Which balance of power system is more stable: Unipolarity, Bipolarity or Multipolarity?
Essay 2 Global Politics 1 Student Number: 100043476 Global politics 1 -Essay 2 (60%) Which balance of power system is more stable: Unipolarity, Bipolarity or Multipolarity? “As a system, the balance of power refers to a condition in which no one state predominates over others, tending to create general equilibrium and curb the hegemonic ambitions of all states.”(Heywood 2011, p.256). Throughout history we have seen many balance of power systems evolve, as states continue to change and grow, and rivalries and alliances disappear or develop, new power struggles come in to play. The international system is constantly changing and in this essay I will evaluate which balance of power system is the most stable, in what seems when studying this idea of the balance of power, an unstable world. The balance of power has been a very important idea in international relations. It has played a key role in realist theory and been a main debate area between the mainstream international relations theories. One of the main balance of power systems is known as Unipolarity. Unipolarity is when there is one dominant state which has the most influence when exercising military, economic and cultural power. In a unipolar world the dominant power faces no opponents, because if it did the international system would
How Useful is the Realist Conception of Power in Contemporary International Relations?
How useful is the realist conception of ‘power’ in explaining contemporary international relations? Realists explain contemporary international relations on the basis of power connections between states or units. Power is a broad subject and realist conception of power constricts our understanding of contemporary international relations because within realism there are different interpretations and conceptions of power that are unlike each other. However, this does not mean that realism has become redundant; rather it is to explain that realism with many complexities, does to some extent offer accurate tools to understand the events in the sphere of international relations which is backed by empirical evidence. This paper sets out in the following manner. First, it explores classical realism by discussing Morgenthau, followed by Neo-realist ideas of Waltz and, while explaining, it is critically assessed with Liberal and Neo-liberal arguments which would highlight some of the main issues of the realist conception of power. It is argued that realist conception of power is narrow and ambiguous especially when it comes to the measurement and utilization of power and, it is presented that the best way to find truth is by having continuous dialogue between these theories. In order to create the best possible model of understanding realist conception of power we need to step
Neoliberal economic policies and military intervention by dominant Western powers have been instrumental over the past three decades in the advancement of democracy and development in the developing world Discuss.
‘Neoliberal economic policies and military intervention by dominant Western powers have been instrumental over the past three decades in the advancement of democracy and development in the developing world’ Discuss. Free trade and export oriented industrialization are key ideas of neo-liberal world order that are certainly shaping our lives today. Neo-liberal economic policies are considered vital for the development of developing states and these policies have certainly played a key role in the economic progress of states like South Korea and Botswana. However, this does not mean that military intervention by Western powers in promoting such ideas would lead to development and stable democracy in the developing world. Due to that reason, this idea has attracted mass criticism from those who claim it to be a domination of South by the North. This paper sets out in the following manner. First, it explains neo-liberal economic agenda and then proceeds to highlight its economic success in states like South Korea and Botswana. This essay points out that despite economic success; these policies undermine the basic principles of democracy and constrain governments in many key areas. The second part of this essay revolves around the debate of using force by western powers on the basis of humanitarianism to promote universal democratic values. It is pointed out that military
Does the UN work well in attempting to achieve international peace and security?
Question: Does the UN work well in attempting to achieve international peace and security? Introduction The United Nations (UN) is often at the centre of dealing with peace and security issues globally. The end of the Cold War in 1991 brought with it renewed hope for a ‘peace dividend.’ But it also resulted in surplus weapons and arms-making capacity, which fuelled the international traffic in weapons.[1] International affairs have been made even more complex since 1991 due to a range of other factors. These include: increasing globalisation; a more multipolar world; political upheaval in Egypt, Libya, Pakistan and Syria; the potential for major conflict with Iran and North Korea; a deepening economic crisis in the North Atlantic; a seemingly unending war in Afghanistan; and non-traditional security threats like terrorism, piracy, and the illegal movement of people. The UN plays a major role in dealing with developments such as these, which then poses the reasonable question: Does the UN work well in attempting to achieve international peace and security? Space precludes a comprehensive analysis of the UN’s performance in responding to all of these issues, so this paper will focus on its response to nuclear disarmament issues and addressing the threat from Chemical and Biological Weapons. It is clear from this analysis that the UN does not work as well as it
Case Analysis - China and Japan Islands Conflict
Han Li Case study September 14, 2012 Case Study – Island conflict China and Japan have had strained relations post World War II and the islands row stands as the latest conflict between the two countries. Known in Japan as the Senkaku islands and in China and Taiwan the Diaoyu Islands, the ownership of the islands have long been disputed over hundreds of years, with incidents beginning in 1996. Historically under Chinese control, the islands were captured by Japan during Sino-Japanese War, yet no objections were raised by Chiang Kai-shek in the Treaty of San Francisco or Okinawa reversion as he relied on U.S. support. Japan’s claims lie within the same two resolutions, since the islands were returned to Japan by the United States (Q&A). With the recently discovered nearby oil fields and fishing grounds, the islands have resurfaced into the international spotlight as not only a territorial dispute but a race over scarce resources (Q&A). Each action taken by one side is immediately reciprocated with a political move from the other. Yet what rises above the superficial territorial and resource contest is political superiority and dominance of the region. In addition to the United States and Taiwan taking sides in this issue, China attempts to establish its dominance in Asia while the United States wishes to reassert its sphere of influence. Tense relations and differing
U.S and North Korea Foreign Policy Relations
U.S and North Korea Foreign Policy Relations June 2012 The most current issue that the United States are obliged to consider is its relationship with North Korea due to the fact that North Korea are at present owners of nuclear power and it is unclear as to whether they are indeed to use these powers with an attack on another state. Due to the confrontational manner of this problem it is necessary for the United States that they deal with it with caution as they are with their relationship with China due to the high level of uncertainty. The issue itself is not the fact that North Korea has nuclear weapons of mass destruction because other countries such as the U.S, Russia, the U.K, France and China are considered to be successful holders of nuclear weapons and have signed under the ‘Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty’ (United Nations 2012). The issue is then the fact that North Korea has not signed under this treaty therefore acknowledging its own place in the list of rogue states such as Pakistan, India and Syria whom all have futures that are unknown and considered to be of high risk by all other states in the world. This rogue status is largely due to the fact that they have not signed the ‘NPT’ which implies that they are likely to use their nuclear weaponry against another state and would also like themselves to be considered a threat to the welfare of all the
Counterinsurgencies in Afghanistan, A look back and a look forward
Counterinsurgencies in Afghanistan Counterinsurgencies in Afghanistan, A look back and a look forward. MSG Steve Grewell, USA Norwich University Afghanistan is a land of rebellion. Ever since it was first settled, it has been an impossible dream to try and govern it as a whole. The terrain does not favor central control of a federal central government, since travel is so incredibly difficult. The people are fiercely independent, the direct result of the history of the region. One cannot look at current events in Afghanistan without having some idea of the great history that has crashed upon the mountains throughout the centuries. The empires that have dared tread upon Afghan soil have left their mark as well. As tribal battles have evolved into rebellions, as rebellions have evolved into insurgencies, the inspired student must look at the various tactics, techniques, and procedures that have been utilized by those very same empires. This paper will study the similarities and differences in the British, Soviet, and American interventions in Afghanistan, specifically looking at their different approaches to counter insurgency. Before one can start to define different counter insurgency strategies, a standard must be set as to the definition of an insurgency itself: “Definition of insurgency- The organized use of subversion and violence by a group or
Sino-Japan Relations: Fishmongers or Warmongers?
Isaac Newton’s third law addresses that for every action, there is an equal or opposite reaction – and throughout history, this notion has exemplified the Sino-Japanese relations. On 7 September 2010, Chinese fishing boat captain Zhan Qixiong collided with two Japanese Coast Guard vessels near the islands in the East China Sea. This resulted in the Japanese action of his arrest which has revived tensions prompting a political reaction from China which has potentially has serious regional repercussions. This paper develops on the horizon of the East China Sea where Japan and China both have their own boundary claims to it. The foundation will set the scene of the territorial disputes: the Pinnacle (in English) or Diaoyu (in Chinese) or Senkaku (in Japanese) islands. Followed by the introduction of five primary pillars which argue their ‘crimes’ of acting as a contributing catalyst to this conflict by exploring actions made by each government. Last but not least, the second part will discuss the factors that may determine a dateline as to whether this matter will be resolved soon or possible even never. To begin with, Zhan Qixiong was within Japanese custody from the 7 September 2010 because he was deemed to have crossed over the ‘boundary line’. After three weeks of diplomatic rows, protests and public demonstrations, the Japanese government finally released
The state of Americas economy is due primarily to free trade throughout the world, but is free trade truly helping America and its citizens, or has it given opposing countries the upper hand? (Free Trade Area)
Free Trade in America Since the mid-nineteen-hundreds, America's economy has been based on the idea of free trade. Free trade takes place when two or more countries come together to agree on disposing of trade barriers and tariffs. Once the barriers and tariffs are gone, the countries are more likely to be encouraged to trade with one another, and this supposedly helps the partners economically by providing new markets to trade within. Although this concept seems perfectly logical, the argument over free trade is a never ending battle within United States. The state of America's economy is due primarily to free trade throughout the world, but is free trade truly helping America and its citizens, or has it given opposing countries the upper hand? ("Free Trade Area") The North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, was established in 1993 and officially put into effect during 1994. It eliminated all trade barriers between the United States, Mexico, and Canada on January 1, 1994 ("Timeline: World"). Many thought that this document would provide more employment within America and overall raise the living standards of all countries taking part, but others thought differently. In their, minds it was be a poor decision that would give away the United States' job opportunities to other countries whose citizens would work for lower wages ("Fast-Track"). Americans are known for
The aftermath of 9/11
In the aftermath of 9/11, what theory or theories of International Relations do you think are most useful in understanding World politics? Introduction They were the most lethal terrorist attacks in history, taking the lives of 3000 American and international citizens and ultimately leading to changes in anti-terror approaches and operations in the U.S and around the globe. (www.fbi.gov). Before 9/11 occurred, the U.S was encountering a period of peace and economic boom. This fostered the illusion that International Relations were of no great significance in the wider arena. The American public and political classes were unconcerned with previous attacks on the World Trade Centre in 94, the attack on the USS Cole, and the attacks on US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Attacks of 9/11 and the fall of the World Trade Centre's marked the beginning of the real 21st century. (Brown 04). 9/11 was not simply an act of terror but the most destructive single act of terror since World War 2. Many in the Islamic community saw the attack, as an attack on "the symbolic heart of global capitalism" (Brown 04). 9/11 galvanised the American people, and less then 12 hours after the attacks, president Bush formally declared a "war on terror". Overnight America's relationships with Russia, China and India improved. Britain and Australia were also seen as close allies. President Bush and his