In 1992 I was 12 years old, I was just a kid… In Genoa, naturally, they were celebrating the 500 years since the so called “discovery of America”. A Genoese, Christopher Columbus, by chance landed on a small Carribean island and since that day many things have changed. From the protests against that event, one statement sticks in my head: “1492, Don’t accept caravelles from a stranger”.
The slaughter of civilians in Mumbai by terrorists in November 2008 has once again vitiated the relationship between India and Pakistan in what is the fourth major crisis between them since the two countries became nuclear powers in the late 1980s.
The mantra used to be that North Korea (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea – DPRK) never changed, in contrast to the dynamism of South Korea (Republic of Korea- ROK). This was always a doubtful assertion – change there was but it was slow and often barely perceived because of the DPRK’s skill at concealment. Today, the mantra no longer applies. While some still bemoan the DPRK’s relatively slowness to change, few would now deny that change has been taking place. Unfortunately, from most points of view, it was change in the wrong direction in 2008.
The assassination of the former president Anwar Sadat and the subsequent endorsement of the action by Tehran has been a source of tension between Iran and Egypt. For about twenty-seven years, conflicting interpretation of Sadat’s role in history has caused hostility between the two states. Although, the nature of animosity is multifaceted, disagreement over Sadat is an issue that symbolises the problems between the two countries.
The recent attacks in India suggest that the specter of religiously-motivated violence is not just back on the global agenda, but will be part of international affairs for years to come. Given what appears to be a jump in religiously-motivated violence over the last several years, what can we learn from past instances of religiously-motivated warfare to help us understand the present and future?
“Change” is the defining theme in the vision of Barack Obama for the future of American politics. Indeed, his proclaimed mission not only encompasses the transformation of American internal politics, but it also includes changing the direction of the US foreign policy. In that light, some have assumed that his arrival on the centre stage of American politics will mark a watershed in Iranian-American relations.
While most studies on peaceful settlement of disputes see the substance of the proposals for a solution as the key to a successful resolution of conflict, a growing focus of attention shows that a second and equally necessary key lies in the timing of efforts for resolution (Zartman 2000). Parties resolve their conflict only when they are ready to do so–when alternative, usually unilateral, means of achieving a satisfactory result are blocked and the parties feel that they are in an uncomfortable and costly predicament. At that ripe moment, they seek or are amenable to proposals that offer a way out.
The recent Russian-Georgian conflict brought to the forefront several important international issues, not least the thorny problems concerning Russia’s energy clout and the European Union’s energy vulnerability. It became increasingly clear that Russia has no intention of becoming a passive or marginalised power. Simultaneously, current containment policy towards Iran is failing. . It is important that Iran be part of near-future investment programmes and arrangements – both economically and politically.
Piracy remains on the fringes of academic research interests, often seen as an exotic and rare phenomenon, often studied in connection with terrorism and other forms of crime, this despite an increasing number of attacks over the last years. Indeed, over 282 attacks were recorded worldwide in 2007 – an increase of 41% from the previous year; the surge seemed to continue in 2008.
Despite Nigeria’s transition to democracy there are trends towards identity-driven political agitation by well-armed youth militia or vigilante groups engaged in acts of violence as responses to alienation from the state, economic decline, unemployment, and the militarization of society by decades of military rule. This underscores the persistence of militarism within some sections of civil society in a ‘democracy-from-above’ which has in practice largely favoured vested interests, and all but closed the prospects for political participation, dialogue and grassroots democratization.
Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.
E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!
Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.
