The responsibility to protect individuals from violations of their human rights around the world has been a movement increasing in intensity since the end of the Cold War. Since 9/11, the responsibility to protect has perished, and its corpse is now being used as a disguise for self-interest and self-security
International development is merely another tool in the proverbial toolbox of statesmen and global actors. It is an effective way to create the conditions necessary to best secure one’s interests.
In 2009, there is an estimated 1.4 billion people worldwide living on less than US$1 per day or in other words, in “absolute poverty”. Every year, at least 15 million children perish from starvation, a problem that would cost a mere US$13 billion to fix, yet these figures have been increasing over the past five decades.
This paper will examine the development of NATO throughout the post-Cold War era within the framework of the ‘neo-neo’ debate. Following a brief outline of the two theories, the activities of the alliance will be considered thematically, with conclusions drawn as to the strengths and weaknesses of each perspective in offering explanatory accounts.
The issue of Palestinian refugees is both an important and highly emotional matter in Middle-Eastern politics, representing one of the most divisive and enduring problems of 20th and 21st century Middle-Eastern affairs.
Democracy promotion is a US foreign policy tool which synthesises its interests and values. Germany and Japan being turned into successful liberal democracies following WWII, supported the belief that the US could ‘successfully export liberal democracy at gunpoint’.
Working within the traditional confines of I.R theory it is difficult to observe Islam in isolation, as states in the Middle East have, since their formation in the post-colonial era, acted with few exceptions in their own self interest. However, observing Islam as a theory of I.R. in its own right, as an al siyasi al Islami (Islamic political order) not as a factor which influences I.R, may well be a more intriguing quest.
Scholars witnessed a ‘bulldozer revolution’ in Serbia in 2000, a ‘rose revolution’ in Georgia in 2003, an ‘orange revolution’ in Ukraine in December 2004 and then a ‘tulip’ revolution in Kyrgyzstan in early 2005. Although only the Orange color revolutions actually had a color as it symbolize this term, ‘color revolution’ has become a popular term for referring to the four revolutions that occurred among regional specialist and local politicians. Why?
Many will exclaim: religious violence in Nigeria again! And the Western media has dubbed the current outbreaks as something new, with a label, “Taliban style” to connect it with its global narrative on terrorism. There was major religious violence in Jos last year, and indeed many cases before then. There will be new cases in the future. This brief piece will supply the context to understand the current, previous and future cases of violence.
Since the establishment of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, its Communist Party leadership has repressed dissident political views and organized political opposition. Nevertheless, today’s China is not the China during the rule of Mao Zedong (1949-1976), when people were persecuted and imprisoned not only for what they said, but for who they were.
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.