|
|
|
I see international studies from the perspective of outer space looking down: viewing all the simultaneous and overlapping forces that connect and repel to make relations across the globe so fascinating. Seeing movements -- of people, from tourists to terrorists; commodities, from computers to cocaine; and services, from security to sexual slavery -- reveals both the interdependence and unevenness of the globalization process. As a teacher, I encourage my students to consider these dynamics within a human security framework in which the benefits and contradictions of globalization are examined. A question I am currently researching concerns one country's use of force against another. What does going to war in order to fight suspected terrorists imply for both the existing norms of war and long-term human security needs? As an international law specialist, I am fascinated by the argument that, in the unprecedented circumstances of a post-9/11 world, the old rules of waging war no longer apply, since they were not written to take into account terrorists and weapons of mass destruction. How can these rules be made more flexible without causing more harm than good? I am a humanitarian at heart, always looking at such questions with a critical eye, and pushing myself and my students to see past the symptoms to the fundamental causes of global insecurities. It's not unusual for me to pose as a two-year old in class, asking a student why? Why? WHY? as a way to lead her to the root of the problem. This skill was developed in part from being the parent to two curious girls, whose WHY questions rarely go unanswered! |
