• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
Page
  1. 1
    1
  2. 2
    2
  3. 3
    3
  4. 4
    4
  5. 5
    5
  6. 6
    6
  7. 7
    7
  8. 8
    8
  9. 9
    9
  10. 10
    10
  11. 11
    11
  12. 12
    12
  13. 13
    13
  14. 14
    14

September 11

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

On September 11, 2001, four commercial airplanes were taken over by terrorists and used to bring terror upon the United States. The damage done to the Pentagon and the World Trade Center and the deaths of more than 3,000 people remain shocking images in the American mind. Combating terrorism remains a challenge to the United States and the world. The United Nations, before and after these attacks, had constantly urged states within the international system to work together to combat the violence. Many countries in the United Nations have constantly asserted the post-September 11 era as a new era in war. It is obvious the terrorist methods of combat share little resemblance to combat in earlier wars, like the wars of the Cold War. However, the cooperation in the international system that many leaders are describing as "new" is only a Kantian theory brought a century forward. The United Nations was established with a similar Kantian consideration. However, its power to control and maintain cooperation between nations is constantly questioned by its critics. The Bush administration slighted the United Nations by ignoring its request for further weapons inspection in Iraq. The Bush administration argument for the war stood fundamentally on their belief that it was in the United States security interest to invade Iraq because they had weapons of mass destruction. In addition, the Bush administration argued they would not concede their security to the world's body. The argument the Bush administration posed resembled a realist interpretation of the international system. The United Nations continually recalls Kant's idealistic idea for cooperation to combat international problems while the Bush administration continues to depend on a combination of realist thoughts, like national interest, to denounce the United Nation's stance. Thus, the argument between the United Nations and the Bush administration on the Iraq War and United States national security in general is a contemporary idealist thought versus realist thought argument. ...read more.

Middle

Hans Blix explains France, Germany, and Russia "declared in a memorandum to the president of the Security Council that the priority should be to achieve the full and effective disarmament of Iraq peacefully."19 The Bush administration, wrapping themselves in the realist concept of national interest, did not share the same confidence in the international system or as it seems, the United Nations. Therefore, the United Nations and its idealist thought is extensively criticized by realist thought and accordingly, the Bush administration. Max Weber, a realist thinker, would be highly critical of these idealist thoughts. Weber expresses the state as "a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory."20 Furthermore in "Politics as a Vocation," Max Weber writes: "the state is considered the sole source of the 'right' to use force. Hence 'politics' for us means striving to share power or striving to influence the distribution of power either among states or among groups within a state."21 Weber believed that there was not a system of cooperative states but rather a continuous discussion of "politics" in the international system, which simply translates as a discussion of who receives what in the power struggle. As Weber further writes: "When a question is said to be a 'political' question...what is always meant is that interests in the distribution, maintenance, or transfer of power are decisive for answering the question and determining the decision."22 Weber basically asserts the politics of the international system is not a discussion for peace but rather an argument over whose interests will be satisfied. Hence, for Weber, Kant's and the United Nation's vision of the cooperative and cosmopolitan constitution established among the states would be incomprehensible in an anarchic system of states whose politics is fundamentally whose interests will be satisfied. The Bush administration continually asserts peace in the Middle East is in the interest of the United States and the Middle East. ...read more.

Conclusion

Nevertheless, the United Nations and the United States have created a contemporary debate of idealism and realism over Iraq and other issues. Furthermore, this contemporary debate does not seem to have an end in the near future. With Syria and Iran at the top of the list, the Bush administration appears poised to evoke the state interest of national security to remove any tyrant leader or regime posing any form of a threat. Despite assertions that the post-September 11 era requires a reexamination of international politics, a debate dating back centuries, idealism versus realism, remains the accurate frame in which international politics is discussed. Recognizing which thought one supports presents many problems. Supporting idealism, one must be prepared to explain why many groups, like the Rwandan Hutus, Al Qaeda, and the Bush administration have difficulties finding peaceful settlements for disputes. In addition, one must also be prepared to explain why many human rights are disregarded within many states. On the other hand supporting realism, one must be prepared to explain why the United Nations has lasted this long. Also, one must be prepared to explain why intergovernmental organizations like the World Trade Union (W.T.O.), European Union, and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (N.A.T.O.) have experienced great success. Consequently, an examination of the international system may still leave a person wondering about the pros and cons of each. Narrowing the issue to national security, which is ultimately the foundation to the Bush administration's realist argument, may make for a less problematic discussion. When someone or something poses a threat to a state's security, what is the state entitled to do and not to do? Should the United States do as Victor Hanson has claimed failed: "Turn the other cheek and say, 'What's a few American volunteers killed in Lebanon or the Sudan when the stock market is booming and Starbucks is sprouting up everywhere?"38 Or should the United States do what the Bush administration ultimately did and attack the threat? These types of questions should guide the international debate on terrorism. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree International Politics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree International Politics essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    What evidence is there that the state is still the dominant actor in World ...

    4 star(s)

    Governments are usually characterised by having military capabilities and legal authority. They may also have high status, control and economic resources, possess specialist information and have access to communications, but all of these four capabilities can also be attributes of transnational actors and international organisations.

  2. Manning's Quasi-Masterpiece: The Nature of International Society Revisited

    It is to these students, at this stage of their academic careers, to whom, forty years on, Nature is most likely to appeal and be of value. In the Preface to the reissued edition, Manning admits that 'the book is indeed a bit hard for the average freshman'.18 It was probably as hard in 1962 as it is today.

  1. 2nd Draft Dissertation - The invasion of Afghanistan, The Iraq conflict, and The dubious ...

    It is implausible to suggest that the Security Council would not have been so careless in the drafting of the resolution as such a sensitive time to allow the carte blanche right to attack that Greenwood interprets from the text.

  2. How has the success of the Extreme Right in France come about and what ...

    The collective nouns Mudde speaks of are anti-pluralism, militarism, and law and order (Mudde 1995 p216). Despite these five criteria being included, it does not necessarily mean that an extreme right party must exhibit all these policies to be classified as extreme right.

  1. Do Developing countries have much of a voice in WTO Decision-Making?

    Contrary to this, within WTO each member has one vote and all of them have the right to initiative. Irrespective of any weighting on the percentage of world trade held, contributions paid or any other criteria whatsoever each member is allowed equal status.

  2. Analyse the contemporary political behaviour of Iran. To what extent can its behaviours be ...

    Ideological policy has imposed too many costs on the country's national interests and increased its regional and international challenges to be deemed as a rational course of decision making. Hence, to understand Iranian foreign behaviour, one should try to understand the ideological and normative characteristics of the country?s foreign policy.

  1. Integrated but not Assimilated - Many have argued that the Kurds should have their ...

    The oil fields around Kirkuk made this a big economic loss for the Kurds. The suspicion of Kurdish and Iranian cooperation would lead to violent attacks against the Kurds during the Iran-Iraq war. Saddam Hussein, the leader of the Baathist government of Iraq, started an operation to exterminate the Kurds, known as the al-Anfal Campaign.

  2. Can the United States retain its status as top nation?

    According to the statistics, the funding used by the United States was accounted for 2.4% of the country's GDP, while Federal government assumed 32% of university expenses, but only assumed 7% of the primary and secondary school expense. The fact can explain why the university of the United States are better than primary and secondary schools.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work