Analytic paper II SIR 210 March 5, 2020 QUESTION: Do values and culture play a role in international conflict? Or are the root causes material? • There is no single "right" answer, but your grade will depend on how well you make and support your argument with appropriate reading references. Make reference to as many readings from the class as you think relevant to your argument. • essay structure, citation, and writing clarity will also be graded • Use only the readings assigned in this class – do not quote lectures or discussion sections. • Length: 1,000 words (include a wordcount) • Due: at the beginning of class, March 12, 2020 Cook 1 Chase Cook Professor Kang IR 210 12 March 20 The Role of Values and Culture in International Conflict Throughout time, international conflicts have emerged, often manifesting within the borders of a country and then expanding outward as other nations become involved. To a certain point, these conflicts can be traced back to their origins. Sometimes, those origins stem from a desire for more financial stability, access to natural resources, or other geographical expansion. Most often, however, the root causes of these conflicts are ideologically based, as one dominant religion fights with another or one nation seeks to overthrow the political values of an opposing governmental system. Even though material causes have played and continue to play a role in furthering conflict between nations, the majority of international conflict arises from opposing values and cultures within diverse and radically religious regions. Across time, economic causes of war have revealed that there are undeniable material sources of some, but not all, international conflicts. Fearing external powers would secure a means of bringing “greater pressure to bear on [him],” Saddam Hussein sought to “seize Kuwait to secure its economic resources” (Pollack 131). Iraq intended to preserve its financial value, which meant annexing areas that were previously not owned by Iraq. These were areas high in oil reserves and natural resources, which would bolster the might of Saddam’s regime. As the years progressed since the 1990 takeover of Kuwait, the U.S. entered the Iraq War based on unfounded declarations that Saddam was hiding weapons of mass destruction. In this case, one might argue that the cause of the conflict was material, since the weapons represented a threat to other nations; however, when no weapons of such kind were found, it became clear that the U.S. Cook 2 ironically attacked Iraq for the same reasons that Iraq had invaded Kuwait. If Saddam was taken out, then America would have a greater ease of access to natural resources like oil that it needed for its own economic gain. Perhaps no international conflict in recent history suggests such a large role that material causes have played when initiating international conflict. While economic reasons catalyze conflict, especially in regions of the world where invaluable natural resources abound, clashing values and cultures further international conflict far more than material causes. Crucial to understanding the role that religion plays in international conflict is the harm that such religious wars have had on human lives. For example, a 60-year survey from 1940 to 2000 indicated that, as time progressed, the percentage of civil wars that involved religion has increased, and such religious wars “are much more destructive than wars fought over other issues: they result in more casualties and more noncombatant deaths, and they last longer (Toft 98). Organized religion itself is not the culprit of such wars. However, looking at those who lead the wars and the radical beliefs that catalyze military action suggests that the values espoused by certain religions trigger these international conflicts. According to many scholars, there has been a significant resurgence in groups like al-Qaida, which has led legislators and policymakers across the world to act in self-defense against anticipated terrorist attacks. The radical religious views of these organizations generate violence against those who do not share the same views or whose views are perceived as a threat to radical ideologies, as witnessed by the September 11, 2001 attacks on the U.S. Those attacks stem from the concept of “jihad,” which can literally be translated as a “defense of faith when faith is threatened,” which often compels jihadists to defend their interpretation of Islam when under threat by ideals like those represented by the U.S.’s current democratic values or the “Soviet Union's ill-fated attempt in the 1980s to preserve an unpopular Marxist regime in Afghanistan” (Toft 111). When Cook 3 religious values are perceived to be endangered, struggles result that cross borders, cost lives, and encourage cultural conflicts. However, religion as a culprit behind international conflict is not limited to attacks on the U.S., as religious values and colliding cultures across the East illustrate religion’s dangerous role across and within borders. Toft argues that “civil wars raging between Buddhists and Hindus in Sri Lanka, between Hindus and Muslims in India, and among Muslims in Iraq” are but a few examples of non-Western conflicts fueled by contradicting values (Toft 98). Many of these initial battles began as disputes over sacred space by exclusivist religions. For centuries, friction has been generated as groups fighting over who claimed the right to certain spaces or whose values should supersede another. The Crimean War, for example, was fought over Christian minority rights in the Holy Land of Israel, while a stolen relic from the Hazratbal mosque in Kashmir led to “160 deaths, 600 injuries, the mass exodus of 700,000 refugees into India, and contributed to the outbreak of the second Indo-Pakistani war” (Hassner 4). One might argue that the relic itself is material, but the cause of that Indo-Pakistani war was not due to a stolen good, but the polarized views of competing cultures within a shared region. When one religion refuses to be inclusivist or tolerant of another in the same area, hostility arises and can culminate in serious, lethal international conflict that pulls many nations into it. Ultimately, examination of international conflicts suggest that there is not a singular cause to all wars, battles, or struggles. Some conflicts like Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait and the U.S. invasion of Iraq can more transparently be traced to economic or material reasons. Still, one cannot isolate material causes as the only catalyst of such conflict. As growing amounts of religiously based antagonism manifests in religious wars, acts of terrorism, and disputes about land rights, such exchanges between different values and cultures cause discord when Cook 4 agreements are not met. Underlying this problem is the issue of exclusivism, and when one culture refuses to make allowances for another or sees another culture as a threat, the quarrels that result can materialize in bloodshed. In the end, there is no doubt that values and culture play a prominent role in international conflict, especially when it comes to religious contention, and in today’s current climate, values and culture are a more dominant cause of international conflict than material reasons. Word Count: 1024 Cook 5 Works Cited Byman, Daniel and Kenneth Pollack. "Let Us Now Praise Great Men: Bringing the Statesman Back In." International Security, vol. 25, no. 4, 2001, pp. 107-146. Monica, Toft. "Getting Religion?: The Puzzling Case of Islam and Civil War." International Security, vol. 31, no. 4, 2007, pp. 97-131. Ron, Hassner. “To Halve and to Hold: Conflicts over Sacred Space and the Problem of Indivisibility.” Security Studies, 2010, pp, pp.1-33.
Purchase answer to see full attachment