ABSTRACT
Booth (1997:110) in terms of ‘freeing people as individuals and groups, from social, physical, economic, political and other constraints that stop them from carrying out what they would freely choose to do’ (see also Jones, 1999:6; Booth & Vale, 1997:337). Expounding a revised realist theory, which he otherwise branded a ‘subaltern realist perspective’, Mohammed Ayoob, tries to strike a balance between what he calls ‘the too restrictive definition of the realist theory’ and ‘the too inclusive definition of critical security theorists’ in his attempt to formulate an appropriate security framework for the Third World. Ayoob retains the realist state-centric definition of security following his argument that such will be more relevant to the Third World countries in the light of their contemporary engagement in the arduous project of state-building. He is, however, sensitive to the nexus between domestic and external threats faced by Third World countries’ and warns that to have adequate explanatory power, the concept of security must meet two criteria (Ayoob, 1997:128, 134):
First, it must go beyond the traditional realist definition of security and overcome its external orientation and military bias. Second, it must remain firmly rooted in the political realm while being sensitive to the variables in other realms of societal activity that may have an impact on the political arena and that may filter through into the security calculus of states because of their potential capacity to influence political outcomes.
