3 “Multi-dimensional and Multilateral Cooperation” and the Non-traditional Security Community

Generally speaking, the non-traditional security community resolves the “resourceinduced” dilemma through multilateral cooperation and the international community also chooses “multilateralism” as the optimum way of transnational cooperation. Nevertheless, multilateralism has different types, such as “strong multilateralism”and “weak multilateralism”, and is of a different nature, such as “multi-dimensional multilateralism”, “mono-dimensional multilateralism”, “monopolistic multilateralism”,“hegemonic multilateralism”, and “violent multilateralism”.

3.1 Optimum Models of the Non-traditional Security Community

The major ways of cooperation for security community are bilateral cooperation and multilateral cooperation while given that non-traditional security problems are wideranging and complex, multilateral cooperation is the best option. With the deepening of globalization, the response to a large number of transnational non-traditional security threats entails bilateral or multilateral cooperation to replace unilateral action in the past. Even in bilateral and multilateral cooperation, there exist not only a series of questions of collective action as to who leads, who is the promoter and who makes the decision but also the question of the alternative between “monodimensional” and “multidimensional”. If “lateral” stands for “country”, bilateral and multi-lateral refer to two countries and many countries respectively. Then,“dimension” refers to quality, “mono-dimension” to mono-dimensional monopolistic governance and “multi-dimension” to multi-dimensional “co-governance”. So according to the different combination of “lateral” and “dimension”, there are four patterns of international cooperation for non-traditional security governance (See Table 5).

Table 5 Patterns of International Cooperation for Non-traditional Security

Source: Yu Xiaofeng and Ruth Kattumuri, “The 'Chinese Dragon' and the ‘Indian Elephant' Standing Shoulder to Shoulder:China-India Non-traditional Security Cooperation, ”Journal of International Security Studies,No.3 (2016), pp. 15-16 (余潇枫、[英]露丝·卡兹茉莉：《“龙象并肩”：中印非传统安全合作》，载《国际安全研究》2016年第3期，第15-16页).

It can be seen from Table 5 that the multilateral cooperation in form is actually monodimensional-multilateral cooperation in which a certain hegemonic power has the “veto”, presenting a “hegemonic world made up of many states”. Democratic and multilateral cooperation in which the leading actor does not have the “veto”is multidimensional-multilateral cooperation, manifesting a “world of peace and cooperation composed of many states”. In the same token, “monodimensional-bilateral cooperation” does not involve the third party, presenting “one world consisting of two states”. While taking into account the national interests of both parties,“multidimensional-bilateral cooperation” pays attention to the “spillover” of bilateral action, thus making allowance for the third party and even more parties. Since the nontraditional security threats man faces are mostly regional and global, the choice of“multilateral consideration” in “bilateral action” and “multidimensional consideration”in “multidimensional cooperation” for the non-traditional security community is more general and superior and the model of “multidimensional-bilateral” cooperation becomes the one of first choice for the non-traditional security community.

The theoretical construction of the models of “multidimensional-multilateral” and“multidimensional-bilateral” cooperation is an exploration of the idea of “peacecooperativism” and it transcends realism, liberalism, and constructivism. It can be said that “peace-cooperativism” with “optimum co-existence” as its value premise is a brand-new notion for the construction of the non-traditional security community. On one hand, “optimum co-existence” places emphasis on the value orientation of“You are secure and I will be secure or vice versa”, transcending greatly the zerosum game dilemma of traditional security in which “You are secure and I will not be secure or vice versa” or both parties meet “mutually assured destruction”. That is to say, “the characteristics of non-traditional security and regional cooperation bring about positive changes to the two core elements of security community—state role identity and collective identity, making it possible to construct security community”. On the other hand, the construction of the traditional security community usually induces the participating member states to be involved in geopolitical conflicts while the nontraditional security community can help its member states stay away from geopolitical conflicts. For example, “many Asian countries hope that they can participate, on an equal footing, in the solution of regional problems that concern themselves and that they cope, in concerted efforts, with non-traditional security threats such as food security, shortage of resources, climate change, environmental pollution, cyber attacks, pandemics, transnational crimes and terrorism but they do not want to see that any country within or without Asia becomes a hegemonic power in this region. They are opposed to any country who interferes in other countries' internal affairs and disrupts regional situation for its selfish gains. That is the main reason why Asian countries launched such regional security mechanisms as ASEAN, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia”. If the traditional security community results in a landscape of “internal peace”and “external confrontation”, the non-traditional security community should create the structure of “internal peace and cooperation” and “external harmony”. This requires that states or other transnational actors deal with the problems and challenges together they face in accordance with the principles of cooperation, responsibility, independence, and win-win outcomes and seek the best path for the construction of the non-traditional security community through innovation. The initiatives of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and the “Belt and Road” launched by China are valuable explorations of “multidimensional-multilateral cooperation” under the guidance of “peacecooperativism”.

3.2 Exploration of the Non-traditional Security Community

The severe challenge to traditional security redefines “security” and “security dilemma”and the “resource-induced” security dilemma develops into a major problem that needs a transnational response. In recent years, three major non-traditional security threats-economic crisis, refugee crisis, and terrorism are posing challenges to the traditional security community EU, plunging its institutional resources of finance and education and natural resources of the ecological environment into a distribution dilemma. Nontraditional security threats intensify the vulnerability of resources which makes the tension of resource exploitation more prominent. The three crises are eroding the foundation of interstate trust and the risks of the EU's division and disintegration are on the increase. In ASEAN countries, the increasingly grave non-traditional security threats, such as terrorism, piracy, illegal immigration, drug traffic, and illegal arms smuggling and the surging differences in security within this community prevent it from realizing its vision. It is impossible to resolve or even ease the “resource-induced”security dilemma as a new quandary through the existing models of international cooperation. Attempts have been made to construct the non-traditional security community at sub-regional, regional, and global levels.

No country can escape from non-traditional security threats, such as climate change, pandemics, and terrorism, the prevention and governance of which will not do without non-traditional security cooperation between state actors. In the meantime, the exploitation of “global commons” also sinks into the “resource-induced dilemma”. Therefore, the main task of the non-traditional security community at the global level is to resolve global non-traditional security threats, focusing on the response to the threats in the areas of cybersecurity, public health security, climate, and environment. In addition to state actors, non-state actors, such as local governments, international organizations, think-tanks, and academic associations take an active part and play an important role in the global non-traditional security community which takes the form of the network platform of mutual help composed mainly of inter-governmental international organizations and non-state actors. For the governance of climate crisis, there are the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cities for Climate Protection, and the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group; for the preservation of public health security, there are the World Health Organization, International Epidemiological Association, and the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization.

Compared with the global non-traditional security community, the content of nontraditional security preserved by the regional non-traditional security community is more complex and varied and requires more coordination and cooperation among pluralistic actors. As a result, the interaction between actors will be more close and frequent and the models of cooperation will be institutionalized and systematic. The features of community such as norms, institution, and trust gradually materialize. Regional inter-governmental non-traditional security communities are ASEAN Regional Forum, East Asia Summit, Conference on Interaction and ConfidenceBuilding Measures in Asia, and the Pacific Islands Forum. Regional non-intergovernmental non-traditional security communities include Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia Pacific, ASEAN Institute of Strategic and International Studies, and Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific. What is worth noticing is that in regional non-traditional security cooperation, the two-way interaction between “the first track” (inter-government) and “the second track” (non-inter-government) is all the more prominent and the chain reaction of the two tracks plays a very important part in the settlement of non-traditional security problems.

The sub-regional non-traditional security community usually addresses the nontraditional security threats in a certain field to achieve comprehensive governance of non-traditional security. Owing to geographical proximity and homogeneity of culture and history, communities at this level possess some identity basis, making it easier to form collective identity and “we-feeling”. The cooperation at state level facilitates the establishment of sub-regional non-traditional security communities, such as the Arctic Council whose purpose is “to protect the Arctic environment and promote the sustainable development of this region” and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization which takes the cooperation in combating terrorism as its foundation to maintain regional peace and stability. Besides, local governments are also important main bodies of the sub-regional non-traditional security community. They overspill the function of integration to the field of security mainly through the cross-border economic cooperation area to promote the non-traditional security governance in the region, such as the EU's Cross-Border Cooperation in the Upper Rhine Region and ASEAN's Southern Growth Triangle.