ABSTRACT
In the previous four chapters on Cambodia and Myanmar, I have outlined what can be loosely defined as the child protection regime in each country, looking at the law, policy, and the role of various state and non-state actors in protecting children. In these chapters, I have identified two very distinct discourses: that of child protection, and that of state security, both of which have shaped national institutions and practices that impact on the human rights of children in these two countries. Both of these discourses, I have suggested, operate through different ‘paradigms’, so to speak, the first being that of the development/social welfare sector, with a very Western orientation towards child protection as localized and dealing with domestic social problems. This, I argue, has disconnected the scope of child protection work from broader human security concerns related to conflict and the impacts of post-conflict governance on children's lives. Further, state security discourse in both countries privileges military and policing institutions, the interests of governing elites whose power base resides in these dominant security institutions, and the preservation of internal stability and order — a goal that has largely been at odds with the protection of human rights for the civilian population.
