File Name: theories of peace and security .zip
- Realism, Liberalism and the Possibilities of Peace
- School of Politics and International Studies - Site Homepage
- The Role of Women in Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding
- International security
Whilst classical approaches linked development with peace, security has become central to understandings of both war and peacetime. This book uniquely reflects on how to deal with the convergence of war and peace in the context of global economic and geo-political development. It addresses methodological challenges in contemporary approaches to conflict, violence, security peace and development.
Realism, Liberalism and the Possibilities of Peace
What will the spread of nuclear weapons do to the world? Horizontally, they have spread slowly across countries, and the pace is not likely to change much.
Short-term candidates for the nuclear club are not very numerous. Counting India and Israel, membership grew to seven in the first 35 years of the nuclear age. A doubling of membership in this decade would be surprising. Since rapid changes in international conditions can be unsettling, the slowness of the spread of nuclear weapons is fortunate. Someday the world will be populated by ten or twelve or eighteen nuclear-weapon states hereafter referred to as nuclear states.
What the further spread of nuclear weapons will do to the world is therefore a compelling question. Most people believe that the world will become a more dangerous one as nuclear weapons spread.
The chances that nuclear weapons will be fired in anger or accidentally exploded in a way that prompts a nuclear exchange are finite, though unknown. Those chances increase as the number of nuclear states increase. More is therefore worse. Most people also believe that the chances that nuclear weapons will be used vary with the character of the new nuclear states—their sense of responsibility, inclination toward devotion to the status quo, political and administrative competence.
If the supply of states of good character is limited as is widely thought, then the larger the number of nuclear states, the greater the chances of nuclear war become. And if nuclear weapons are acquired by two states that are traditional and bitter rivals, should that not also foster our concern?
Predictions on grounds such as the above point less to likelihoods and more to dangers that we can all imagine. They identify some possibilities among many, and identifying more of the possibilities would not enable one to say how they are likely to unfold in a world made different by the slow spread of nuclear weapons. We want to know both the likelihood that new dangers will manifest themselves and what the possibilities of their mitigation may be.
We want to be able to see the future world, so to speak, rather than merely imagining ways in which it may be a better or a worse one. How can we predict more surely? With those two tasks accomplished in the first part of this paper, I shall ask in the second part whether increases in the number of nuclear states will introduce differences that are dangerous and destabilizing.
The Second World War followed the first one within twenty-one years. Conflict marks all human affairs. In the past third of a century, conflict has generated hostility among states and has at times issued in violence among the weaker and smaller ones.
Remarkably, general war has been avoided in a period of rapid and far-reaching changes—decolonization; the rapid economic growth of some states; the formation. Presumably features found in the post-war system that were not present earlier account for the world's recent good fortune. The Effects of Bipolarity. Bipolarity has produced two outstandingly good effects. They are seen by contrasting multipolar and bipolar worlds. First, in a multipolar world there are too many powers to permit any of them to draw clear and fixed lines between allies and adversaries and too few to keep the effects of defection low.
With three or more powers, flexibility of alliances keeps relations of friendship and enmity fluid and makes everyone's estimate of the present and future relation of forces uncertain. There are too many to enable anyone to see for sure what is happening. In a bipolar world, the two great powers depend militarily mainly on themselves.
This is almost entirely true at the strategic nuclear level, largely true at the tactical nuclear level, and partly true at the conventional level. Not only do we carry the main military burden within the alliance because of our disproportionate resources but also because we contribute disproportionately from those resources. Internal balancing is more reliable and precise than external balancing.
States are less likely to misjudge their relative strengths than they are to misjudge the strength and reliability of opposing coalitions. In a bipolar world, uncertainty lessens and calculations are easier to make.
The military might of both great powers makes quick and easy conquest impossible for either, and this is clearly seen. Second, in the great-power politics of a multipolar world, who is a danger to whom. Dangers are diffused, responsibilities blurred, and definitions of vital interest easily obscured. In the great-power politics of a bipolar world, who is a danger to whom is never in doubt. Changes may affect each of the two powers differently, and this means all the more that few changes in the world at large or within each other's national realm are likely to be thought irrelevant.
Self-dependence of parties, clarity of dangers, certainty about who has to face them: These are characteristics of great-power politics in a bipolar world. Because responsibility is clearly fixed, and because relative power is easier to estimate. The United States produces about a quarter of the world's goods, and the Soviet Union about half as much.
Unless Europe unites, the United States will remain economically well ahead of other states. In the old days weaker powers could improve their positions through alliance by adding the strength of foreign armies to their own. Cannot some of the middle states do together what they are unable to do alone?
First, nuclear forces do not add up. The technology of warheads, of delivery vehicles, of detection and surveillance devices, of command and control systems, count more than the size of forces. Combining separate national forces is not much help. To achieve this has proved politically impossible. At the strategic level he was right.
States fear dividing their strategic labours fully—from research and development through production, planning, and deployment. Decisions to use nuclear weapons may be decisions to commit suicide. Only a national authority can be entrusted with the decision, again as de Gaulle always claimed. Entering the great-power club was easier when great powers were larger in number and smaller in size. With fewer and bigger ones, barriers to entry have risen.
The club will long remain the world's most exclusive one. We need not fear that the spread of nuclear weapons will turn the world into a multipolar one. Nuclear weapons have been the second force working for peace in the post-war world. They make the cost of war seem frighteningly high and thus discourage states from starting any wars that might lead to the use of such weapons.
Much of the writing about the spread of nuclear weapons has this unusual trait: It tells us that what did no, happen in the past is likely to happen in the future, that tomorrow's nuclear states are likely to do to one another what today's nuclear states have not done. A happy nuclear past leads many to expect an unhappy nuclear future. States coexist in a condition of anarchy. Self-help is the principle of action in an anarchic order, and the most important way in which states must help themselves is by providing for their own security.
Therefore, in weighing the chances for peace, the first questions to ask are questions about the ends for which states use force and about the strategies and weapons they employ. The chances of peace rise if states can achieve their most important ends without actively using force. War becomes less likely as the costs of war rise in relation to possible gains.
How nuclear weapons affect the chances for peace is seen by considering the possible strategies of states. Force may be used for offence, for defence, for deterrence, and for coercion. Consider offence first. Germany and France before World War 1 provide a classic case of two adversaries each neglecting its defence and both planning to launch major attacks at the outset of war.
France favoured offence over defence, because only by fighting an offensive war could Alsace-Lorraine be reclaimed. This illustrates one purpose of the offence: namely, conquest. Germany favoured offence over defence. Hemmed in by two adversaries.
The Plan illustrates another purpose of the offence: namely, security. Even if security had been Germany's only goal, an offensive strategy seemed to be the way to obtain it. The offence may have either or both of two aims: conquest and security. An offence may be conducted in either or in some combination of two ways: preventively or pre-emptively. If two countries are unequal in strength and the weaker is gaining, the stronger may be tempted to strike before its advantage is lost.
Following this logic, a country with nuclear weapons may be tempted to destroy the nascent force of a hostile country. This would be preventive war, a war launched against a weak country before it can become disturbingly strong.
The logic of pre-emption is different. Leaving aside the balance of forces, one country may strike another country's offensive forces to blunt an attack that it presumes is about to be made. Mutual vulnerability of forces leads to mutual fear of surprise attack by giving each power a strong incentive to strike first. Whether pre-emptive or preventive, an offensive first strike is a hard one. A pre-emptive strike is designed to eliminate or decisively reduce the opponent's ability to retaliate.
A preventive strike is designed to defeat an adversary before he can develop and deploy his full potential might. I should add, are not planned according to military logic alone. Political logic may lead a country another country to attack even in the absence of an expectation of military victory, as Egypt did in October of How can one state dissuade another state from attacking?
In either or in some combination of two ways. One way to counter an intended attack is to build fortifications and to muster forces that look forbiddingly strong. To build defences so patently strong that no one will try to destroy or overcome them would make international life perfectly tranquil.
I call this the defensive ideal. The other way to inhibit a country's intended aggressive moves is to scare that country out of making them by threatening to visit unacceptable punishment upon it.
School of Politics and International Studies - Site Homepage
International security , also called global security , is a term which refers to the measures taken by states and international organizations , such as the United Nations , European Union , and others, to ensure mutual survival and safety. These measures include military action and diplomatic agreements such as treaties and conventions. International and national security are invariably linked. International security is national security or state security in the global arena. With the end of World War II , a new subject of academic study focusing on international security emerged. It began as an independent field of study, but was absorbed as a sub-field of international relations.
Introduction · Front Matter Pages PDF · Introduction John Garnett Pages 13 PDF.
The Role of Women in Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding
This paper argues that paying special attention to the different experiences of women and men is critical in designing successful conflict management and peacebuilding programmes. It examines the role women play and the obstacles they continue to face in post-conflict resolution and peacebuilding. Conflicts often force women to organise themselves to safeguard basic necessities and to carry out activities related to, for example, education and healthcare. These activities have a role to play in ensuring lasting peace and governments must ensure women are included in key peace negotiations at all levels.
Kinsella and Laura J. Is that it?
Theories of Peace and Security. The module will define concepts, meanings, and the overall notions of peace and security. It is designed to engage students in an examination of the major contemporary theories and conceptual challenges of peace and security; sources of conflict and violence, and several key nonviolent mechanisms for conflict transformation and prevention. The first half of the module will be focused on theoretical assumption and its implications and the second half, on the discovery and application of methods. Participants in the module will engage critically with various theories and methods of Peace and Security and its impacts conflict and violence. They will develop their understandings of the theoretical resources available in the area of peace and security studies as well as their capacity for putting theory into practice.
Various theories about peace educa-tion have arisen as peace movement activists have struggled to address different forms of violence at global, ecological, community and personal levels. This book will be essential reading for students of war and conflict studies, peace studies, conflict analysis and conflict resolution, and ethnic conflict, as well as security studies and IR in general. They comprised 80 countries. Peace and Conflict Studies is an interdisciplinary field of study with a commitment to the non-violent management and resolution of conflict from the local to the international level. The emergence and development of all these theories and approaches are historically contextualized alongside developments of Conflict Resolution approaches. Many theories of conflict exist in explaining the nature of conflict in society.
Research and expertise
S President Barack Obama. When Plato said that only the dead have seen the end of war, his remarks echoed the history of his time. Peace has been central to this process of inquiry and thought which has led humanity to its present condition. Theories of peace and war have been central to this cognitive exercise. However, in the last three centuries, relations between nation-states have taken the central stage. Nonetheless, there are still considerable obstacles that remain in the pursuit of peace. Theorists have outlined them and literature has shed light on these hurdles whereas in some cases the pre-occupation with peace has also led towards a more hostile state of international affairs amongst nations as well as peoples.
The Economic Conflict theory, Human Needs Theory of conflict, Relative Deprivation theory, Protracted Social Conflict theory PSC and Psycho-cultural Conflict theory are the theoretical underpinnings of this study, since the Bawku conflict hinges on the issues that these theories deal with. Regional conflicts; However, not all conflict resolution is successful. The course begins with an introduction to peace studies, focusing on why this is a useful area of inquiry and how peace can be studied scientifically. Witnesses courted the prospect that their own blood scholars in order to understand peace and conflict, and 3 to encourage students to begin to try their own hand at making sense out of a complex and interesting subject. An emerging trend in conflict theory shifts the focus from the political economy to basic human needs.
Our experts advise governments, provide commentary to the media, work with non-governmental organisations and engage with communities around the world. Link to Leeds gives international students the opportunity to talk directly to some of our current international students. We provide the academic tuition and theoretical training to explore the current challenges of our global society. The health and wellbeing of our staff, students and visitors are our priority. We know that many people are understandably anxious about the current coronavirus outbreak, and we are taking further measures to address your concerns, to protect your health and wellbeing, and to ensure that learning can continue. Find your bachelor programme in international development, international relations, or politics and discover our opportunities to expand your horizons with international study and work experience. We offer Masters courses in the main areas of global development, international relations and security, and politics for you to further develop your skills and interests.
Сьюзан ни слова не сказала об истинной причине своей беседы с Дэвидом Беккером - о том, что она собиралась предложить ему место в Отделе азиатской криптографии. Судя по той увлеченности, с которой молодой профессор говорил о преподавательской работе, из университета он не уйдет. Сьюзан решила не заводить деловых разговоров, чтобы не портить настроение ни ему ни .
Сьюзан задумалась о том, почему он задерживается так долго, но ей пришлось забыть о тревоге за него и двигаться вслед за шефом. Стратмор бесшумно спускался по ступенькам. Незачем настораживать Хейла, давать ему знать, что они идут.
Стратмор скачал файл с Цифровой крепостью и запустил его в ТРАНСТЕКСТ, но программа Сквозь строй отказалась его допустить, потому что файл содержал опасную линейную мутацию.