The deadliest war in American history may have saved the Union but it left both the North and South in shambles. Towns were charred to ashes, railroads were twisted to coils, and a Southern economy was on the verge of collapse. On top of it all a whole group of people were given freedom and placed into a society alien to them. Perhaps the biggest battle America had to fight came after the Civil War: reconstruction. Many in the US government believed they had the best plan to rebuild the country.…
Course Outline: This course examines the major political, economic and social processes that have shaped the modern Middle East (the Arab East, plus Iran, Israel, Turkey). Major themes to be discussed include: the patterns of 19th century constitutional reforms and the legacy of Ottoman rule; the structures of European imperialism; the processes of nation-building; the struggles for political and economic independence; the continued interventions of foreign powers; the regional ramifications of the century-long Palestinian-Israeli conflict; the impact of the 1990-91 Gulf War; and the tumultuous events of last year.…
Throughout the 20th Century relations between Arabs and Israelis in Palestine have undergone immense tension, change and deterioration, with both parties facing many barriers to peace. Foreign intervention is often listed as one such barrier to this peace. While the importance of foreign intervention cannot be omitted, other factors can be argued to have been both equally and more detrimental to the peace process. These include the founding of the Haganah, the 1948 War after the declaration of the State of Israel, and the rise of political extremism. The aim of this essay is to identify which barrier among so many was most significant in the hundred year period from 1900 to 2000.…
As we discussed in class, every country is different, so even Middle Eastern countries have their differences including “their politics, their models of society, and their understanding of moral responsibility”. With differences like this, there is bound to be with turmoil.…
The middle east has been at the centre of involvement for great powers for centuries. Its people have been subjected to conquest, colonization, and regime change. The Ottoman Empire, European powers and the United States have each impacted the region. The combination of their actions created the modern states of the Middle East as we know them today. This argues that the current social and political situation in the region is a direct consequence of these various powers.…
The name Israel has historically been used in common and religious usage to refer to the biblical kingdom of Israel or the entire Jewish nation. According to the Hebrew Bible the name Israel was given to the Palestinian Jacob after he successfully wrestled with the angle of the Lord, Jacobs twelve sons became the ancestors of the Israelites also known as the twelve tribes, well, that is from a biblical view. Israel, officially the state of Israel is a parliamentary republic in the Middle East along the Eastern shore of the Mediterranean sea, it contains geographically diverse features within its relatively small area, some if not all will be discussed in the essay below, in this Essay I will concentrate on discussing the general information of Israel and that includes its Geographical location, Population, Ethnic Composition, Historical background, Level of economic development and the Nature of government.…
Realism, as a way of interpreting international relations has often been conceived to be closely tied to the Cold War. Realism, rooted in the experience of World War II and the Cold War, is said to be undergoing a crisis of confidence largely because the lessons adduced do not convincingly apply directly to the new realities of international relations in the twenty-first century (Clinton 2007:1) Worse still, if policymakers steadfastly adhere to realist precepts, they will have to navigate “the unchartered seas of the post-Cold War disorder with a Cold War cartography, and blind devotion to realism could compromise their ability to prescribe paths to a more orderly and just system.” (Kegley 1993:141). This paper will demonstrate that this picture of realism is incomplete – realism is not an obsolete theory in contemporary international relations, but is indeed relevant - it can be, and has been applied in the twenty-first century. In order to prove this, the work of well-known political thinkers thought to be the precursors of realism, and the writings of present-day international relations analysts will be examined, and the core tenets of realism will be extracted. It will be argued that these root concepts of realist thought do not rely on the circumstances of the Cold War, and are thus not bound by its confines, with the possibility that these lessons retain their validity in addressing issues in the post-Cold War world of international relations.…
When speaking of the current conflict in Middle Eastern nations, Dr. Ghassan Salamé asserts that the Islamists of today seek to restore “-a highly idealized old order of things” (22), and that their actions are “driven in part by an alienation from the present world system, in which they consider the Muslim world’s position as unjustly marginal in light of Islam’s past glories.” (22). The key assumption that both Dr. Syed and Dr. Salamé both address but fail to state outright, and that underpins the entire European narrative of the Middle East, is the assumption that the core values of the Middle East and the West are too incompatible to overcome and absolutely cannot exist in close proximity to one another without violence. This assumption is directly challenged by both Martin Amis’s short story, “In the Palace of the End” and Yasmina Khadra’s novel, The Sirens of Baghdad. Both stories transcend the narrative of inevitable conflict between European and Middle Eastern values by exemplifying the human capability for empathy in spite of religious, political, and cultural…
Harper, P. (1990). The Roots of Violence. The Arab-Israeli conflict (pp. 8-9). New York: Bookwright Press.…
According to the reading by Schmidt and Williams, realists are “cautious about the use of military force” and did not support the use of force against Iraq in 2003 (Schmidt 193).…
The Arab Israel conflict remains one of the most considerable and complex dilemmas facing the international community. The enduring quarrel between Israelis and Arabs has directly and indirectly propagated many regional wars in the past five decades, jeopardized Western entrance to important oil resources in the Middle East, provided a good reason for increased militarization throughout the region, and caused a high amount of civilian deaths as consequence of terrorism. However, Israeli-Palestinian (Arab) peace prospects are not very hopeful because the ongoing clashes frequently sabotage every peace settlement between the two nations which eventually affect regional peace. The issue holds a significant place in US foreign policy since its birth and White House had spawned serious efforts to create peace in the region. Apart from bringing peace to the region, Washington has its own reasons of involvement in Middle East such as oil resources, economic interests, terrorism but the core problem plays a major role in US participation in the affairs of the region. Every US president from Truman to Obama has advocated many peace plans which even reached towards a settlement but at the end, proved to be futile. To determine the background for understanding the current situation, it is necessary to evaluate the roots of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and probable solutions to end the controversy.…
While it may appear that a government made a certain decision to help a struggling country, or start a war in the name of spreading democracy or bringing an end to terrorism, their true goals lie in much more selfish matters. For instance, a country might send an army into Africa to put a stop to an uprising of rebel soldiers, but on the back side they begin exporting valuable resources to their homeland. Realists believe that power, not peace, is the main focal point of political interest, a hypothesis which can easily be tested by observing the actions taken by previous governments throughout history. By focusing on the study of political power, realists create a continuity of analysis of policy: each state can be analyzed in terms of power politics. Notwithstanding, Morgenthau warns against two common misconceptions: the first would be trying to understand the motives of governing individuals and groups. This is a mistake because motives don 't always align to actual policy or the outcomes of said policies; and the second misconception is the alignment of ideology with action. Put simply, Morgenthau believed that a policy may be made to seem that it has the intentions of the people, or a cause the people believe in, at heart when the reality is that the policy is truly a means to gain additional power. Although it may sound rather obvious. Morgenthau warns that policy has been repeatedly guided by legal and moral guidelines instead of strictly political considerations. As a result, the power of a country and the welfare of its citizens have been routinely endangered. Instead, realism advocates that policy must arise out of purely political analysis. With that being said politics become a bit more translucent. If one were to follow the history of…
Despite the lack of definition, realism has been successful and has become a dominate theory in international relations (Rosenberg, 1994). Therefore defining it remains an active argument, meaning realist scholars continue to debate the fundamental assumptions of realist…
Hostilities and border clashes occurred between Iraqi and Iranian forces before the 22nd of September 1980;[1] however, this date marks the official start of an eight year war that has in many ways become the most destructive and the bloodiest conflict since World War Two.[2] On that date the Iraqi government initiated synchronised strikes against Iranian airfields located within the range of its bombers, while Iraqi ground forces advanced into the Iranian province of Khuzistan.[3] Numerous explanations of causality and attempts to identify the origins of the conflict have been put forward, ranging from geopolitics and territorial disputes, to the attribution of the outbreak of war to the religious and ethnic divide that has separated Persians and Arabs, to grand design theory and finally to explanations claiming that this conflict is merely a continuation of an age-old rivalry between Arabs and Persians.[4] The aim of this essay is to look at the Iran-Iraq War through the lens of Realism and more specifically through that of the Security Dilemma with the intention of identifying the major causes of the conflict. In dealing with a causal question such as that above, one ultimately works with independent variables (IV) and a dependent variable (DV); the IV’s being those that cause the DV. For the purposes here, the DV is the Iran-Iraq War, and the IV’s are (i) perception, (ii) offense vs. defense and (iii) opportunity. The IVs identified here are the three components of the Security Dilemma, hence the abovementioned emphasis on the Security Dilemma as the primary tool in providing a causal analysis of the conflict.[5] This essay will provide an understanding of the Realist paradigm to ensure conceptual clarity. The Security Dilemma will be applied to the case of Iraq with the aim of identifying the IVs mentioned above towards the aim of establishing causality and finally will provide criticism of Security Dilemma and the Realist…
Donnelly, Jack, Realism and International Relations, (2004), The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press , pp. 6-43…