Human security is defined by two core negative rights of the individual: to be free of fear (safety) and free of want (well-being). Human security calls for the global institutionalization of these rights to ensure the physical, economic, political and cultural well-being of a people. The history of the concept can be traced to the rise of democratic values in which popular as opposed to dynastic principles became the basis for international legitimacy. The democratization of warfare helped internationalize human security, and through 19 th century treaties like the Geneva Convention and the Hague Declarations, and the Nuremburg principles of the 20 th century, human rights permanently entered the discourse of international law. In more recent years, Canada and Scandinavian countries have taken the lead in promoting the concept. Reflecting the highly disproportionate toll that war takes on civilians, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axworthy stated at the 54 th meeting of the UN General assembly that ‘The search for global peace increasingly turns on issues of personal safety.' Taken up by feminists, anti-globalization activists, and NGO's, human security is mobilizing a global audience if not yet enjoying state adherence. Is human security a case of one size fitting all? Amidst such political, cultural, ethnic, and religious differences, can the universalism of human security find global acceptance?