Human Security The concept of human security forms a core component of the contemporary security status. This concept has questioned the dominant state- centric approach to security, which makes the state the referent object or the entity to be made secure. By contrast, human security by shifting the focus to the individual, and making people the referent object, places increasing attention on people suffering insecurities inside states. The idea that people need to be secure in their daily lives is not a new one. In fact, the political philosophy of liberalism placed people at its epicentre by providing them necessary conditions such as freedom and equality. Human security fully entered the policy and academic debates in the early 1990s. The UNDP report, 1994, talks about giving relief to people from all the traumas that besiege human development. The emphasis is on providing safety from chronic threats such as hunger and disease and protection from sudden disruptions in the patterns of daily life. The UNDP report, 1994, outlines seven areas which deal with human security which are highlighted as:  Economic Security- Poverty, vulnerability to global economic change.  Food Security- Hunger and famine, vulnerability to extreme climate events and agricultural changes.  Health Security- Injury and disease, vulnerability to disease and infection.  Environmental Security- Resource depletion, vulnerability to pollution and environmental degradation.  Personal Security- Violence, vulnerability to conflicts, natural hazards, and “creeping” disasters.  Community Security- Violations of the integrity of cultures; vulnerability to cultural globalization.  Political Security- Political repression, vulnerability to conflicts and welfare. Nevertheless, despite its widespread usage within national and international policy circles, its definition remains highly contested. Caroline Thomas maintains that material sufficiency is at the core of human security. According to her, ‘human security describes a condition of existence in which basic human needs are met, and in which human dignity, including meaningful participation in the life of the community can be realised’. In the words of Amitav Acharya, ‘we have three different conceptions of human security today: one focusing on the human costs of violent conflict, another stressing human needs in the path to sustainable development and a third emphasising human rights. There are two schools of thought on human security namely, freedom from fear and freedom from want. Scholars have highlighted the various purposes that the concept of human security serves. The focus that the concept puts on the nexus between conflict and development is very useful and important. Since the 1990s conflicts are seen as occurring or frequently surrounding disrupted states. An analysis of conflicts and the related human suffering not only brings to the fore an understanding of state failure, but also its dire local, regional and global effects. One can see that discussions on human security have been the underlying motivation for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the UN Charter, the Geneva Conventions, the Ottawa Treaty, and the International Criminal Court. Human security often serves as an umbrella norm for various treaties and conventions aiming to protect the vulnerable. Members of the 2003 Commission on Human security argue that the objective of human security is to protect the vital core of all human lives in ways that advocate human freedoms and human fulfilment.