War and conflict

Anonymous
timer Asked: Dec 13th, 2018
account_balance_wallet $15

Question description

ach student is required to write a substantial research paper dealing with some significant empirical or theoretical aspect of contemporary geopolitics.

- Typically, between 3-4 pages, the paper should be analytical rather than descriptive and is expected to present logically organised, clearly written, and well-documented arguments. Students should avoid writing a paper that presents normative arguments or political polemics

War and Conflict in the Contemporary World (NBU 2018/19) L1: War and Conflict in the continuum of Peace – an introduction to definitions and concepts Valeri R. RATCHEV ratchevv@yahoo.com Civil war Civil war is a violent conflict between factions (political, ethnic, religious, social) within a state, trying to create, or prevent a government control for the entire state or part of it. ➢ Civil war might be continuation of policy of irredentism, secessionism, and separatism. ➢ Eritrea (1980s) – secession ➢ Serbia (1990s) – war within a federal state ➢Ukraine (2014) – to annex a territory ➢Syria – to dismiss Assad’s regime Civil war brutality Guerrilla warfare Warfare: a characteristic of the combat operations Guerrilla WARFARE is a form of CIVIL WAR in which a small group of combatants such as armed civilians or irregulars use military tactics including ambushes, sabotage, raids, petty warfare, hit-and-run tactics, and mobility to fight a larger and less-mobile traditional military. A warfare within a state or across borders (PKK, Nepal) without frontline. ➢ Irregular forces (partisan) operate over territory aiming to diminish capacity of the state forces to control it. ➢ It creates large zones of no-control and chaos, where civilian population is pushed to take either side. ➢ As the civilian population is “on the territory” and has not decisive role, the guerrilla warfare is not a clear civil war. ➢ Guerrilla forces might fight for “liberation” from dictatorship, foreign forces, ethnic or religious dominance, ideology, power, etc. Guerrilla wars used to have a strong ideology “Hybrid”war “Hybrid” war is an armed conflict in which at least one of the adversaries simultaneously and adaptively employs a tailored mix of conventional, irregular, terrorism and criminal means or activities in the operational battlespace. Rather than a single entity, a hybrid threat or challenger may be a combination of state and non-state actors. Hybrid war blurs the borders between peace and war, creating the ground for a lasting conflict Palestinian intifada Russia’s “hybrid” war Intensity of coercion, violence Conflict and War in the continuum of Peace Crisis Level of critical violence Conflict apogee Serious complex and protracted dispute Single issue dispute Unstable (‘cold’) peace Durable (‘constructive’) peace Harmony of interests Time Every war must end! Post-war continuum to Peace Post-war continuum to Peace – de-escalation De-escalation of war or armed conflict is the reduction in intensity of the use of armed forces. De-escalation occurs in two cases: • In a situation in which neither side can prevail, but both sides are being harmed by continuing the confrontation. But as long as at least one side thinks it can win, de-escalation is harder to achieve. • In result of peace enforcement operation of a third party (international organisation or country/coalition) - (Bosnia) * De-escalation is also en element of the crisis management when a conflict escalates rapidly to the point where the parties fear that further escalation will be catastrophic, and they back off. (This occurred in the Cuban Missile Crisis between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. in 1961/62) Post-war continuum to Peace – stabilisation • Stabilisation is the process of re-establishing the key government functions and services for the society Post-war continuum to Peace – reconstruction • Reconstruction is the process of eliminating the roots of the war (armed conflict). Intensity of coercion, violence Conflict and War in the continuum of Peace Crisis Level of critical violence Conflict apogee Serious complex and protracted dispute Single issue dispute Unstable (‘cold’) peace Durable (‘constructive’) peace Harmony of interests De-escalation Stabilisation Reconstruction Time Conclusion • Conflict and peace are not random, unexplainable phenomena. Both are created, and both can be influenced. • Conflict and peace are not static. They are dynamic, connected processes that evolve over time. • Not all conflicts are violent; some conflicts are settled peacefully. • Preventing violent conflicts requires understanding the dynamics of conflict—peaceful and violent—and understanding the ingredients of peace. • The peace after war (armed conflict) is never like before it Conclusion • War and Peace are not merely the absence of the other, but definable states of the international system • Peace and war can be represented as different phases in social system development. • Conflict is the precondition for war – no war without conflict. Not every conflict leads to war, but each war is a kind of conflict. • Peace after a war is never like the peace before it.
War and Conflict in the Contemporary World (NBU 2018/19) L1: War and Conflict in the continuum of Peace – an introduction to definitions and concepts Valeri R. RATCHEV ratchevv@yahoo.com Classification of war from a political perspective Hegemonic war (also world, global, general, systemic war) Hegemony: one state’s holding a dominance of power in the international system, allowing it to manage the rules and arrangements by which international political, economic and security relations are conducted. War period Global hegemon The challenger 1494- 1517 Portugal Spain 1579 - 1609 The Netherlands France (1) 1688 - 1713 Britain (1) France (2) 1792 - 1815 Britain (2) Germany 1914 - 1945 USA (1) USSR (1) 1945 - 1992 USA (2) USSR (2) 1992 – 2018+ USA (3) China Classical: British Empire in 19 century after defeating Napoleon: British rules + naval power + trade=hegemony Ant. Gramsci: the same result might be achieved using a complex of ideas (communism + state ownership + central planning = global communist hegemony) or (democracy + capitalism=US hegemony) US after WWII: 50+% of global GDP + research & technology leader + Atomic power + dominant at the sea + most powerful global AF Decline of hegemony because of “overextension” over time Hegemonic stability • Hegemonic stability theory: hegemony provides some order, similar to the Government, reducing anarchy, deterring aggression, promoting “freedom” (human, political, economic, trade) ➢ Hegemons control stability trough: - Deterrence, Including nuclear; Demonstration of political will and military power; Sanctions, including military blockade; Limited preventive and pre-emptive interventions; War. • Hegemonic stability theory from other countries point of view: - Unjust and illegitimate order - Infringement in their sovereignty Limited war Limited war is war in which: 1) the weapons used, 2) the territory involved, or 3) the objectives pursued are planned restricted in some way. The aim is not to eradicate the opponent and occupy the country: ➢ Requires limited mobilisation of capacity ➢ Relatively short duration ➢“Socially acceptable” number of victims Deliberation of Kuwait - “Desert Storm”(1991): coalition casualties Country Total Enemy action Accident Friendly fire United States 181 111 35 35 United Kingdom 47 38 United Arab Emirates 6 6 Syria 2 Senegal 92 Saudi Arabia 24 18 Qatar 3 3 Kuwait 1 1 France 9 9 Egypt 11 6 9 92 6 5 Total war Total war is a military conflict in which the contenders are willing to make any sacrifice in lives and other resources to obtain a complete victory. The planned goal is to eradicate another country or to put it under total control. ➢ Total war between equal states require full (total) mobilisation of the national capacity and massive armed forces ➢ Napoleon – conscription, full mobilisation; the last – WWII ➢ Societies are seen as “legitimate targets” (as they have been mobilised) – Germany – Britain (first FAU after UK bombing killed 600 000 Germans and hundred of thousands Japanese. ➢ The nuclear bombing of Japan cities ➢ Great powers and big countries can achieve total results with limited mobilisation against small countries or less capable armed forces The plan might not be achieved and the war may turn into limited.
War and Conflict in the Contemporary World (NBU 2018/19) L1: War and Conflict in the continuum of Peace – an introduction to definitions and concepts Valeri R. RATCHEV ratchevv@yahoo.com Topics • Peace, Conflict, and War from a political perspective • Conflict and War in the continuum of Peace Peace “When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.” Jimi Hendrix The meaning of “peace” in different cultures • The Ancient Greek: eirene, contains the idea of a lasting peace - opposition to polemos, war • In Latin: pax has been strictly connected to bellum (peace after war); Later - pax and securitas were the supreme values • In the Bible: shalom does not embrace only the absence of war, but rather it speaks of wholeness, well being, prosperity, life, and even salvation • In the Quran: salam means not only peace, but also love and brotherhood. • In Chinese: ping refers to harmony • M. Ghandi: satyagraha (struggle for truth) + ahimsa (built-in inhibitors of violence) + sarvodaya (the well-being of all that naturally exists in a nonviolent world) • in the beliefs of Quakers and Mennonites: war is morally wrong (pacifism) Peace in the realist political perspective The realist perspective (ancient China, Greece, Hobbes, Machiavelli, Rousseau, Stalin, Hitler, Charles de Gaulle, Churchill, Putin, Kissinger, Brzezinski, Waltz, Trump…): • State is a single rational actor - state actions are self-reliant and self-centred. • International system is anarchy – states can't trust each other and must be prepared for war – security dilemma as the states are natural competitors; • In an anarchy, power and sovereignty of interests and actions are the only important (if the state has power it will use it; if does not have – should build it to use it). • The international system and its structure differ from the domestic (in its international affairs, the state is separated from the society) • Peace could exist only as a balance of interests and power between states or under unilateral hegemony; cooperation is possible only in limited forms Peace in the liberal political perspective The liberal perspective (I. Kant, J. Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, W. Wilson, A. Smith, T. Jefferson, John-Steward Mill, F. Fukuyama, K. Popper, B. Clinton, J. Nye, B. Obama): • State and non-state actors are important; state is disaggregated into components, some of which may operate internationally; focus on individual rights and freedoms • International system is manageable – cooperation and tensions, dialog and conflict, bargaining and international law may lead to compromises which are not necessarily optimal; IO are very important (liberal institutionalism) • States may cooperate economically even if they are in security competition – interdependence provides security, not the power (collective security) • Democracy at home – democratic peace for all. Boulding’s explanation of Peace as “status” Definition 1: Peace is a setting in which conflict and excitement, debate and dialogue, drama and confrontation do not get out of hand and become destructive Kenneth Boulding Galtung’s peace dichotomy Definition 2: Negative peace is simply the absence of direct violence or war. Definition 3: Positive peace is more than the absence of war or even violence. • It is the most common understanding of peace, not only in the context of international politics, but more broadly speaking in the context of the peace and war debate. • The pax romana (a condition of absence of violence guaranteed by legal arrangements, military power and social repression) is an example of negative peace. • Positive peace is not only a condition of society in which exploitation is eliminated or minimised, but its meaning is so broad to include also the idea of peace of mind, harmony with other living things and with the entire world. • It implies equity and justice in human relations, and absence of all kind of violence, including the absence of structural and cultural violence. (?) Types of peace from a political perspective Types of Peace • Durable peace (Constructive, Partnerships) (The West during the Cold War) • Unstable peace (Separate, Co-Existence) (East-West during the Cold War) Goals of the Peace Policy • To build – To create trust, value (East-West after the Cold War) • To restore – To reestablish trust, value (The West and Germany during the Cold War) Durable peace Definition 4: Harmony is a relationship between communities and nations in which there are virtually no conflicts of interests or values; nations’ citizens feel when they share a common cause. Example: the EU nations. Definition 5: Durable peace, "lasting," "positive" or "just peace" involves a high level of cooperation at the same time as awareness and pursuit of conflicting interests. Parties value their overall relationship more than specific self-interests. Separate interests are pursued within peaceful, institutionalised dispute settlement mechanisms; parties feel no need for military force to safeguard security against others. Violent conflict or repression is virtually impossible. Example: US/Canada or Scandinavian relations. Unstable peace Definition 6: Unstable peace or "cold peace" is a relationship of limited communication and cooperation within a context of basic order, mutual respect and general absence of violence. A "negative peace" prevails: there is little physical violence but no friendship; levels of tensions rise and fall, and parties maintain armed forces as a deterrent. There are few or no explicit mutual agreements. Violent conflicts are possible but unlikely. Examples are US/Soviet-Russia relations. Intensity of coercion, violence Conflict and War in the continuum of Peace Unstable (‘cold’) peace Durable (‘constructive’) peace Harmony of interests Time Conflict “An eye for an eye will only make the whole world blind.” Mahatma Gandhi The Conflict from a political (international relations) perspective Definition 7: “Conflict” in political terms is a struggle over values or claims to status, power, and scarce resources (not only to gain the desired values, but also to neutralise, hurt, or eliminate rivals) that may include the use of armed forces. S o u r c e s Unmet resource needs (territory, raw materials) Unmet Basic Needs (security, identity, material necessities, self-determination) Clashing Values (freedom versus equality) Beliefs (chosen people) Ideologies (capitalism versus communism) From peace to conflict: the dispute Definition 8: “Disputes” are disagreements on single issue, that could be resolved as they usually involve interests that are negotiable for all sides; such disagreements rarely lead to war as they reflect interests but not vital. Conflict escalation – the serious dispute Definition 9: “Serious disputes” are long-term, deep-rooted problems that involve seemingly non-negotiable issues (territory, sovereignty, religion, ideology, security) and are resistant to resolution. Conflict radicalisation: the violence Structural Violence Harm that comes from subtle, gradual, systematised, normally accepted actions of particular social institutions where responsibility is blurred: Direct Violence That committed by identifiable people on particular victims: Poverty, Unemployment, Discrimination, Poor health care, schools or housing, Corrupted politics, Poor accountability for misuse of power – people die from the governance Hate crimes, Ethnic cleansing, Rape,Police brutality, Murder, War - people are killed Violence manifest differently but all forms are interdependent 17 Cultural violence religion or ideology drive the killers The conflict apogee – the crisis Definition 9: “Crisis” is a level of conflict with tense confrontation, including between active or mobilised armed forces. These forces may engage in threats and occasional skirmishes but have not exerted significant amounts of force. The probability of war is high. Example: the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. "In order to save the world, we must retreat" “Mankind must put an end to war before war puts an end to mankind.” Intensity of coercion, violence Conflict and War in the continuum of Peace Crisis Level of critical violence Serious, complex, and protracted dispute Single issue dispute Unstable (‘cold’) peace Durable (‘constructive’) peace Harmony of interests Time

Tutor Answer

NKURUMAH
School: UCLA

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
Good stuff. Would use again.

Similar Questions
Hot Questions
Related Tags

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors