Is war an inevitable feature of international politics?
International Relations Coursework Samar Alkadhi March 2002 Is war an inevitable feature of international politics? War was defined by Clausewitz as "an act of violence intended to compel our opponent to fulfil our will". War is often seen by states as a means of political negotiation, as the use of force is implemented to try to gain control over a situation. Warfare is a concept which has existed for almost as long as civilisation itself, but the number of war casualties since the mid-1990s is higher than ever before. Also, war is known to be most common between different states, and this fact supports the increasingly popular claim that international politics encourage war. In his book 'Power Politics', Wight states that "the cause of war (......) will remain so long as a multiplicity of governments are not reduced to one government and international politics transformed to domestic politics." . In order for war to occur, a relationship must exist between two parties, as it is a fault or conflict in this relationship which leads to an outbreak of war. So is the increasing number of relationships being formed due to globalisation increasing the inevitability of war? Warfare is more than just competition between states, as competition does not necessarily entail a party attempting to gain an advantage by reducing their opponent's position. War is more hostile; it
To what extent was Napoleon's success in Europe to 1807 the consequences of his own military ability?
To what extent was Napoleon's success in Europe to 1807 the consequences of his own military ability? Napoleon's success in Europe to 1807 could not have been the consequences of a single factor, his own military ability, but rather a combination of linking, interdependent factors, some of which playing a greater role than others, but all helping Napoleon along the road to success. It is undeniable that if fate had given Napoleon an entirely different set of circumstances (if he had not been able to rise through the ranks as easily, if France had not the massive population it did e.t.c) then, no matter how intelligent or able he was, he would not have enjoyed the kind of success he did. Correlli Barnett, in his book Bonaparte, is very critical of Napoleon and his tactics, claiming that it was largely the incompetence and weaknesses of his enemies that enabled him to achieve success. For example, on the Battle of Ulm (October 1805), Barnett talks about what might have happened if Austria had a "general more active than Mack", who broke out with a single Austrian corps right across Bonaparte's communications. The Austrian army had an impressive artillery which could have posed a threat to Napoleon if combined with Russia, but there was no universal language, and with it's varied ethnic and racial populations this was a huge problem - it slowed communication and often left
Wars of counter-insurgency cannot be won - discuss.
Wars of counter-insurgency cannot be won - discuss. The Soviet Union pulled out of Afghanistan defeated after many years of fighting the Taliban. The United States is currently fighting the same Taliban after invading them for the deadly attacks of Sept 1 2001. After a tremendously successful and devastating attack on the mullahs who ran Afghanistan with bunker busting bombs, the Americans and their European allies are struck in this quagmire where total victory has become illusive. The same tale is being repeated in Iraq, where the terrorist group Al Qaeda practices its hit-and-run strategy to devastating effect. By the same token there have been counter-insurgency movements that have been text-book successes. The Malayan counter-insurgency of the 1950s mounted by the British against the Malayan communist has been hailed as a fine example of the containment and defeat of counter insurgency forces. The defeat of the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka is another example. It is my thesis that history is chock-full of lessons of counter-insurgency and it is only through studying these lessons and principles and adapting them, that wars of counter- insurgency can be won. For as long as mankind has existed, war has been a long integrated element of life. History, time and again has proven it to be inescapable by-product of human nature. It can be argued that
The causes and effects of World War I
The Causes and Effects of World War I World War I was a military conflict from 1914 to 1918. It began as a local European war between Austria - Hungary and Serbia on July 28, 1914. It was transformed into a general European struggle by declaration of war against Russia on August 1, 1914 and eventually became a global war involving 32 nations. Twenty - eight of these nations, known as the Allies and the Associated Powers, and including Great Britain, France, Russia, Italy, and the United States, opposed the coalition known as the Central Powers, consisting of Germany, Austria - Hungary, Turkey, and Bulgaria. The immediate cause of the war between Austria - Hungary and Serbia was the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand on June 28, 1914, at Sarajevo in Bosnia by Gavrilo Princip, a Serb nationalist. (Microsoft Encarta, 1996) On July 28 Austria declared war against Serbia, either because it felt Russia would not actually fight for Serbia, or because it was prepared to risk a general European conflict in order to put an end to the Greater Serbia movement. Russia responded by partially mobilizing against Austria. Germany warned Russia that continued mobilization would cause war with Germany, and it made Austria agree to discuss with Russia a possible change of the ultimatum to Serbia. Germany demanded, however, that Russia demobilize. Russia refused to do so, and on
How, When and Why do Western Democracies Use Coercive Military Power?
How, When and Why do Western Democracies Use Coercive Military Power? Trying to present a total or even a mere account of the global conflicts through the history of humanity would be almost an endless process. What is essential to present is that the way and "for what reasons" those wars were conducted has changed dramatically throughout late history. In order to present a more in-depth overview of the advances that formed the art of war in contemporary history, the following will be examined at brief. The pre-westphalian world, the post Westphalian system, the world wars and the cold war, summarising the most important changes that formed the way military force is been used today, focusing in the west regions, were later the western liberal democracies were formed. Before the westphalian system, religious authority was ruling in Europe. The Roman Empire had a centralised authority since the fifth century, and then a decentralisation followed in the middle ages. The majority of the western Europe regions, reverted to feudal principalities then, authority was placed on private hands and as a consequence, power were allocated in different overlapping levels1. The predominant institution was once again the church with the pope and the central authority in Rome. Wars then were fighting for territorial expansion and religious unification under the name of Christianity. Later
US military History - A long telescope allows us to see how warfare evolved from simple brutish clashing of men and clubs to a culture of warriors itself.
The Long Telescope US Military History Brian L. Hansen Consequently, the art of using troops is this: When ten to the enemy's one, surround him... When five times his strength, attack him... If double his strength, divide him... If equally matched, you may engage him... If weaker numerically, be capable of withdrawing... Sun Tzu, The Art of War A long telescope allows us to see how warfare evolved from simple brutish clashing of men and clubs to a culture of warriors itself. From the age of the chariots to the last great horse battles of World War II, man and equestrian beast have become one in bringing swift death upon their enemies. It was this art of combining the valor of man with the strength and speed of the horse, and wrapping it in ideology, which changed warfare and this world's history. Shortly after 1525 BC, the first chariots appeared under the direction and bloodlust of Aryan armies from lands in eastern present day Iran. The author John Keegan maintains the "adoption of the war chariot... is one of the most extraordinary episodes in world history."? The appearance of the chariot alone cannot claim to be revolutionary, instead it must be combined with the speed of the horse and skill of the archer with his composite bow in order to gain battlefield dominance. The relatively slow foot troops were at a great disadvantage when fast chariots could
The Strategic Competence of Small Businesses.
The Strategic Competence of Small Businesses Abstract The general investigative focus of our research paper is on the market. More specifically, we narrow our focus on the question as to whether there is something like a specific strategic competence of small firms. Our initial hypothesis is that small firms have a very different "strategic competence" as compared to large firms. An extensive literature review comes up with 35 potential variables for such a specific strategic competence of small businesses. After a thorough analysis, this list is narrowed down to 15 variables. These 15 variables have powerful theoretical and practical implications and their validity should be tested through more in-depth literature reviews as well as empirical research on a global scale. CONTENTS . INTRODUCTION 5 .1 The General Issue: The Market 5 .2 Narrowing The Focus: Specific Strategic Competences Of Small Businesses 6 .3 What Motivated Our Investigation 7 2. REVIEW OF THE PERTINENT LITERATURE 9 2.1 Vozikis and Mescon (2002) on the Strategic Competence of Small Businesses 10 2.2 Strategy and the Internet - Has Planning Become Obsolete? 16 2.3 The Importance of Planning and Preparation (from Sun Tzu through von Clausewitz to The Economist 2002) 21 2.4 Small Businesses and Planning 23 2.4.1 Perry (2001) On The Relationship Between Planning And Failure 23 2.4.2 Upton et al.
Compare realist, neorealist and liberal explanations of war. Using examples assess which explanations seem to you to be the most valid.
Compare realist, neorealist and liberal explanations of war. Using examples assess which explanations seem to you to be the most valid. War has drastic consequences, over 125 million deaths have been accounted for since 1900 and many being innocent civilians. Over the years wars have been fought for a variety of reasons, but more recently these reasons have been changing. Looking at recent wars, territorial expansion of the larger states has been replaced by wars fought for ideology (Vietnam), intervention for human needs (Kosovo), protection of allies/resources (Iraq '91), terrorism (Afghanistan). All wars between states tend to start from decisions of national leaders, whose choices ultimately determine whether armed conflict will occur. In this case, we must look at the relationship of war towards these individuals. There are two types of realism. Classical realism (traditional realists) and structural realists (neorealist). I will first look into the classical realists' perspective of war. Realists look at war as a drive for power which cannot be eliminated. This is such a traditional perspective as many times in history we have come to know of wars occurring wholly on the purpose on increasing one's power. The 'want for resources' is a very big incentive for leaders to go to war according to realists. Many countries go to war on the basis that the country they are
Threat of Nuclear Terrorism and its implication for Western Security
Running Head: THREAT OF NUCLEAR TERRORISM AND ITS IMPLICATION FOR Threat of Nuclear Terrorism and its implication for Western Security [Author's Name] [Institution's Name] Threat of Nuclear Terrorism and its implication for Western Security Introduction Terrorism and the possible possession by terrorists of WMD, especially nuclear weapons, are part of the "asymmetric" dynamics that have thrust the international community into a new and uncertain situation. These dynamics have been witnessed in the 9/11 (2001) al Qaeda terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, the 3/11 (2004) terrorist attacks against Madrid, and the 7/11 (2005) terrorist attacks against London. 1Terrorist acquisition and use of WMD, especially nuclear weapons, is an extremely serious problem that must not be dismissed as the subject of works of fiction. Indeed, the U.S. casualties and losses on 9/11 would be seen as relatively minor as compared to a possible terrorist strike using even crude nuclear weapons. Both candidates in the United States 2004 presidential elections agreed that this is the most serious threat the country faces. 2 The threat of terrorist strikes, particularly those involving weapons of mass destruction (WMD) represents one of the most serious threats to the United States and other nations that are potential targets of subnational, national, and transnational terrorist groups
WHY SHOULD ONE STUDY ANCIENT/ CLASSICAL GREEK AND ROMAN WARFARE?
WHY SHOULD ONE STUDY ANCIENT/ CLASSICAL GREEK AND ROMAN WARFARE? Ancient, Classical Greek and Roman warfare should be studied as warfare has always been a common part of life as it has always has been. To understand modern warfare and revolutions in military affairs or even the current political situations, a background in ancient warfare can help explain many factors as the connection is axiomatic in contemporary studies of the history of warfare. Even though, we are supposed to learn from our mistakes in history we do not. Studying the ancient or classical Roman times certainly tells us how selfish and cruel man can be and never learn form history.1 Wars carried out thousands of years are being compared to those carried out in the 20th century, for example, the Korean War was compared to the Peloponnesian War, and the current 'war on terror' has revived the study of the Crusades. So what can we include in the Ancient World? Greece, Rome, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Babylon, Persia, Byzantium and Turkey are certainly included as well as figures like Alexander, Plato, Virgil, Socrates, Aristotle, Caesar, and Homer. Ancient Civilization did not begin in what we think of as the West. It did not start in Paris or Berlin or London or Prague or Brussels or Stockholm. It grew out of the Mediterranean breezes, the sun and desert of Northern Africa, the Persian and West Asian
