ways in geopolitical and security studies. Political boundaries dictated the limits of the state, jurisdiction and power. It is true that all of the above concepts are dynamic and not fixated, thus giving rise to constant fluctuations and new ideas.
2.2SECURITY: A PARADOX OF THE MODERN AGE
Reaching consensus on the contested concept of security is far from being over. The ongoingdebates can be categorized into two. They are the traditionalist and non-traditionalist. Whiletraditionalist favours the maintenance of cold war conception of security defined in militaryand state centric approaches, the non-traditionalists have attempted to broaden the meaning ofsecurity to include such issues as economic, environmental, social, feminist, and otherthreats. The focus here is what can possibly endanger the survival of the individual as well asthe state. In common sense and usage, security as a concept is similar to safety. Security means something is not only secure, but has become secured. It is also a condition of protection against danger or loss. The antonym is insecurity as currently witnessed in Nigeria and particularly with border security. In military standpoint, it is a condition of establishment and maintenance of protective measures that can guarantee inviolability from hostile acts or enemies. Certain terms that further illuminate the meaning of security are:
• Threat- it is usually a trigger method of a risk event that is often dangerous;
• Risk- a possible event that could cause a loss;
• Counter measure- ways to stop a threat from triggering a risk event;
• Defense- the concept of not relying on one security measure;
• Assurance- reasonable level of guarantee that a security system will behave as expected.
These terms are important, because they have inherent linkages to the concepts of border, management and national security. Security, remain the platform upon which the political is institutionalized in the state or nation. Security in whatever form is a standard measurement of the viability of any state. A state of heightened security means, that a threat has arisen, and the very existence of that state is in a flux. Security can be categorized into two namely traditional and human securities.
2.3TRADITIONAL SECURITY
Traditional security can be viewed from the realist construct of security in which the referent object of security is the state. The dominances of this thought reached a feverish pitch during the era of cold war. States at this point in time strongly believed in the concept of balance of power among contending states either in the EAST or WEST divides. The sovereignty of nations received undue emphasis with the concept of territorial integrity under traditional security. States were deemed to be rational entities driven by the desire for absolute power which manifested its ugly consequences by scramble for territories, sphere of influence and other clandestine activities least beneficial to mankind. One of the major scholars of realist fame is Stephen Walt (1991:212). Walt argues that security:
‘may be defined as the study of the threat, use and control of military force. It explores the condition that make the use of force more likely, the ways that the use of force affectsindividuals, states and societies, and the specific policies that states adopt in order to prepare for, prevent and engage in war’
Here it is assumed that the greatest hindrances to national security are external components of threats. It is noted that in Africa, the greatest threats to national security have been intrastate conflicts and not necessarily interstate conflicts. In Nigeria for example, the problems have been from within as most of the conflicts are intrastate. Responding to these challenges of intrastate conflicts, Mohammed Ayoob, (1997:130) strongly believes that intrastate conflicts arise as a result of political-institutional underdevelopment:
‘Security or insecurity is defined in relation to vulnerabilities, both internal and external, that threaten to, or have the potential to, bring down or significantly weaken state structures, both territorial and institutional, and regimes’
Ayoob, believes that a problem needs to become sufficiently politicized to have the potential to threaten the survival of the state, its boundaries, political institutions or governing regimes. The politicization of crude oil in Nigeria has sufficient tendencies to threaten the corporate existence of the Nigeria nation.
2.4HUMAN SECURITY
Human security is an emerging concept and it is aligned to modern thoughts about global security, with emphasis on human safety and survival. It is antagonistic to traditional conception of security, though not discarding all about traditional security, but offering better alternatives. Human security emphasizes that the referent objects should be the individual, where the integrity of mankind is upheld. Its main targets are diseases, poverty, natural disasters, violence, conflicts, and landmines, rehabilitation of war victims, gender and human rights. These factors as noted here are live threatening issues that effectively constitute security challenges to nations globally and Nigeria in particular. Environmental degradation, struggles for control of scarce resources, bad governance and even energy appear to be a major push factor resulting in insecurities. Further to our understanding of security as a concept, Klare and Thomas (1994:3) contend that security needs to be expanded due to the declining significance of geographical boundaries. State actors are perceived as less able to respond to global problems of the environment and international financial crisis in currency. Both scholars advocated world security conception to tackle global nature of security problems like money laundering, oil theft, illegal diamond trade, advance fee fraud, identity fraud, human trafficking and the likes. To them world security is: ‘Distinguished by the belief that security involves more than protection against military attack…. ecological, economic and demographic trends pose serious challenges to [developed] countries. And even in the less-developed “South,” where the threat of armed attack remains constant, non-military trends pose equal or greater threats to people’s security’ Klare and Thomas view global security as closely related to human needs and thus human security. The inclusion of global problems as human rights abuse, economic crises and ecological threats are unique and all actors are motivated to respond collectively to such emerging threats. Ken Booth, (1991:539) further advocated the emancipation of the individual in human security conception:
‘Emancipation means freeing people from those constraints that stop them carrying out what freely they would choose to do, of which war, poverty, oppression, and poor education are a few. Security and emancipation are in fact two sides of the same coin. It is emancipation, not power and order, in both theory and practice that leads to stable security’
Booth’s emancipator proposal has both intrinsic and emotional appeal, but fell short of certain tendencies as total emancipation of humanity could create a condition of anarchy, where violence becomes the order of the day. The freedom that Nigerians currently enjoy is also tainted with pockets of agitations and emergence of resistant movement by some ethnic nationalities.
2.5NATIONAL SECURITY
The 1999 constitution of The Federal Republic of Nigeria 9 sections 214 and 217 providesfor the establishment and maintenance of an army, navy, air force and other security agencies that maybe necessary for the purpose of:
- • Defending Nigeria from external aggression;
- • Maintaining territorial integrity and securing our borders from violation on land, sea and air;
- • Suppressing insurrection and acting in aid of civil authorities to restore order, when called upon to do so;
- • Performing such other functions as may be prescribed (such as undertaking relief orwelfare duties in such cases as national disasters, peace keeping among others)
These are clearly national objectives or goals. The means to goal attainment can only befeasible if the strategies are right and dynamic. An enlarged defence policy covering the whole of Africa may not have been too ambitious if the means and resources are in abundance to prosecute such policy effectively. Where the resource are limited and ineffectively distributed, discontent and conflict may take centre stage, because the problems of poverty and diseases, which are internal security threats, must be contained before regional or global problems. Security in whatever form is a standard measurement of the viability of any state or nation. A state of insecurity means red alert and that a risk factor have been identified, which must be contained. This largely may involve both military and non-military. All nations have the right under international law to secure its territorial space and protect its citizens from any imminent attack. Apart from military dimensions to security, national security can beexplained as the public policy of maintaining integrity and survival of the nation state through the use of other means like economic, religious, political, technology or the exercise of other diplomatic initiatives either in times of peace or war. This thinking informed Nwolise (1985) to postulate that:
“A country may have the best armed forces in terms of training and equipment, the mostefficient police force, the most efficient custom men, the most active secret service agents and best quality prisons, but yet be the most insecure nation in the world as a result of defence and security problems within bad governments, alienated and suffering masses, ignorance, hunger, unemployment, or even activities of foreign residents or companies “
The above scenario is not different from what currently obtains with security assessment of Nigeria. Even the USA with enormous resources is greatly troubled by the activities of forced migrants, talk less of Nigeria. Even if internal security problems are minimal in Nigeria, the fact that her immediate her neighbours like Benin, Niger, Chad and Cameroun are weak states vulnerable to crisis and conflicts, food shortages, diseases or proliferation of small arms and light weapons means that Nigeria may be unsafe except security is beefed up. The new thinking about global security and the emerging challenges gained further prominence with McNamara(1968:149) who is also of the opinion that:
‘Any society that seeks to achieve adequate military security against the background of acute food shortages, population explosion, low level of productivity and per capita income, low technological development, inadequate and inefficient public utilities and chronic problems of unemployment has a false sense of security’