To the surprise of many, there has been little armed resistance to the Taliban. Although several groups have formed, they have had little success and lack international support.
Understanding the causes of such human devastation is arguably the most important question facing contemporary peace research. Can the desire for self-enrichment by corrupt government elites or rebel leaders be solely responsible? Are we to believe the rhetoric of the latter who claim they represent the interests of oppressed populations? In short, what is the most convincing explanation for the outbreak of intra-state wars?
In order to understand the challenges that confront refugees, broader forced migration studies in international development must integrate perspectives from international relations.
Since the end of the Cold War, research into the causes of civil conflict has intensified dramatically as scholars, policy makers, and NGOs have come to recognise the tremendous human toll they exact. Almost completely absent from civil war literature is the impact that natural disasters may have on the likelihood of conflict.
The project’s success hinges on China’s ability to convince Pakistanis that they are neither a new version of the Raj, nor an exploitative superpower.
Traditional approaches to international relation, such as liberalism, realism, and realpolitik, have failed in Somalia. As policymakers determine what to do about Somalia, they should consider employing faith-based diplomacy jointly with traditional military operations and Track I diplomatic efforts.
The gap between the analytical tools of IR and its epistemological western framework has contributed to the failure to predict major ‘upheavals’ in the Middle East.
On the face of it, South Asia appears to vindicate the Hobbesian image of international relations that is a central component of many rationalist/realist analyses and theories. Yet a closer look reveals that Constructivism offers great value to understanding and analysing India-Pakistan relations.
When one discusses conflicts that may have a religious background, it is mandatory to question when and under what circumstances does a conflict qualify as a ‘religious’.
Direct security concerns have pushed Egypt into a security paradox regarding Libya. By supporting militias, Egypt is directly contradicting UN unity efforts.
