Great powers are primed for offense. They will defend balance of power when looming change favors another state but will undermine the balance when direction of change is in its favor. Specifically in World War I, the struggle for power was exacerbated by the three major assumptions of the security dilemma: Absence of central authority (anarchy), States all have offensive military capability, and states can never be certain about other states’ intentions. The result is fear, self-help, and power maximization, and so, the security dilemma ensued and ultimately led to the outbreak of World War I. Thus, the most persuasive theoretical explanation of the outbreak of World War I is the cascading security
This was due to the position of the USA that the juridical content of the ‘laws of humanity’ could not be defined. They went into the nature of war, after taking objection to the use of the terms ‘Laws of Humanity’, wherein they went on to say that the war by its nature was inhuman, but consistent with the laws and customs of war and they further said that the judicial tribunal could only deals with and administers the existing laws and it is not the forum to discuss the moral laws and laws contrary to principles and laws of humanity. “ The
In this case the ‘Power’ we are referring to is the United States which intervened in this war to help Kuwait defeat Iraq. Realist Perspective of the War: According to realists, the International Political system is anarchical. There is no sovereign entity ruling above the sovereign states in the world. Whilst this anarchy needs not to be chaotic, for various member states of the international
The Japanese had done many ruthless things towards other countries, and they did not have a bomb there, so they could not do anything to defend themselves. Although there are many reasons to drop the bomb on Hiroshima, there were just as many reasons as why the bomb should not have been dropped. The bomb killed 60,000-80,000 people, and most of those civilians had nothing to do with the war. As the years went on, many more people died, which was caused by illnesses from radiation exposure. Even if people survived the bombing, their children would also be affected.
According to Robert Hoag article Armed Humanitarian Intervention, humanitarian intervention is defined as “The use of military force to address the extraordinary suffering of people, such as genocide or similar, large-scale violation of basic of human rights, where people’s suffering results from their own government’s actions or failures to act.” (par. 1) In other words, this kind of interventions purpose is to protect, rescue or defend people from violation or abuse, which is cast upon them by the government. This intervention can be executed by states or International Organizations. Furthermore, humanitarian interventions are a zero-sum game and occur without the approval of the offending state. On this essay, based on cosmopolitan doctrine, I will argue why humanitarian intervention can be justified, DUE to the protection of human rights, and states responsibilities.
“We received no food. We lived on snow; it took the place of the bread.” (Wiesel pg 100) For every individuals hair that is kept in the case at the memorial museum in Auschwitz, needs a voice. These human beings were killed in horrible dehumanizing ways. They were ordered to either the gas chambers or the crematorium; or they died because of their bad health. “We did not know, as yet, which was the better side, right or left, which road led to prison and which led to the crematorium” (Wiesel pg 32) Innocent people were tricked into walking right into the gas chambers.
This is a disagreement was a political issue that didn’t involve any economic factor, and a major piece leading to the American Revolution. Another vital political issue is the forbiddance of westward expansion. In Document 2, King George says: “And We do hereby forbid on Pain of our Displeasure, all our loving Subjects from making any Purchases or Settlements whatsoever, or taking Possession of any of the Lands above reserved.” The colonists wanted to expand westwardly to create settlements, but the British prohibited it. Again, this had hardly anything to do with the economy. It was merely an argument between the two sides, making it a political issue.
The World Wars have a huge impact to develop international law. War among the states naturally occurs because of their different perspective and interest. The two world wars, (World War 1 and 2), has awaken the enmity among the states that they need to have a governing body to avoid that kind of catastrophe. The World War 1, a Global War
The demolition and rioting in Mumbai saw retaliatory attacks by the terror organisations. Over 300 people were killed in serial terror attacks in Mumbai on 12 March 1993. Several other riots, including the 2002 Gujarat massacre in which mostly Muslims were killed, is also believed to have originated from the sparks of Babri demolition. Despite losing several lives over the religious conflicts in the past, India seems to have learnt nothing from Ayodhya. Once again the Hindu organisations have intensified their demand to rebuild the Ram mandir (temple), regardless of the fact that the case pertaining to the rightful ownership of the disputed land is still not settled.
Human society is becoming more lenient towards terrorism. Terrorism is very awful and these criminal should be treated different than an American citizen. In the United States constitution it does not clarify who is qualified to be protected under all of the amendments. Just because the constitution does not clarify who is protected doesn 't mean that the united states should be lenient and let terrorists off the hook. It should be as simple foreign terrorist who have committed major crimes should not be given the same rights as a U.S citizen.