What is human security and how does it fit in the current world order? The United Nations (UN) proposed human security in 1994 at the end of the Cold War. In Western liberal tradition, individuals cause the state to exist for each of their several basic needs and interests, which constitutes a relationship between a state and its people. Human security is a UN prescription for governing constructively on behalf of the interests and needs of people. This paper operates on a Western political history assumption: security requires a leviathan, an enforcer. The monograph considers different world orders established by Western nations, from the Treaty of Westphalia to the UN, suggesting these have been inadequate leviathans. The argument converges on how the United States (U.S.) and other liberal Western nations are currently enforcing liberal notions of governance in many places around the globe, when and where they can. However, as the world becomes more multipolar, these Western liberal nations are likely to be restrained from being the leviathan. How will human security evolve without a de facto leviathan?