Securitising environmental issues can aid in combating environmental degradation, by gaining the attention of high-level decision makers and enabling mobilisation of resources towards a solution. However if the focus of security remains on the state, securitisation is likely to cause problems as well as solve them.
Rousseau and Rawls attempt to solve the elusive mystery of consensus in the pluralist environment of ancient and contemporary systems of democracy.
Do states go to war due to resource competition? Or, do states seek settlements that reflect their long-term interests? Cross-tabulating data from the Issues Correlates of War dataset and Peter H. Gleick’s Event Intensity Scale shows that states seek negotiated settlements.
“Nationalism”, asserts Fred Halliday, “has been one of the formative processes of the modern world”[1]and many argue that nationalist ideology continues to play an important part in the political discourse and decisions of the developed and developing world. In the dialogue of this essay I will; briefly define the ‘nationalist ideal’ and the complications such a definition raises; examine the nature of contemporary nationalism and whether this can be ascribed as ‘new nationalism’; ascertain the impact that modernity and globalisation has on the nationalist ideal; and present a discussion on the relevance of nationalism in the conduct of politics in the United States, with particular focus upon the internationalist scope of American nationalism and the need to securitize subjectivity in times of uncertainty and existential anxiety.
From a simple positivist position, it is relatively straightforward to claim that – in a not so distant future – the most significant threats to the human society will be environmentally related. It is difficult to conceive another set of problematics that could rival the global scale and potential magnitude of the consequences provoked – for instance – by a constant rise in the sea levels or by a substantial reduction in the global availability of water.
Release from colonial rule has not benefited Sierra Leone. Ironically, it is the government’s responsibility to provide its citizens with good living conditions; in Sierra Leone, it is this same government that plays a key factor in pushing them into deeper poverty.
This essay argues that, for the English School, war is an essential component of international relations that is regulated by “norms”. Prominent English School thinkers believe that war should be waged with reference to morality and justice (with rules formulated to that effect) and that the purpose and existence of war is as an instrument of international society used to enforce international justice.
The gendered approach uncovers information through non-traditional sources, and can tell theorists more about a conflict or national sentiment than regular statistics and game theory.
The media can be a highly useful tool for agencies and individuals involved in development projects. It can be used to raise awareness of the problems they are working to overcome, to apply political pressure, and to gain financial or material support. Unfortunately, at times the way that the media and the way that development projects function often come in to conflict, especially for corporate news outlets
This essay explores the partial “success” of sanctions in Libya and their “failure” in the case of North Korea, before looking at the issue of integrative complexity and the current sanctions regime in Iran.
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.