International Relations

Stalemate; A deadlock in battle situation where neither side makes any progress. Stalemate occurred in the western front, during 1914-16 because of the threat of the Germans losing some land caught from the French, which the French regained after a counter-attack. Both countries decided to defend so therefore dug trenches from the Swiss mountains all the way to the sea. They did this because of the both the Generals had no back plan and couldn’t think of another plan. A further significance is that both armies were closely matched in strength and ammunition, even without same sized armies.

During the 1914’s trench warfare had developed, instead of what happened in the Battle of the Somme, Generals make precautions to protect their armies. Subsequently after France’s counter-attack to regain the land lost to the Germans, Germany didn’t want to be pushed back any further, so the Germans decided to dig trenches starting from the Swiss mountains all the way to the sea. It was the race to the sea.

An additional reason of why stalemate occurred was the superiority of defence. During the wars beyond the 1914 all the countries did was attack with either shells or running across no man’s land with guns. The only defence was the barbed wire. However after the Battle of the Somme, Private George Coppard said that hundreds of the soldiers had died on the enemy wire. He also said ‘The Germans must have been reinforcing the wire months. It was so thick that daylight could barley be seen through it’.

This showed that the Germans had been thinking defensively as well has attackingly. Another defensive based weapon is the machine gun, the British and the French underestimated it, but the Germans used it more to a greater affect against their Allies. After the attacks, which caused heavy casualties both forces made sure, they had an endless supply of machine guns and ammunition. The trenches were also a strong defence as they sheltered troops and kept their territory behind them. During the battle of the Somme the Germans trenches were re-enforced inside with concrete showing that trenches were thought of a defence mechanism.

The stalemate could have occurred by the fact that both Generals had a lack of military expertise. General Von Kluck and General Joffe had no back-up plans in case their original plans had failed. Also Generals had been using 19th century methods in a 20th century battle show their incompetence of the fighting a war. I know this because General Haig wanted to fight a battle with men on horseback showing his lack of skill of being a General.

Another potential motive of stalemate is that both Armies were closely matched, but not in size, but in strength, weapons, ammunition and artillery. Both forces had the same weapons of defence and attack such as machine gun, barbed wire and shell ammunition. None of the forces had the same amount of troops in their armies as Russia had the largest Army but was badly organised which gave the Germans a small chance. The French and British Armies combined was a big force but so was the German’s and Austria-Hungary’s. Both Armies had adopted the same method of fighting making it even more of a closer combat.

My conclusion is that stalemate occurred because, not one, but many reasons such as the incompetence of the Generals who didn’t have a back up plan so had to make do with trenches, also the way the weapons and way of fighting have changed from all out attack to a defensive encounter, which the generals couldn’t figure out. The most apparent reason I find is the how trench warfare had developed and the race to the sea, which showed that neither country didn’t, was to lose any more territory.

Hard power is a term used to describe power that is acquired from the use of military and/or economic force to influence the behaviour or interests of other political entities. As the name might imply, this type of political power is often aggressive, and is most effective when imposed by one political body upon another of lesser military and/or economic power. What it boils down to is: Do what we want. If you don’t, we will inflict undesirable damage on your person, citizenry, economy, security forces, crops, well water, et cetera.

Hard power is mostly placed in the International Relations field of Realism, where military power is seen as the expression of a state’s strength in the international community. While the existence of hard power has a long history, the term arose when Joseph Nye coined ‘soft power’ as a fresh and different form of power in a State’s foreign policy. Nye defined soft power as “the ability to get what you want through attraction rather than through coercion. ” He also said that soft power “could be developed through relations with allies, economic assistance, and cultural exchanges. He argued that this would result in “a more favourable public opinion and credibility abroad. ” By engaging both forms of power, hard and soft, one is then employing ‘smart power’. Another term defined by Joseph Nye, it was endorsed by Hilary Clinton: “We must use what has been called smart power — the full range of tools at our disposal — diplomatic, economic, military, political, legal, and cultural — picking the right tool, or combination of tools, for each situation. With smart power, diplomacy will be the vanguard of foreign policy. Ideas matter, and a country’s ability to promote ideals to citizens of other nations and societies, known as public diplomacy (PD), can work wonders to advance the national interest. By taking a look at case studies, we will examine whether PD can complement hard power tactics and thus we will see if ‘smart power’ is really viable in practice. The U. S strategy of hard power and public diplomacy in the Cold War During the Cold War, the world was divided in two, as the two super-powers attempted to gain support from neutral parties while offsetting the actions of their opponent.

The United States and Russia were more or less equally matched in military and political strength and this resulted in a stalemate. With hard power abilities alone proving ineffective at turning the tide in any direction it meant that another means of demonstrating global dominance would be required. The basic strategy of the US during the Cold War was containment using military, economic, and diplomatic strategies to stop the spread of Communism, boost America’s security and influence abroad, and avert a “domino effect”.

The concept of containment was proposed by diplomat George Kennan in the notorious Long Telegram . Kennan argued that the only way to defeat the spread of Communism was to suffocate it. Containment had two major policies associated with it, the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan and was a reaction to a string of moves by the Soviet Union to expand Communist influence in Eastern Europe, China, and Korea. It represented a middle-ground position between appeasement and rollback. The Truman Doctrine was a robust plan that that pledged military support to the nations struggling against communist pressures.

It was announced By President Truman in his 1947 address to congress after the United Kingdom informed the United States that it no longer had the capabilities to aid Greece and Turkey in their struggle against Soviet tensions. In the address he declared that the United States would “support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures. ” The Truman Doctrine displayed the U. S objective to respond to any further expansion with military force—the hard power element of containment.

The Truman Doctrine was the justification for considerable injections of American money into European economic recovery to counteract the development of social and political unrest. This ambitious aid plan was called the Marshall Plan after the secretary of state at the time. General Marshall proposed the plan with two intentions: to assist in the rebuilding of Europe and to win the “hearts and minds” of the citizens most vulnerable to the reach of communism. The act of benevolence was accepted by the United States’ European allies after a phase of negotiations, but was discarded by the Soviets and other members of the Eastern Bloc.

The Marshall Plan represented a significant early application of U. S. soft power and the vital non-military aspect of US policies of containment. Containment is an excellent example of a successful balance of hard and soft power. The policies they implemented in this process served to strengthen relations with “at-risk” countries in Europe while at the same time sending a strong message to the Soviet Union th at the United States would react strongly to any further Soviet expansion. In fact, containment was so successful, that many experts consider it the leading cause of the Soviet collapse.

Another prime example of this PD was the cultural exchanges which saw tens of thousands of Soviet students go to America to study. These exchanges enabled many Soviet citizens, especially in the upper and middle reaches of society, to see the United States with their own eyes. The students would then go back to the USSR and some even occupied roles of influence and played important roles in the peaceful demise of the Soviet Union As I mentioned earlier, Public Diplomacy serves to make one’s country and ideals more attractive to citizens of other countries.

One way that the U. S achieved this during the Cold War was by setting up organizations such as Radio Free Europe/Radio Lib¬erty (RFE/RL), the Voice of America (VOA), and the United States Information Agency (USIA) which communi¬cated the ideals of democracy, individual rights, and the free market. U. S. officials distin¬guished America’s truthful approach from the lies and deceptions of classic Nazi and Soviet propa¬ganda and therefore the term “public diplomacy” came into general use by the 1970s to reflect this critical dif¬ference.

In fact it was noted by Edward R. Murrow, then director of the USIA, that “truth is the best propaganda and lies are the worst. ” Nye remarks that Pop culture also featured largely in the U. S arsenal as it transmits widely “American values that are open, mobile, individualistic, anti-establishment, pluralistic, populist, and free. ” “Long before the Berlin Wall fell in 1989; it had been pierced by television and movies. The hammers and bulldozers would not have worked without the years-long transmission of images of the popular culture of the West before it fell. In the end, the promotion of these values contributed mightily to the nearly bloodless dissolution of the Soviet Empire. China’s public diplomacy in Africa In recent years, China has looked to complement its long-established employment of hard power with soft power, and as a consequence, the Chinese government has devoted a lot of consideration to public diplomacy. In the past, Chinese governments have demonstrated a limited understanding of public diplomacy, viewing it either as external propaganda or a form of internal public affairs, but this has not prevented China from becoming a killed public diplomacy player. Public diplomacy and hard power are not only used in situations of war or tension between countries. One can look at Chinese relationship with Africa for a prime example of public diplomacy employed to strengthen economic relations. Africa has resources that China needs and so China views other countries, mainly this in the West, as a direct competitor for African resources. That is why they needed to establish such strong relationship with Africa.

A strategy to block out competitors would require a deep partnership of trust (gained with PD), or coercion (Hard Power). The Chinese opted for the trust route as they believed it would be more cost-effective in the long run to establish a trust and understanding. Relationships begin with dialogues. The goal is to build trust. Trust cannot be manufactured, it has to be earned. China-African relations have steadily deepened and strengthened since the founding of “new China” in 1949.

Developing from the ideologically-driven interactions during the Cold War, today’s China-Africa relations combine pragmatic economic and political means to achieve China’s objective of establishing a world order that is peaceful and favourable to continued economic growth and stability at home. In the 1960s and 1970s, China supported liberation movements in several African countries, gave aid to socialist nations to build stadiums, hospitals, railroads and other infrastructure, and cemented relations through a steady stream of expert engineers, teachers, and doctors.

Today, Chinese officials travel to Africa accompanied by bankers and businesspeople, promoting political and economic commerce that develops China-Africa ties in a sustainable fashion. While trade and diplomacy are driven by China’s newfound economic strength and subsequent demand for raw materials, China continues to support longstanding programs that deliver aid to impoverished African citizens, such as sending teams of doctors and providing medicines. There are a number of reasons why China makes for such an appealing partner to many African countries.

China’s attitude towards bilateral relations and economic development offers a different alternative to the political and economic reforms pushed forward by the “West”. China has adopted a firm stance of respect for other nations’ sovereignty and persistently refuses to condemn or involve itself in the internal affairs of African nations. This attitude has earned it the respect of those leaders and elite individuals and groups that profited from poor governance and crooked political systems and so they are not so keen on applying tedious and costly economic reforms insisted on by the West.

In order to demonstrate to Africa how sincere and beneficial their friendship with China is, Beijing drafted a policy on Africa. China reportedly gets over a quarter of its oil from Africa , so it is not surprising it’s interested in building up and maintaining relations on the continent. At the start of the millennium, Beijing established the China-Africa Cooperation Forum (CACF) to encourage trade and investment with 44 African countries. In 2003, Prime Minister Wen visited several oil-producing African states accompanied by Chinese oil executives, and President Hu toured Algeria, Egypt, and Gabon.

China has been collaborating with governments in the Gulf of Guinea, from Angola to Nigeria, as well as with the Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Libya, Niger, and Sudan. In mid-January 2006, China issued an African foreign policy paper. China has laid out the strategy for all to see and it is divided into six parts: 1. Africa’s Position and Role 2. China’s Relations with Africa 3. China’s African Policy 4. Enhancing All-round Cooperation between China and Africa 5. Forum on China-Africa Cooperation and Its Follow-up Actions 6.

China’s Relations with African Regional Organizations The document is made as accessible as possible on the internet. It is written in simple English which means that it is easy to read even for those who do not have an exceptionally strong command of the language. This document is a perfect demonstration of public diplomacy. The Chinese are doing a superb job in the region. China’s relationship with the public goes further than building prestige buildings for the public and the public themselves get to choose whether they want a sports stadium or a government building.

In addition, television in the area is becoming more and more English language transitions from China. By backing up its economic interests with so much soft power, China has been put on a moral high-ground when compared to other global players. EU integration and public diplomacy One of the most successful initiatives to embody the principles of effective public diplomacy was the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community in the 1950’s which has now evolved into the European Union.

European integration is the process of mainly political, legal, social and economic integration of European states, which these days is primarily achieved through the European Union and the Council of Europe. Attempts at European integration emerged originally after the devastation of the Second World War and the desire of European countries to integrate so much so as to eliminate the possibility of another European war. The main intention behind integrating economically and politically is that the smaller European countries have more influence in international matters such as trade and world politics.

A ‘kind of United States of Europe’ was called for by Winston Churchill and in 1950 the German and French politicians, Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet, proposed a common market for coal and steel for those countries willing to delegate control of these sectors of their economies to an independent authority. In 1951 the Treaty of Paris was signed by the leaders of six European countries; Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, France and West Germany.

This treaty founded the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) creating a common market in which the industries that were crucial for war were controlled thus preventing the unilateral rearmament of any of its member states, particularly Germany. The ECSC enjoyed economic and political success which spurred the six member states to sign the Treaty of Rome in 1957 and establish the European Economic Community (EEC), which was transformed into the European Community from 1967 in the Merger Treaty.

In 1993 the Maastricht Treaty transformed the ECSC into the European Union and European integration became less and less about the ‘negative’ removal of barriers, and more and more about ‘positive’, active harmonization. The EU has steadily been evolving as a diplomatic power in its own right. To demonstrate this, we need to look at the broad sweep of the development of an EU diplomatic corps over time; where it came from, how few of them there originally were, how little they did, and how these details compare with trends today.

The European Union practices public diplomacy through a multilayered framework of policies and programs, relying both on its Representations in member-states, as well as its Delegations abroad – it now has diplomatic delegations in over 150 countries, employing over 5,000 members of staff. With its internal communication strategy the Union aims to engage EU-citizens more closely in its political life and to create a sense of common identity.

Its communication strategy for enlargement, on the other hand, is designed to explain the goals and responsibilities of the European project to countries that aspire to become member states as well as to promote the benefits of enlargement to Euro-sceptics inside the EU. The European Neighbourhood Policy provides another layer of regional integration and governance and is directed towards the EU’s immediate neighbours by land and sea, primarily developing countries, who seek one day to become either member states of the European Union itself, or more closely integrated with the economy of the European Union.

Finally, through its network of Delegations abroad, the EU aims to assert itself on the international stage and regulates its relations with “third” countries. Although basically aimed at developing a public diplomacy capability, most of the outreach activities of the EU are not officially referred to as “public diplomacy”, but are described as information and communication campaigns, or education and cultural exchange programs. These efforts are intended not only to inform and explain the workings of EU institutions but also to socialize into the norms and values of the Union.

The European Commission is the institution responsible for conducting the Union’s diplomacy and public diplomacy efforts. While other EU bodies have also initiated public diplomacy programs, the Commission is the one providing the executive action. Since the creation of the ECSC in 1950 member states have achieved great success in integrating socially, economically and politically between themselves however there are still many difficulties to be overcome and the process of integration will never be complete.

Much progress has been made to create an integrated EU diplomatic service and this will continue to be utilized alongside hard power economic and political policies to develop the EU as strong and coherent body of states. Conclusion As we have seen in these case studies, when hard power is coupled with soft power, especially public diplomacy, it creates a most effective product – more effective than the sum of its parts. The European Union for example has been seen as a civilian power.

It has no army even though this is one of the areas where unity would bring an obvious increase in efficiency and influence. It relies on law, on negotiation, on multilateral organisation. Its relationships are often in the form of “contractual agreements”, itself a revealing phrase. It seems a model of soft power, as America is of hard power. Even China, a country based on hard power, has realised the effectiveness of adding a strong public diplomacy to its repertoire. Realists have a preference for hard power.

Otto von Bismarck is famous for the remark that “this policy cannot succeed through speeches …and songs; it can be carried out only through blood and iron”. In a twist of irony however Bismarck’s blood and iron was not the solution to the German question. By 1945 Germany had had enough of both: they had undermined Bismarck’s achievement of unification and had led to the ruin of Germany. In today’s world it is more important than ever to be able to effectively combine hard and soft power to form smart power.

Even one of the greatest military men of all time, realised the importance complementing hard power with soft when he famously stated that: “There are but two powers in the world, the sword and the mind. In the long run the sword is always beaten by the mind. ” – Napoleon Bonaparte Bibliography Bonaparte, Napoleon (1769-1821), ‘Napoleon Bonaparte Quotes’, http://www. military-quotes. com/Napoleon. htm Carnes Lord – Helle C. Dale, Public Diplomacy and the Cold War: Lessons Learned, in the Heritage Foundation (online) 18 September 2007 http://www. heritage. rg/Research/nationalSecurity/bg2070. cfm [accessed 28 January 2010] Drew Thompson, China’s Soft Power in Africa: from the “Beijing consensus” to health diplomacy, China Brief: Volume 5, Issue 21 (October 13, 2005) Joseph S. Nye Jr, Soft Power: A Means to Success in World Politics. Public Affairs, New York. 2004. Joseph S. Nye Jr, Soft Power, Hard Power and Leadership. Seminar, 27 October 06. http://www. hks. harvard. edu/netgov/files/talks/docs/11_06_06_seminar_Nye_HP_SP_Leadership. pdf Lee Rotherham, EU Diplomats, (online) in TaxpayersAlliance. com http://www. taxpayersalliance. om/EUDiplomats. pdf Matt Armstrong, Practicing Effective Public Diplomacy in Africa (or elsewhere). Blog – MountainRunner. US (online). February 8 2006 http://mountainrunner. us/2006/02/practicing_effe. html [accessed 28 January 2010] Robert Cooper, Hard power, Soft power and the Goals of Diplomacy, in David Held/Mathias Koenig-Archibugi, American Power in the 21st Century, 2004, pp. 167-180 Rory D Huff Jr, U. S. Applications of Hard and Soft Power (online) http://www. personal. psu. edu/cpl2/blogs/powerforce/Huff%20on%20Hard%20and%20Soft%20Power. pdf [accessed 28 January 2010]

As a natural consequence, millions of people in Iraq had no difficulty believing that it would be possible to get rid of Saddam if the US, which had been bombing Iraq at that time, was in their own ranks.Although these riots–the period that was relatively unexpected–faced by the Iraqi Republican Guard’s agile and violent interventions. Saddam’s forces have found life in a very disturbing range, from burning gas from helicopters to burning people to bombing hospitals where they were wounded.

However, the support that the United States implied at various levels did not come at all. In particular, Turkey’s fear of a fragmented Iraq, and the diplomatic pressure on this issue, is to step back to support the riots that could result in the US government declaring the independence of the Kurds, and Saddam’s In response to the riots, it was enough to let tens of thousands of people die.The riots that began against a dictator in the region with this back step of the United States suddenly transformed into the biggest migration of the last 50 years.

Only in March and April, nearly two million Kurds began to flee to Iraq’s northern border neighbors, Turkey and Iran, among the ruins of the war, which were suddenly part of their lives.The US, the UN, Turkey, and Iran’s inexperience in keeping the situation under control has worsen the suffering of the people trapped in the interests of the state. During the migration, thousands of people, mostly children, died from the weather conditions, hunger, thirst and health problems, as well as the shooting of helicopters at civilian populations from time to time.

According to estimates made by the United Nations data, an average of 2,000 Kurds per day was killed in a section of 1991.

After the Gulf War in 1991, around 470 thousand people fled to Turkey.The most dramatic examples in our recent history were in Bosnia and in our border neighbor Syria. In Syria, it is still ongoing in the form of domestic and foreign immigration.

The Bosnian War is the most violent war in Europe since the second World War, in which a series of ethnic conflicts took place between March 1992 and November 1995, and many war crimes, especially ethnic cleansing, were committed. According to the official sources during and after the war, only Turkey, 20.000 people had to emigrate. In addition, more than 1.5 million Bosnian-Muslim people had to leave their lands.

About 20,000 to 30,000 women were raped. This war has passed on the history of the world as the bloodiest and systematic genocide. On the other hand, in Syria, approximately 400,000 people lost their lives in the civil war, which began with a small protest on March 11, 2011 and became one of the biggest catastrophes in the Middle East.

While 3 million people were wounded in the civil war, 1 million people were disabled. Due to the Syrian civil war, millions of people fell to refugee status and the historic structures were destroyed as if they could not be repaired.With the process called Arab Spring, the overthrow of the 30-year Husnu Mubarak rule had deeply affected the peoples of the region, not just Egypt.

This historic revolution dominated Bahrain, Libya, Morocco and even Gaddafi’s death.During this period, when the people’s movements led to great revolutions, two female doctors expressed their happiness about the situation while they were talking on the phone. These two women, who were listened to by the intelligence of the phones, were arrested, and their hair was shaved as punishment.

On top of that, the 12-13 children, a relative of one of these women, wrote the slogan “The people want the order to be demolished.” The principal of the school is complaining about these kids in intelligence. They run the children in and expose them to severe torture.

However, the street celebrations that accompanied the British and French declaration of war gives historians the impression that the move was popular and politicians tend to go with the popular mood. Was much done to avoid the start of the war? By 1914, Europe had divided into two camps. The Triple Alliance was Germany, Italy and Austria-Hungary. The Triple Entente wasBritain, France and Russia. The alliance between Germany and Austria was natural. Both spoke the same language – German – and had a similar culture. In previous centuries, they had both been part of the same empire – the Holy Roman Empire.

Austria was in political trouble in the south-east of Europe – the Balkans. She needed the might of Germany to back her up if trouble got worse. Italy had Joined these countries as sne teared their power on ner northern border. Germany was mainland Europe’s most powerful country – so from Italy’s point of view, being an ally of Germany was an obvious move. Each member of the Triple Alliance (Germany, Austria nd Italy) promised to help the others if they were attacked by another country. The Triple Entente was less structured than the Triple Alliance. Entente” means understanding and the members of the Entente (Britain, France and Russia) did not have to promise to help the other two if they got attacked by other countries but the understanding was that each member would support the others – but it was not fixed. France was suspicious of Germany. She had a huge army but a poor navy. Britain had the world’s most powerful naw and a small army. France and Britain Joining together in an understanding was natural. Britain was also concerned about Germany because she was building up a new and powerful navy. The inclusion of Russia seemed odd when Russia was so far from France and Britain.

However, Russia’s royal family, the Romanovs, was related to the British Royal Family. Russia also had a huge army and with France on the west of Europe and Russia on the east, the ‘message’ sent to Germany was that she was confronted by two huge armies on either side of her borders. Therefore, it was not a good move by Germany to provoke trouble in Europe – that was the hoped for message sent out by the Triple Entente. Certain specific problems also helped to create suspicion throughout Europe. The first was Germany’s fear of the huge British Empire. By 1900, Britain owned a quarter of the world.

Countries such as Canada, India, South Africa, Egypt, Australia and New Zealand were owned by Britain as part of the British Empire. Queen Victoria had been crowned Empress of India. Huge amounts of money were made from these colonies and Britain had a powerful military presence in all parts of the world. The Empire was seen as the status symbol of a country that was the most powerful in the world. Hence Britain’s title “Great Britain”. Germany clearly believed that a sign of a great power was possession of overseas colonies. The ‘best’ had already been taken by Britain but Germany resolved to gain as much colonial territory as possible.

Her main target was Africa. She colonised territory in southern Africa (now Namibia) which no-one really wanted as it was useless desert but it did create much anger in London as Germany’s new territories were near South Africa with its huge diamond and gold reserves. In reality, Germany’s African colonies were of little economic importance but it gave her the opportunity to demonstrate to the German people hat she had Great Power status even if this did make relations with Britain more fragile than was perhaps necessary for the economic returns Germany got from her colonies.

A second issue that caused much friction between Britain and Germany was Germany’s desire to increase the size of her navy. Britain accepted that Germany, as a large land-based country, needed a large army. But Germany had a very small coastline and Britain coul d not accep na Germany needed a large navy. Postcard from 1912 of the Spithead review of Britain’s Navvy Britain concluded that Germany’s desire to increase the size of her naw was to hreaten Britain’s naval might in the North Sea.

The British government concluded that as an island we needed a large naw and they could not accept any challenges from Germany. As a result, a naval race took place. Both countries spent vast sums of money building new warships and the cost soared when Britain launched a new type of battleship – the Dreadnought. Germany immediately responded by building her equivalent. Such a move did little to improve relations between Britain and Germany. All it did was to increase tension between the two nations.

INTRODUCTION This paper begins by outlining the definitions and what exactly is meant by international relations. Secondly, it tells the story of how and why the study of international relations emerged when it did, during the course of modern history.

Even though, the history and the origins of this discipline alone does not reveal everything we need to know about how international relations functions in this day and age, it certainly would help us to understand the legacy left behind by this study’s original purpose, international gains and calamities, and by its traditional schools of thought; explanations starting from the time of the Great Powers, to the French Revolution, the first of the alliances, the Industrial revolution, the two World Wars along with the consequent Cold War, the formed international organizations such as the League of Nations and the United Nations, and finally, to where international relations stands today.

The final outcome of this paper is to create a detailed understanding on the readers mind on how international relations developed into what it at present is – a science, or rather a field of study – during the course of the modern history, starting from the 16th century. WHAT IS INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS? International relations is a field of study that seeks to understand a variety of global issues, foreign affairs and the interactions of nations and states within the international system. International relations draw upon its expertise from a variety of other fields such as social science, including geography, history, sociology, political science, economics, law, etc…

It is therefore a challenging field to master due to its both diverse and complex nature. Strictly defined, the field of International Relations (IR) concerns the relationships among the world’s governments. However, these so called world’s governments or in other words nation states, alone cannot regulate the events taking place in international arena. They in fact are connected or rather influenced by other actors, namely, inter-governmental organizations (IGOs), international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and multinational corporations (MNCs) along with other social structures such as economics, cultural differences and ideology. Furthermore, the study of nternational relations has always been heavily influenced by normative considerations, such as the goal of reducing armed conflict and increasing international cooperation. International relations are an exceptionally important aspect of citizenship in a global society. As our world becomes smaller and smaller through communication technology, speedy air transportation and a complex international economy and interactions, the value of peaceful and cooperative relationships between nations is increasingly important. HISTORY The concept of international relations on some level is probably quite old, given that humans have been establishing governments and communicating with each other for thousands of years.

Aspects of international relations have been studied for thousands of years, since the time of Thucydides, but IR became a separate and definable discipline in the early 20th century. However, many people agree that international relations truly began to emerge around the 15th century – the dawn of the modern era – when people started exploring the world and interacting with other governments and cultures. THE TREATY OF WESTPHALIA (1648) The modern international system is often dated from the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, which established the principles of independent, sovereign stated that continue to shape the international system today. Many even consider this treaty, also knows as the Peace of Westphalia as the birth of international relations as a field of study.

The Treaty of Westphalia was a series of peace treaties signed between May and October 1648 in Osnabruck and Munster, Germany. These treaties ended the Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648) in the Holy Roman Empire, and the Eighty Years’ War (1568–1648) between Spain and the Dutch Republic, with Spain formally recognizing the independence of the Dutch Republic. These treaties resulted from a big diplomatic assembly, thus initiating a new system of political order in central Europe, between the Hapsburg alliance (Austria-Hungury and Spain) and the Protestant countries (France, Britain, Sweden). Later it was called by many parties as the Westphalian sovereignty. The key factor to this ystem was the ability of one state to balance the power of another state so that it could not obtain power of smaller units and create a universal empire, thereby forming a relationship between the many nations within the European terrain. THE FRENCH REVOLUTION (1789 – 1799) The French Revolution (1789–1799), was a period of drastic social and political turmoil in France and one that had a major impact not only on France but also throughout the rest of Europe. The absolute monarchy that had ruled France for centuries collapsed within a mere three year period. However, 5 directors established control of the French state in 1795 and held power until 1799, when it was replaced by the Consulate under Napoleon Bonaparte. Meanwhile, by the nearing end of the 18th century Britain’s power multiplied due to industrialization along with its rival at the time, France.

What was once the great powers in Europe and the adjacent terrain were by this era beginning to decline, namely Sweden, Netherlands and the Ottoman Empire. Nevertheless, nations such as Russia and then followed by Prussia (the forerunner of modern-day Germany) also developed in to major players or rather great powers. THE NAPOLEANIC WARS (1803 – 1815) The Napoleonic Wars (1803–1815) were a series of wars declared against Napoleon’s French Empire by opposing coalitions. The underlying causes for these Napoleonic Wars took place due to many reasons. For one thing, the French Revolution inspired a desire among the French to export the ideals of freedom, equality and union. As a result, neighboring monarchs, especially the British Empire, found this very threatening.

Napoleon happened to be both brilliant and energetic in defending the state from its enemies. Eventually, the dynamics of war and the changes in revolutionary spirit made Napoleon King of France and the territories he had conquered. Now he became a different kind of threat as he wanted to maintain his popularity and control in France through conquest of neighboring states. Thereby France, a single, very powerful European state was regarded as a threat to world stability and had to be put down. One way or the other France was defeated at the Battle of Waterloo by an alliance of Britain, the Netherlands, Spain, Austria-Hungary, Russia and Prussia.

Nevertheless, Europe’s’ supreme, the British empire realizing the threat that another challenging nation (the Napoleon’s empire) could bring upon, and therefore established an alliance with fellow European nations in 1815 named as the Congress of Vienna. THE CONGRESS OF VIENNA (1814 – 1815) The Congress of Vienna was a conference of ambassadors of European states chaired by the Austrian statesman and held in Vienna from November 1814 to June 1815. The objective of the Congress was to settle the many issues arising from the French Revolutionary Wars, the Napoleonic Wars, and the dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire. This is to date considered as one of the first the most prominent alliances, or a series of relations between nations in the history of international relations. THE CONCERT OF EUROPE (1815 – 1914)

The Convert of Europe was the balance of power that existed in Europe from the end of the Napoleonic Wars (1815) to the outbreak of World War I (1914). Its founding powers were Austria, Prussia, the Russian Empire and the United Kingdom, the members of the Quadruple Alliance which was responsible for the downfall of the First French Empire. However, in time France was established as a fifth member of the concert. The Concert of Europe, however, is closely connected to the congress of Vienna. It was the balance of power that existed in Europe from the fall of Napoleon in 1815 to the beginning of the First World War. THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION (1760 – 1830) The term Industrial Revolution is normally reserved for a set of events that took place in Britain roughly from 1760 to 1830.

The historical events in question consisted of a set of technological, economic, and social changes that in the long run revolutionized not just the British economy but that of the rest of Western Europe, North America, and eventually much of the rest of the world. For Instance, The industrial Revolution sparked in Britain with the invention of the steam engine in 1769. Wooden sailing ships were discontinued in production. Instead, the manufacturing of larger and faster coal powered iron steamships took its place. These accomplishments put Britain as the leading role in world’s economy along with two other competitors; USA from the west ; Japan from East.

These developments in the fields of marine, road going and rail roads not only increased the world production and trade but also tied distant locations more closely together more faster and more economically. Furthermore, Britain dominated world trade in this period due to its advancement in technology was way above par at the time. Thus, it products met massive competition and as a result British Policy tend to favor free trade. The United Stated nevertheless overtook the British in terms of economy by the end of the 19th century, despite the fact that they suffered greatly during the great depression. However the United States government’s role in the economy intensified during World War II.

By the dawn of the 20th century not only the British but also the United States and Japan were in the process of selling their merchandise in foreign land, and this to economically, industrially and socially influenced the field of international relations immensely. THE TWO WORLD WARS (1900 – 1950) The twentieth century saw the lights of two unfortunate World Wars. World War I took place during 1914 to 1918 and World War II, during the period of 1939 to 1945, together occupying a decade of the 21st century. Unlike a conventional war between two nations these two world wars were global or hegemonic wars in which almost all major states participated in an all out struggle over the future of the international system. WORLD WAR I (1914 – 1918)

World War I was a global war centered in Europe that began on 28 July 1914 and lasted until 11 November 1918. This war is one which symbolizes the tragic irrationality of war. It was predominantly called the World War or the Great War from its occurrence until the start of World War II in 1939, and the First World War or World War I thereafter. It involved all the world’s great powers. It involves the almost all the worlds great powers, which were assembled in two opposing alliances: the Allies (based on the Triple Entente of the United Kingdom, France and Russia) and the Central Powers (originally centered around the Triple Alliance of Germany,

Austria-Hungary and Italy; but, as Austria–Hungary had taken the offensive against the agreement, Italy did not enter into the war). Although the participating great powers made plans for a quick, offensive and rapid victory – what has been called the cult of offensive, the war was neither short nor decisive. In fact scholars indicate it was a catastrophic war that was unnecessary and perhaps even accidental. Russia happened to be the first nation state to crumble as Revolution at home made it retreat from war in 1917. The revolution eventually let to the founding of the Soviet Union. Further, the entry of the United States on to the war turned the tables upside down for Germany.

The Triple Alliance was consequently defeated by the United Kingdom, France and Russia which saw the end of the 1st World War. THE TREATY OF VERSALLIES (1919) The Treaty of Versailles was one of the peace treaties at the end of World War I. It ended the state of war between Germany and the Allied Powers. The treaty was signed on 28 June 1919, exactly five years after the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand (which was a reason for the occurrence of the world war). At the Treaty of Versailles, Germany was forced to give up territory, pay reparations, limit its future armaments and most importantly admit to guilt of the war, while the other Central Powers on the German side of World War I were dealt with in separate treaties.

Even thought the treaty was agreed upon, the German resentment against the harsh terms of the Versaillian treaty would contribute to the German aggression in the mid 1930’s and later on, during the course of World War II. THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS (1920 – 1946) Witnessing the painful experience in World War I, at the time US president, Woodrow Wilson, along with other idealistic mindsets placed their hopes for peace in the newly formed League of Nations. The League of Nations (abbreviated as LN in English, and SDN in its other official languages), was an intergovernmental organization founded as a result of the Paris Peace Conference that ended the First World War. It was the first international organization whose primary and principal mission was to maintain world peace.

Its primary goals, as stated in its Covenant, included preventing wars through collective security and disarmament, and settling international disputes through negotiation and arbitration. At its greatest extent from 28 September 1934 to 23 February 1935, it had 58 members. Yet, the League lacked its own armed force and depended on the Great Powers to enforce its resolutions, keep to its economic sanctions, or provide an army when needed. However, the Great Powers were often reluctant to do so. After a number of notable successes and some early failures in the 1920s, the League ultimately proved incapable of preventing aggression by the Axis powers in the 1930s.

Germany withdrew from the League, as did Japan, Italy, Spain and others. The onset of World War II showed that the League had failed its primary purpose, which was to prevent any future world war. The United Nations or the UN (which would be discussed later on) replaced it after the end of the war and inherited a number of agencies and organizations founded by the League. WORLD WAR II (1939 – 1945) World War II, or the Second World War was a global war that was underway by 1939 and ended in 1945. It involved a vast majority of the world’s nations – including all of the great powers – eventually forming two opposing military alliances: the Allies (U. S. Britain, France, Soviet Union, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Denmark, Greece, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, South Africa, Yugoslavia) and the Axis (Germany, Italy, Japan, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria). It was the most widespread war in history, with more than 100 million people serving in military units. In a state of “total war”, the major participants placed their entire economic, industrial, and scientific capabilities at the service of the war effort, erasing the distinction between civilian and military resources. Marked by significant events involving the mass death of civilians, including the Holocaust and the only use of nuclear weapons in warfare, it resulted in 50 million to over 70 million fatalities. These deaths make World War II by far the deadliest conflict in all of human history.

Even though, the Empire of Japan was already at war with the Republic of China in 1937, the world war is generally said to have begun on 1 September 1939, with the invasion of Poland by Germany, and subsequent declarations of war on Germany by France and most of the countries of the British Empire. Germany therefore set out to establish a large empire in Europe. From late 1939 to early 1941, in a series of campaigns and treaties, Germany conquered or subdued much of continental Europe. Later on however, the nominally neutral Soviet Union fully or partially invaded, occupied and annexed territories of its six European neighbors, including Poland. As a result the United Kingdom remained the only major force continuing the fight against the Axis, with battles taking place in North Africa as well as the long-running Battle of the Atlantic.

In June 1941, the European Axis launched an invasion of the Soviet Union, giving a start to the largest land theatre of war in history, which tied down the major part of the Axis’ military forces for the rest of the war. In December 1941, the Empire of Japan, which aimed to dominate East Asia and Indochina, joined the Axis, attacked the United States and European territories in the Pacific Ocean, and quickly conquered much of the West Pacific. The advancement of the Axis nations were stopped in 1942, after Japan lost a series of marine battles and German troops were defeated in North Africa and followed by, at Stalingrad. In 1943, with a series of German defeats in Eastern Europe, the Allied invasion of Fascist Italy, and American victories in the Pacific, the Axis lost the initiative and undertook strategic retreat on all fronts.

Meanwhile in 1944, the Soviet Union regained all of its territorial losses and invaded Germany and its allies. The war in Europe ended with the capture of Berlin by Soviet and Polish troops and subsequently the Germans fell into surrender on 8 May 1945. After two devastating nuclear bombing n Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the war in Asia ended on 15 August 1945 when the Empire of Japan agreed to surrender. Thereby, victory of the Ally nations over the Axis in 1945 ended the conflict. World War II altered the political alignment and social structure of the world. THE UNITED NATIONS (1945 – Present) The United Nations was established to encourage international cooperation and prevent future conflicts.

The great powers that were the know as victors in the war – nations such as the United States, Soviet Union, China, United Kingdom & France – became the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. The United Nations is in fact an international organization whose original aims were regard to facilitating cooperation in international law, international security, economic development, social progress, human rights, and achievement of world peace. Founded in 1945 after World War II it went to replace the League of Nations, in hopes to stop wars between countries, and to provide a platform for dialogue. So far the United Nations has been successful in preventing a third World War, which otherwise would probably mean nuclear warfare & consequent destruction of the world.

Furthermore, the United Nations proclaims to consist of 193 member states, which includes every sovereign state in the world with the exception of Vatican City. Nevertheless, this forming of this organization is known to be the biggest and the most successful alliance between nations in the history of International Relations. THE COLD WAR (1945 – 1889) The Soviet Union and the United States emerged as rival superpowers, creating a bipolar world and setting the stage for the Cold War. The cold war lasted for the next 46 years and each of them had its own ideology, its collection of alliances, third world consumers and a deadly armory of nuclear weapons.

Meanwhile, the influence of European great powers started to decline, while the decolonization of Asia and Africa began. Most countries whose industries had been damaged moved towards economic recovery. Political integration, especially in Europe, emerged as an effort to stabilize post war relations between fellow nations. In addition, the United States forged NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization), a military alliance using suppression of communism and encouraging capitalism as a main strategy in 1949, while the Soviet Union formed the Warsaw Pact in 1955. Some countries aligned with either of these 2 superpowers, whilst others chose to remain as Non-Aligned Movement.

The Cold War was named likewise as it never featured direct military action, since both sides possessed nuclear weapons, and its use would result in mass destruction. However these two parties’ third world allies fell victim to s streak of devastating wars, namely, the Korean War (1950–1953), the Suez Crisis (1956), the Berlin Crisis of 1961, the Cuban Missile Crisis (1962), the Vietnam War (1959–1975), the Yom Kippur War (1973), the Soviet war in Afghanistan (1979–1989), the Soviet downing of Korean Air Lines Flight 007 (1983), and the “Able Archer” NATO military exercises (1983). However, by 1991 the cold war came to an end as the Soviet Union collapsed and reformed in to 12 different states.

In the 1980s, the United States increased diplomatic, military, and economic pressures on the Soviet Union, at a time when the communist state was already suffering from economic stagnation. In 1991 occurred the collapse of the Soviet Union, leaving the United States as the dominant military power, and leaving behind a resulting uni-polar world. Nevertheless, the Cold War and its events have left a significant legacy, a huge impact and a rather solid attitude towards the functions of International Relations. The aftermath of Cold War conflict, however, is not always easily erased, as many of the economic and social tensions that were exploited to energize Cold War competition in parts of the Third World remain sensitive.

In Eastern Europe, the end of the Cold War has ushered in an era of economic growth while in other parts of the world, such as Afghanistan, independence was accompanied by state failure. SCOPE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS TODAY The scope of international relations has greatly expanded in modern times. Initially international relations concerned only upon the study of contemporary foreign affairs with a view to draw certain lessons. Later on emphasis began to be laid on the study of both foreign affairs and international law and international relations began to be studied within the framework of international law. The field of the study of international relations was further widened with the establishment of the League of Nations after the First World War and the study of international organizations and institutions.

The scope of international relations in the post World War II period got further widened due to significant changes which took place, with the emergence of USA and USSR as two superpowers; the entry of a large number of non-European states into the society of nations; the threat and danger of nuclear warfare; increasing interdependence of states and rising expectations of the people in the under developed third world, etc… CONCLUTION It is in this way quite evident that world history, especially modern world history plays a major role in the development of International Relations as a field of study. Although initial events indicate that war held prominence in international affairs, things were prone to change with the spark of the industrial era and the rapid globalization of the world economy.

It is also evident that greater importance began to be placed on scientific study of international relations, which led to development of new methodologies and introduction of new theories in the study of international relations. It is therefore in this way quite clear that all in the recent past, the present and in the future, the scope of International Relations will be thoroughly important for the functions carried out in the international arena. ——————————————– [ 2 ]. Goldstein, Joshua S. International Relations, Sixth Edition. Pearson Education Inc. and Dorling Kindersley Publishing Inc. 2005: 29 [ 3 ]. Columbia Encyclopedia: international relations [ 4 ]. Goldstein, Joshua S. International Relations, Sixth Edition.

Pearson Education Inc. and Dorling Kindersley Publishing Inc. 2005: 53 [ 5 ]. “Principles of the State System”. Faculty. unlv. edu. Retrieved 2012-09-11. [ 6 ]. Bloy, Marjie. The Congress of Vienna, 1 November 1814 – 8 June 1815. The Victorian Web. 2009 [ 7 ]. Dockrill, Michael. Atlas of the Twentieth Century World History. NY: Harper Collins, 1991. Ferguson, Niall. The pity of war: Explaining World War I. NY Basic, 1999 [ 8 ]. Willmott, H. P. World War I, New York: Dorling Kindersley Inc. 2003: 27 [ 9 ]. The Triple Entente was the name given to the alliance between France, Britain, and Russia after the signing of the Anglo-Russian Entente on August 31, 1907.

The alliance of the three powers, supplemented by agreements with Portugal and Japan, constituted a powerful counterweight to the Triple Alliance. [ 10 ]. Bade, Klaus J; Brown, Allison (tr. ) (2003), Migration in European History, The making of Europe, Oxford: Blackwell (translated from the German). [ 11 ]. Goldstein, Joshua S. International Relations, Sixth Edition. Pearson Education Inc. and Dorling Kindersley Publishing Inc. 2005: 53 [ 12 ]. “Covenant of the League of Nations”. The Avalon Project. Retrieved 30 August 2011. [ 13 ]. Jahanpour, Farhang. “The Elusiveness of Trust: the experience of Security Council and Iran” (PDF). Transnational Foundation of Peace and Future Research. p. 2. Retrieved 27 June 2008. [ 14 ].

Barrett, David P; Shyu, Lawrence N (2001). China in the anti-Japanese War, 1937–1945: politics, culture and society. Volume 1 of Studies in modern Chinese history. New York: Peter Lang. [ 15 ]. “General Assembly of the United Nations – Rules of Procedure”. UN Department for General Assembly. Retrieved 15 December 2010. [ 16 ]. “Milestones in United Nations History”. Department of Public Information, United Nations. Retrieved 17 July 2008. [ 17 ]. Goldstein, Joshua S. International Relations, Sixth Edition. Dorling Kindersley Publishing Inc. 2005: 67 [ 18 ]. Cold War, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Cold_War

Japanese call the island group near as Senkaku Islands whereas Chinese call these islands as Diaoyu Islands. For many years, the two countries have been arguing who the sovereignty of the islands is, but so far, they do not have any conclusion who should possess the islands. This year, at April, the governor of Tokyo, Shintaro Ishihara organizes a event to refund in order to buy the Diaoyu Islands of japan. Later on the government take over the event, they try to nationalize the Islands.

The above action course some Hongkongers went to the islands and wanted to tell the world that Diaoyu Island belongs to China. After the incident, many Chinese, including those who live in China and Taiwan, came out and had mass demonstration. Due to this unexpected event, this sensitive topic becomes the major discussion between the government of Chinese and Japan. When we want to discuss this issue, we should insight into the history of the islands. Diaoyu island was first recorded on the Chinese book: Voyage with a Tail Wind. Since then, the Ming and Qing Dynasty were controlling the islands until 1895.

After the First Sino-Japanese War, according to the ‘Treaty of Shimonoseki’ in 1895, the Taiwan islands and its islands group were ceded to Japan, but the treaty didn’t include Diaoyu Islands. However, Diaoyu islands were still being controlled by the Imperial Japan and became a part of Ryukyu Islands. After WWII, according to the ‘Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers Instruction Note, No. 677’: ‘For the purpose of this directive, Japan is defined to include the four main islands of Japan (Hokkaido, Honshu, Kyushu and Shikoku) and the approximately 1,000 smaller adjacent islands’.

The territories of Japan will only be the 4 main islands and 1,000 small islands, which were not included Diaoyu Island. However, after the WWII both the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China did not specify Diaoyu islands as a part of the Chinese territory. In 1972, when the Unites States handover Ryukyu Islands came back to Japan, they also handovered the administrative jurisdiction of Diaoyu Island to the Japan government. Owing to the above historical background, both countries, China and Japan, believe in their own version about the sovereignty of the islands and refuse the other’s version.

To understand political as power in the Diaoyu islands dispute, Countries that involved: Chinese, Japan and Unites States has demonstrated different faces of power. In the face of ‘Power as decision-making’: This face of power consists of conscious actions that in some way influence the content of decisions. , use Chinese as an example, when every time japan wants to do anything related to the sovereign of Diaoyu Island, like setting up a lighthouse, sending some scientist to Islands, or even recently, nationalize the islands, Chinese government will use there power to affect the Japanese government.

Look the action that takes in this time, Chinese tightening customs inspections from Japan as a kind of economic sanctions towards japan. And also many of Chinese traveler cancelled their trip to Japan, will give a big hit to the Japan tourism. With these actions, the Chinese government showed their power to influence the content of decisions. The other face of power is ‘Power as agenda setting’, the ability to set to set or controls the political agenda. Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the Unites States and Japan’ make sure that if some countries have conflict or at war with Japan, the Unites States will help to protect the Japan. So it makes that the Chinese can’t have a very strong action to fight for the Diaoyu islands. The protection promised by the Unites States to the Japanese, actually set up a line that stop Chinese government to take a further action on fighting back there right. What makes the Chinese or the Japanese believe in their own version about the sovereignty of the islands in dispute and reject that of the Japanese or the Chinese?

As the sociologist Max Weber defined that, sovereignty is a community’s monopoly on the legitimate use of force. From the Chinese’s viewpoint, Chinese always restate that Diaoyu islands belong to China since the ancient time. They believe their own version because since 1403, the book Voyage with a Tail Wind, and the book: Record of the Imperial Envoy’s Visit to Ryukyu in 1534 is the very first record of the islands. Since then, the Chinese Imperial Map of Ming identified Island group name as Diaoyu, which mean fishing is Chinese and these advance prove that Diaoyu islands should be a part of China.

Also as even it is not a part of ceded lands of Treaty of Shimonoseki but according to Potsdam Declaration japan should give up the control of all islands except for “the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and such minor islands as we determine”. The Chinese government believes that Japan is now illegally to control the island, so Diaoyu Islands should be handovered back to China. On the other hand, In the Japanese point of view, although Diaoyu islands were found by Chinese, the islands were not effectively governed by the Chinese government.

Also after the sign of ‘Treaty of Shimonoseki’ in 1895, even though the control of Diaoyu islands wasn’t covered in the treaty, the Japanese has already effectively governed the islands. Moreover, after WWII, according to the ‘Treaty of Peace with Japan’, The Unites States temporarily take the control of the Ryukyu Islands. As Diaoyu islands are a part of the Ryukyu Islands, when Unites States handovered Ryukyu Islands to japan, Chinese government didn’t disagree, so Diaoyu Islands should be remain as a part of Japanese.

However, the reason I think that why Japanese/Chinese reject others version, is mainly because the Diaoyu islands problem is not just simply the sovereign of a land. According to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Exclusive economic zones (EEZs) extend from the edge of the territorial sea out to 200 nautical miles from the baseline. Within this area, the coastal nation has sole exploitation rights over all natural resources. Base on this law, if Diaoyu islands are really a part of japan, the EEZ of Japan will be very close to the coast of Taiwan and Mainland.

This will definitely affect the economic interest of China. Furthermore, in 1969, the United Nations Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East (ECAFE) identified a huge among of potential oil and gas reserves in the vicinity of the Diaoyu Islands. If who control there, that country will have the long-term energy source. As Japan itself doesn’t have enough resources for it own use, that huge amount of resources should be very attractive to Japan. So the dispute is not just the sovereign or nationalism. I believe the dispute will be resolved politically instead of militarily.

First, if Japan and Chinese use there military power to resolved the dispute, the economic and both county will be damaged. War is an event that consumes a lot of recourses, money, fuel, food etc. A country has to put itself to prepare the war; as a result the country will put lack affect on other area of event. The economic of Japan was in a downturn of many years; a war for Japan may give them a big hit which they can’t handle. As the effect of globalization, on the other hand, if Japan economic collapse, the Chinese economic will also be damage.

On the other hand, although ECAFE identified a huge among of potential oil and gas reserves in the vicinity of the Diaoyu Islands, military action, or war take a lot of resources. Even we know that there may be so much potential oil and gas under Diaoyu islands, but it may actually not deserve to put money on the unknowable resources. In the side of global relation, Chinese will not indicate a war to Japan, as the Unites States will involve in the war. In 1960, Japan signed ‘Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the Unites States and Japan’ with Unites States.

The treaty stated that: Either side get military attack on the territory of Japan controls will be deemed to endanger the safety of the other. In the dispute of Diaoyu Islands the Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs restated that Diaoyu Islands were under the Japan’s effective control, the treaty will protect it. It means that, if the PLA attack or occupied the islands, according to the treaty, Unites States have it right to send there troops and participate the war. Chinese government may not have power to fight the country with strongest military power.

As the result, Chinese also will resolve the problem militarily. In this dispute, we can see the nationalism demonstrated in both countries. On China, after those Hongkongers landed on the Diaoyu Islands, and captured by the Japan Coast Guard. Many different cities in China started to many demonstrate to oppose Japanese’s action. How every these huge demonstrate soon became Irrational violence, people damage cars that made from japan, rob restaurants or stores that related to Japanese, even it was owned by Chinese. Some of these thugs even tried to damage or even enter the Embassy of Japan.

Also I this time of demonstrate, the slogans that used were no longer just about ‘Not to buy’, but something’s like: ‘War with Japan! ’ ‘Step in to Tokyo! ’ But the strangest thing is that, these slogans were seen at different cities, but not one. All these were like planned to happen. The above cases can be seen as some kind of expansionist nationalism, as these actions tend to project another nation/race as an enemy. On Japan, after the landing of Hongkongers, 50 members of the Japanese Right-wing politics group included 8 member of National Die landed Diaoyu Island again to restates the Japan sovereign of there.

On the other hand, these Japanese Right-wing politics group also organize a demonstrate to oppose Chinese’s action, similar to the one in China, they all clam that the Islands are their land, and they are not welcome the Chinese. Also on both countries’ Internet forum, we can see a lot of post or comments about the dispute. Many of those incite the hatred between two races, this also one of example that we can see the expansionist nationalism.

Reference:

1. Xiang, D. (1961). Liang zhong hai dao zhen jing. Beijing: Zhonghua shu ju. Pp. 253 SCAPIN677 – Wikisource, the free online library. (2012, April 2).
2. Retrieved November 25, 2012, from http://en. wikisource. org/wiki/SCAPIN677 Heywood, A. (2007). Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Pp. 11 China tightening customs inspections from Japan. (2012, September 21).
3. Retrieved November 26, 2012, form http://www. channelnewsasia. com/stories/afp_asiapacific_business/view/1227266/1/. html Islands dispute with China may hurt Japanese tourism recovery. (2012, September 16).
4. Retrieved November 26, 2012, form http://www. eturbonews. com/31190/islands-dispute-china-may-hurt-japanese-tourism-recovery “??????????? ”??? (?? ). (2012, September 25).
5. Retrieved November 25, 2012, from http://news. inhuanet. com/2012-09/25/c_113202698. htm UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA . (2012).
6. Retrieved November 26, 2012, from http://www. un. org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx. htm ????? ??????????. (2012, September 21).
7. Retrieved November 25, 2012, from https://www. youtube. com/watch? v=FtwgBDLx8Vg ???????????. (2012, Augest 19). Retrieved November 25, 2012, from http://www. bbc. co. uk/zhongwen/trad/world/2012/08/120819_japan_diaoyu_landing. shtml ——————————————– [ 1 ]. Xiang, D. (1961).
8. Liang zhong hai dao zhen jing. Beijing: Zhonghua shu ju. Pp. 253 [ 2 ].
9. SCAPIN677 – Wikisource, the free online library. (2012, April 2).
10. Retrieved November 25, 2012, from http://en. wikisource. org/wiki/SCAPIN677 [ 3 ]. Heywood, A. (2007). Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Pp. 11 [ 4 ].
11. China tightening customs inspections from Japan. (2012, September 21).
12. Retrieved November 26, 2012, form http://www. channelnewsasia. com/stories/afp_asiapacific_business/view/1227266/1/. html [ 5 ].
13. Islands dispute with China may hurt Japanese tourism recovery. (2012, September 16).
14. Retrieved November 26, 2012, form http://www. eturbonews. com/31190/islands-dispute-china-may-hurt-japanese-tourism-recovery [ 6 ]. ??????????? ”??? (?? ). (2012, September 25).
15. Retrieved November 25, 2012, from http://news. xinhuanet. com/2012-09/25/c_113202698. htm [ 7 ].
16. UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA . (2012).
17. Retrieved November 26, 2012, from http://www. un. org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx. htm [ 8 ]. ????? ??????????. (2012, September 21).
18. Retrieved November 25, 2012, from https://www. youtube. com/watch? v=FtwgBDLx8Vg [ 9 ]. ???????????. (2012, Augest 19).
19. Retrieved November 25, 2012, from http://www. bbc. co. uk/zhongwen/trad/world/2012/08/120819_japan_diaoyu_landing. shtml

– Analyse the impact of anti-communism in the USA from the late 1940’s to 1953 and the impact this had on tensions between the superpowers during this time. In the years between 1940 and 1953 the capitalist nations of the world such as USA became very concerned about the communist ideologies and its possible spread in the world. As a result, the ideological war period known as the “Cold War” was developed. With the end of World War II, the USA emerged with a renewed sense of confidence as they believed that their role in the Allie alliance was a key factor when defeating their enemy powers.

It was not long, however, before ironically, this alliance between USA and USSR would be the cause for rising tensions in the world. It can be suggested that the rise of Cold War tensions led to the Anti-communist policy being being developed in the USA which not only impacted its own country but also renewed Cold War tensions. This is evident when examining McCarthyism, the Witch-Hunts and Trials, and the Propaganda campaign. The US historical period known as “McCarthyism” began long before Joseph McCarthy’s own involvement.

There were many factors that contributed to its beginning including; the increased membership in the “Communist Party of the United States” during the late 1930’s and early 1940’s along with Soviets establishing communist regimes across Central and Eastern Europe. Later USA was concerned with Soviet espionage inside government institutions, and at the same time politicians were slowing down social reforms or criticizing President’s arguing they had been influenced by communism. (R) This practice of making accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for evidence was later known as, McCarthyism.

Joseph McCarthy’s own involvement began with a speech he made: “I have here in my hand in my hand a list of 205 – a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department. (McCarthy, ). (R) As a result of McCarthyism there were many Anti-communist committees, as well as private agencies, carrying out investigations about possible communists in the USA.

Furthermore the federal government, under Harry Truman’s administration with the help of FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover initiated a program of Loyalty Review for Federal Employees, with the aim of determining if government employees were disloyal to the government. (R) Hoover’s extreme sense of communist threat and numerous illegal practices including burglaries, opening mail and illegal wiretaps, resulted in thousands of government workers losing their jobs after unfair accusations or sometimes even without having any process. R) Among these victims was, Robert Oppenheimer, scientific director of the Manhattan Project who built the first atomic bomb. Historian Ellen Schrecker has written; “in this country, McCarthyism did more damage to the constitution than the American Communist Party ever did”. (R) It was later proved that Soviet espionage did exist in the USA, but besides that fact it can be suggested that the American government could possibly had a greater threat of danger in order to react in such an extreme way, which created divisions still present in the USA.

The House Committee on Un-American Activities(HUAC) was perhaps the most involved in Anti-communist investigations government committee. Earlier, this committee had investigated a number of activities including German-American Nazis during World War II, and later focused on communism, investigating an espionage case against Alger Hiss, American politician accused of perjury, in 1948. It was not until 1947 that HUAC achieved its greatest fame with the investigations into the Hollywood film industry.

These investigations involved screenwriters, directors, and other professionals in testifying about their known, or suspected membership in the Communist Party, within its members, or support of its beliefs. The “Hollywood Ten”, as it was known, was a group of people formed by the first ten film industry witnesses that decided not to cooperate, and instead cited the First Amendment’s, which guaranteed freedom in speech and beliefs, but failed and were sentenced to prison (R).

Later victims had the option of either being informants, and thus, give names of communist sympathizers or going to prison if refused to cooperate (R). On November25 of 1947, Eric Johnston, President of the Motion Picture Association of America published the “Waldorf Statement”, which announced the firing of the Hollywood Ten, and stated they would not employ any communist or member of a party which advocates to overthrow the government (R). This generated a ”Hollywood Blacklist”, through which over 300 actors, authors and directors were denied to work in the film industry.

Those actions taken by the government not only placed USA’s famous “freedom” in question and showed an excessive use of power until the point that citizen’s rights were constantly violated but also created an atmosphere of fear and suspicion, which sometimes resulted in hysteria. These extreme measures led to a great division in the country that is still present these days. Distribution of Anti-communism propaganda was, without a doubt, one of the most successful measures taken by the USA government during this period of time. Kbbnf3@eq. edu. au