Security is an idiosyncratic and contested notion, subject to individual interpretation. A generic explanation of security is the absence of peril or trepidation. Optimism and hope may be termed as security. And hope and optimism may or may not be a “Law”. It may be rules, precedents, norms, values, customs and traditions. If one is hopeful and optimistic about anything, he may feel secure at once. In a state of nature, devoid of laws, chaos reigns, rendering no individual secure. However, one must admit flaws in implementing the law – the source of hope. The matter of fact is that institutions such as courts, ombudsman, ICJ, ICC, etc are also paramount in implementing laws – actualization of hope – and making a society secure. Consider the allegations by PTI regarding the purported theft of the people’s mandate in the 2024 General Elections. But the aggrieved party is still ‘hoping’ for justice – fostering a sense of security. For instance, Asad Toor, a journalist has been picked up by FIA in allegations, of maligning CJP. Whether he has done so or not but was feeling secure as he is privileged by the constitution under Article 19 – a law making one secure. It goes the same way for the countries. The US is using the jargon “Rules-based International Order” in its rhetoric against China to keep itself hopeful that China would abide by the rules set by the international community. In the case of the Israel-Palestine Conflict, why South Africa went to ICJ? Because they were hopeful that it would penalize the Zionist entity Israel and give some sense of security to innocent Palestinians against its brutal aggression. Hope for decisive action in conflicts like Israel-Palestine shapes political outcomes, highlighting the symbiotic relationship between hope and security. The populace’s hope for decisive action in conflicts like Israel-Palestine shapes political outcomes, highlighting the symbiotic relationship between hope and security. It is evident in the US as it is facing intense criticism domestically because it holds a higher moral authority. The youth of the US was hoping that POTUS would act immediately and press Israel to stop aggression against innocent Palestinians. But it didn’t happen and eventually, President Joe Biden seems to be losing upcoming elections. It proves a point that hope and optimism is security. When hope vanishes, people get insecure in one way or the other. Given the Operation Swift Retort, people were expecting the same kind of response to feel secure from any external aggression such as Iranian missile strikes inside Pakistan. On the environmental front, we are hoping to see a transition in energy sources from non-renewable to renewable. Electric vehicles are one of the hopes, of making ourselves secure from the looming spectre of climate change. Hope or optimism is augmented by Law. During the Stone Age, there was no hope of getting better off because there were no laws. In the presence of law, might is not right. Might is questionable and answerable to the law. The same is the stance of China towards the dominance of the US. They question the double standards of the US on some parameters set out in International Law, the UN Charter, norms, and rules. The absence of fear is security. When hope is killed, fear prevails. And fear is insecurity. For example, a man is fearful of losing his job at a company. He is now insecure. And there is another man, who is experiencing the same circumstances but he applied for a position in another organization. Now he is not fearful of losing his job because he is hoping to get adjusted somewhere else. He is fearless, expecting another job and feeling secure. The absence of optimism is insecurity. If there is some hope or optimism it means there is security. The writer is a student of Strategic Studies at National Defence University, Islamabad. He tweets @afnanwasif