Advocating Global Health Security

For the last two decades, a recurring strategy employed by health professionals, scientists, and diplomats has been to play the ‘health security card’ to achieve particular trade, diplomatic, strategic, and development goals. The presumption has been that the securitisation of health will harness global political leadership and resources. This marriage of health issues to security logic has been met with a mix of applause, caution, and critique. In particular, there have been growing claims that the successful global health initiatives such as, the Global Fund for AIDS, TB, and Malaria (Global Fund) and the Global Alliance for Vaccine Immunization (GAVI) were achieved without asserting their necessity on security considerations. Thus, what difference does the association of security to health make for the success and longevity of global health initiatives? In this chapter, I answer this question through comparing a case where the security logic was deliberately deployed to frame the ‘health emergency’ (Framework Convention on Tobacco Control), against a case where human rights logic was used to advocate for its creation (the GAVI). I critically explore the conditions under which linking securitisation with an international health initiative captures and maintains political leadership and resources.