Abstract
Western engagement in fragile post-conflict states aims at building state institutions to protect both citizens and the surrounding world from non-state threats. The article claims that this policy fails to acknowledge the complexity on the ground. Localised non-state security solutions emerge in the absence of strong state structures and will often hold considerably more legitimacy than the formal state. If donors wish to promote human security, they must look beyond Hobbes and Weber and work with hybrid forms of state/non-state provision of security.