The Theoretical Landscape of Non-Traditional Security

Any security theory must address three core questions: whose security, how security is achieved, and what kind of security is sought. These correspond to the ontology, methodology, and axiology of security studies, respectively. Western security theories exhibit inherent ontological deficiencies, incapable of effectively illuminating the overall human security landscape. Such ontological shortcomings inevitably lead to methodological biases and axiological omissions.

The Theoretical Landscape of Non-Traditional Security, by Yu Xiaofeng, a professor from the School of Public Affairs at Zhejiang University (ZJU), criticizes Western international security theories by analyzing their intrinsic flaws, including “individualism,” “atomism,” and “dualism.” Yu puts forward a Chinese paradigm for international security governance—the “Harmony Doctrine”—centered on the core concept of “harmony and shared security.”

One of the book’s key contributions is its innovative analysis of security through algorithms. It introduces the concept of “security entropy” from physics, arguing that the aim of security algorithms is to reduce this entropy. Yu categorizes security algorithms into four types: war algorithms, competition algorithms, coopetition algorithms, and harmony algorithms, noting that “these algorithms exhibit a trend of iterative upgrading on a macro scale.”

The war algorithm, the most traditional type, is rooted in material power and seeks security through strategies such as material strength, military expansion, and territorial conquest. This approach is closely tied to geopolitics and geo-economics, with its guiding principle being “exclusive dominance.” Following the establishment of sovereign states, the competition algorithm emerged as the mainstream security algorithm. While slightly less aggressive than the war algorithm, the competition algorithm still carries significant risks of spiraling out of control. The war algorithm pursues absolute security, whereas the competition algorithm aims for relative security, with its core principle being “exclusive benefit.” The author refers to the coopetition algorithm as a “non-traditional security algorithm.” It attempts to utilize institutional cooperation to alter mutual perceptions and foster friendly identities, thereby ensuring security for all parties involved. This algorithm transcends the realist framework of material power structures, manifesting as a highly idealistic algorithm.

The harmony algorithm is envisioned as a future-oriented algorithm characterized by strong idealism and robust institutionalism. It is premised on the assumption that as long as parties regard each other as friends, conflict will not arise, nor will mutual threats emerge. The author believes that the harmony algorithm will rise to dominance among human security strategies, with its principle of “shared benefits” surpassing the “exclusive dominance” of the war algorithm, the “exclusive benefits” of the competition algorithm, and the “incidental sharing of benefits” of the coopetition algorithm. The choice of a security algorithm depends on the wisdom of decision-makers, reflecting their ability to draw lessons from the past. Through continuous introspection, security decision-makers ultimately come to realize that material strength alone cannot ensure security, and self-security cannot yield lasting security. Only collective security can provide enduring safety.

Gan Junxian is an associate professor from the School of Marxism at ZJU.