Placeholder Image

Subtitles section Play video

  • Almost 20 years have passed since 9/11.

  • It is time to take stock of where we stand

  • and stop and think.

  • It is time to ask ourselves,

  • have the assumptions and policies

  • we developed in the wake of those tragic events

  • truly made us more secure?

  • Have they made our societies, both in Europe and in the United States,

  • more resilient?

  • I've worked all my life in the field of security and defense,

  • and I am convinced that now, more than ever,

  • we need to radically reframe the way we think and act about security,

  • and especially about international security.

  • By international security, I actually mean what we do,

  • how we prepare our countries

  • to better respond and prevent external threats,

  • and how we protect our citizens.

  • The key to both

  • is to focus on protecting civilians,

  • both in our own countries

  • and in those where we are present in the name of security.

  • Now, this idea goes against the fixed narrative

  • that we developed over the past 20 years

  • over what security is and how to get it,

  • but that narrative is flawed, and worse, it is counterproductive.

  • Over the past 20 years,

  • both in the United States and in Europe,

  • we've come to accept that we must talk about security in zero sum terms,

  • as if the only way to gain more security is by compromising on values and rights:

  • security versus human rights,

  • safety versus freedom and development.

  • This is a false opposition.

  • It just doesn't work like that.

  • We need to recognize

  • that security and human rights are not opposite values,

  • they are intrinsically related.

  • After all, the most basic human right

  • is the right to live and to be free from violence,

  • and a state's most basic responsibility

  • is to guarantee that right for its citizens.

  • Conversely, if we think about communities all over the world

  • affected by war and conflict,

  • it is insecurity and violence

  • that stops them from achieving their full freedom and development.

  • Now, they need basic security just as much as we do

  • and they need it so they can live a normal life

  • and so that they can enjoy their human rights.

  • This is why we need to shift.

  • We need to acknowledge that sustainable security

  • builds on a foundation of human rights,

  • builds on promoting and respecting human rights.

  • Also, over the past two decades,

  • we have accepted that the best way to guarantee our own security

  • is by defeating our enemies,

  • and to do that, we need to rely almost exclusively on the military.

  • Again, this clashes with my work, with my research,

  • with what I see in the field.

  • What I see is that building sustainable security

  • has a lot less to do with crushing enemies,

  • has a lot less to do with winning on the battlefield,

  • and has a lot more to do with protecting victims

  • and building stability.

  • And to do that, well, the military alone

  • is simply insufficient.

  • This is why I believe we need to shelve the never-ending War on Terror,

  • and we need to replace it with a security agenda

  • that is driven by the principle of protecting civilians,

  • no matter where they are from, what passport they hold,

  • or where they live:

  • Vancouver, New York,

  • Kabul, Mosul, Aleppo or Douma.

  • Sustainable security tells us that we're more likely

  • to have long-term security at home for ourselves

  • if we focus our engagements abroad on protecting civilians

  • and on ensuring their lives are lived in dignity and free from violence.

  • For example, we all know that defeating ISIS

  • is a security achievement.

  • Absolutely.

  • But rebuilding destroyed homes,

  • restoring order,

  • ensuring a representative political system,

  • these are just as, if not more important,

  • and not just for the security of civilians in Iraq and in Syria,

  • but for our own security and for global stability.

  • More fundamentally,

  • ISIS's danger should not just be counted in the number of weapons it holds

  • but also in the number of children it has kept out of school

  • or indoctrinated.

  • This is from a security perspective.

  • From a security perspective,

  • the long-term generational impact of having millions of children in Syria

  • growing up knowing only war and out of school,

  • this is a far more dangerous threat to stability

  • than all of ISIS's weapons combined,

  • and we should spend just as much time and just as much energy to counter this

  • as what we spend when countering ISIS militarily.

  • Over the past two decades, our security policy has been short-term.

  • It has focused on the here and now.

  • It has systematically downplayed the link between what we do today

  • in the name of security

  • and the long-term impact of those choices.

  • In the years after 9/11,

  • some of the choices,

  • some of the policies we've implemented

  • have probably made us less, not more secure in the long term.

  • Sustainable, civilian-centered security

  • needs to look at what happens in the long term.

  • Again, for example,

  • relying on drones to target enemies in faraway countries may be a tool.

  • It may be a tool to make sure or to lessen the threat

  • of an imminent attack on the United States.

  • But what about the long-term impact?

  • If civilians are killed,

  • if communities are targeted,

  • this will feed a vicious circle

  • of war, conflict, trauma and radicalization,

  • and that vicious circle is at the center of so many of the security challenges

  • we face today.

  • This will not make us safer in the long term.

  • We need civilian security,

  • we need sustainable civilian-centered security,

  • and we need it now.

  • We need to encourage thinking and research around this concept,

  • and to implement it.

  • We live in a dangerous world.

  • We have many threats to peace and conflict.

  • Much like in the days after 9/11,

  • we simply cannot afford not to think about international security.

  • But we have to learn the lessons of the past 20 years.

  • To get it right, to get security right,

  • we need to focus on the long term.

  • We need to focus on protecting civilians.

  • And we need to respect and acknowledge the fact

  • that sustainable security builds on a foundation of human rights.

  • Otherwise, in the name of security,

  • we risk leaving the world

  • a far more dangerous and unstable place

  • than what we already found it in.

  • Thank you.

  • (Applause)

Almost 20 years have passed since 9/11.

Subtitles and vocabulary

Click the word to look it up Click the word to find further inforamtion about it

B1 US TED security long term sustainable term protecting

【TED】Benedetta Berti: Did the global response to 9/11 make us safer? (Did the global response to 9/11 make us safer? | Benedetta Berti)

  • 736 20
    林宜悉 posted on 2018/10/02
Video vocabulary