Is Human Security Enough? Lessons from Gujarat
Institutional Affiliation
NSU
Start Date
January 2026
End Date
January 2026
Proposal Type
Presentation
Proposal Format
On-campus
Proposal Description
Human security, as a framework, shifts focus from national borders to the well-being and safety of individuals and communities. Yet, in practice, not all individuals are protected equally. In Gujarat, recurrent episodes of communal violence and the state's uneven response highlight critical questions: Whose security is secured, and whose insecurity is normalized? This paper interrogates human security by examining how ongoing tensions and policies in Gujarat shape experiences of safety, dignity, and justice for marginalized communities.
Rather than treating violence as isolated events, this paper situates Gujarat as a persistent site where boundaries of belonging and protection are continuously contested. While state rhetoric often emphasizes law and order, the lived realities of many—especially Muslims, Dalits, and other minorities—reveal persistent denial of care, justice, and reparations. Drawing on survivor testimonies, legal documents, and activist interventions, this paper traces how insecurity is produced not only through violence but through systemic neglect and exclusion.
This inquiry is set against a backdrop of rising majoritarian nationalism and ideological policing, raising profound challenges for the concept of human security. It asks whether human security can remain a meaningful framework for peace, dignity, and justice when structural inequalities undermine equal protection. By revisiting Gujarat as both a site of violence and resistance, the paper contributes to broader reflections on how human security might be reimagined in deeply divided societies. And it closes by posing a critical question: Is human security enough, or must we rethink and expand its meaning to truly protect all?
Is Human Security Enough? Lessons from Gujarat
Human security, as a framework, shifts focus from national borders to the well-being and safety of individuals and communities. Yet, in practice, not all individuals are protected equally. In Gujarat, recurrent episodes of communal violence and the state's uneven response highlight critical questions: Whose security is secured, and whose insecurity is normalized? This paper interrogates human security by examining how ongoing tensions and policies in Gujarat shape experiences of safety, dignity, and justice for marginalized communities.
Rather than treating violence as isolated events, this paper situates Gujarat as a persistent site where boundaries of belonging and protection are continuously contested. While state rhetoric often emphasizes law and order, the lived realities of many—especially Muslims, Dalits, and other minorities—reveal persistent denial of care, justice, and reparations. Drawing on survivor testimonies, legal documents, and activist interventions, this paper traces how insecurity is produced not only through violence but through systemic neglect and exclusion.
This inquiry is set against a backdrop of rising majoritarian nationalism and ideological policing, raising profound challenges for the concept of human security. It asks whether human security can remain a meaningful framework for peace, dignity, and justice when structural inequalities undermine equal protection. By revisiting Gujarat as both a site of violence and resistance, the paper contributes to broader reflections on how human security might be reimagined in deeply divided societies. And it closes by posing a critical question: Is human security enough, or must we rethink and expand its meaning to truly protect all?