Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Explain the situation of international politics after the Second World War
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Immanuel Kant said, “It is the desire of every state, or of its ruler, to arrive at a condition of perpetual peace by conquering the whole world, if that were possible”(Mearsheimer 2001:34). There is a common misconception that following the end of the Cold War, the great powers ceased to be enemies or allies within an international political system, and became an international community in which power was irrelevant. However, although the conflict may have ended at that time, the nations’ abilities to carry out future conflicts did not dissipate, their armies were not disbanded. While most nations desire peace, all great powers unanimously desire security, and in the international system a power is only truly secure if they are the hegemon(Mearsheimer …show more content…
Survival overrides all other objectives of a state because if a state is eliminated or conquered by a greater power, it would be unlikely for the state to reemerge or recover. For instance, Mearsheimer references Stalin’s reaction to a possible war in 1927, “We can and must build socialism in the [Soviet Union]. But [sic] in order to do so we first of all have to exist”(Mearsheimer 2001:31). These five assumptions combined create the international system that provokes great powers into a semi-permanent state of offensive interactions. The great powers fear each other, cannot trust each other, and therefore wish to overcome one another. The security dilemma stems from these paranoid interactions. Also known as the spiral model, the security dilemma occurs when one state takes actions meant to increase their own security for personal and non-offensive reasons. However, other states see this increase in military capability and begin to doubt their intentions, responding by increasing their own military powers. The swift increase in security by both nations creates tension and increases the likelihood of conflict. The security dilemma operates under similar assumptions as Mearsheimer’s theory, such as an anarchic world system and the uncertainty amongst
The United States had bought Alaska from Russia partly so that the tsar would not be offended by a refusal. This kind of relation between the two became a rarity later on, especially in the twentieth century. The tense ambiance of this period gave no room for a civil affiliation between the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic. After World War II, the two nations battled it out in a conceptual war known as the Cold War. It was characterized by a competition between the nations’ political philosophies- the USSR wanted communism to dominate the world, while the US wanted democracy to prevail. However, the war did not come about suddenly- it was congealed over a period of time by multiple factors. As World War II ended, the
In the article, Offense, Defense, and the Security Dilemma, Robert Jervis argues that the security dilemma is more lethal and that the international conflict is more likely to occur when the offense has an advantage over defense. Robert Jervis also maintains that, when a defense is prominent the chance of war and conflict decreases exponentially. Throughout the article, Jervis makes multiple compelling arguments regarding the offense-defense balance and the security dilemma. The security dilemma exists when "many of the means by which a state tries to increase its security and decrease the security of others. " Security dilemma provides a rational foundation referred to as the ‘spiral model’, which is a term used in international
Odd Arne Westad, Director of the Cold War Studies Centre at the London School of Economics and Political Science, explains how the Cold War “shaped the world we live in today — its politics, economics, and military affairs“ (Westad, The Global Cold War, 1). Furthermore, Westad continues, “ the globalization of the Cold War during the last century created foundations” for most of the historic conflicts we see today. The Cold War, asserts Westad, centers on how the Third World policies of the two twentieth-century superpowers — the United States and the Soviet Union — escalates to antipathy and conflict that in the end helped oust one world power while challenging the other. This supplies a universal understanding on the Cold War (Westad, The Global Cold War, 1). After World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union opposed each other over the expansion of their power.
Following World War II, the United States and the USSR were the only two world super powers left. Because of different economic systems, strategic interests, and atomic weapons the US and USSR entered a Cold War. This war was not a typical war. It was strictly economical and political fighting, there was no physical fighting. The USSR believed that peace would only come from worldwide communism, but the US wanted to stop the spread of communism immediately. President Truman tried to offer financial aid to countries nearing turmoil and facing communism, in order to stop the spread of communism entirely. The United States was successful in that it did not actually fall to communism itself, and that the US was able to partially contain communism
Upon hearing the mention of “The Cold War” most people begin to imagine and think of a time focused on political and military tensions between two main powers, the United States of the Western world and The Soviet Union of the Communist world. The context of the Cold War has traditionally been seen this way, as a nontraditional war without any engagement of battle, as a nuclear arms race between to profoundly different political and economic ideologies. Though being accurate this view of the Cold War is not complete. The Cold War was not just a nonviolent war between the United States and the Soviet Union but one affecting the entire planet in different fashions and on multiple plains. It is for these reasons that while events during the 1980’s-1990’s seemingly led to the conventional end of conflict, they ironically only facilitated the existence and continuance of the Cold War even until today.
...dens the understanding of international relations and correspondingly broadens the understanding of security. Built on Thayer’s and Waltz’s theory, the paper suggests that structure of the international system is central to international security and to achieve peace, suitable strategies are necessary to balance the power relations. While it should not be ignored that the Evolution theory still falls within realism realm with many other forms of complex security problems unexplained.
All throughout time and history people have been at war with each other at one point or another. War can, truthfully, at times be inescapable and considered by some historians as a natural instinct, an instinct that every human being possess. Throughout history mighty empires and governments have collapsed due to the damages inflicted on by a war, yet in spite of this, some have managed to face the odds and make it through, staggering along as if nothing happened. War is a true test of an empire or government’s determination to move forward, adapting using the knowledge and intellect they have acquired to their own advantage. Nevertheless, not all wars lead to fighting by physical means but instead it can lead to fighting mentally by opposing sides. One such example would be the non-traditional Cold War fought between the United States and Soviet Union. The Cold War was a time that caused an immense fear in the lives of many, and inspired novels such as 1984 by George Orwell, Alas, Babylon by Pat Frank, and essays such as “You and the Atomic Bomb” by George Orwell, which are just some of the voices from this terrible time.
The end of the Cold War was one of the most unexpected and important events in geopolitics in the 20th century. The end of the Cold War can be defined as the end of the bipolar power struggle between the United States and the Soviet Union, which had existed since the end of the World War II. The conclusion of the Cold War can be attributed to Gorbachev’s series of liberalizations in the 1980s, which exposed the underlying economic problems in the Soviet Union and Eastern bloc states that had developed in the 1960s and 70s and prevented the USSR from being able to compete with the US as a superpower. Nevertheless, Reagan’s policies of a renewed offensive against communism, Gorbachev’s rejection of the Brezhnev doctrine and the many nationalities
The cold war was a significant event following the WWII. The Cold war was caused by the USA’s fear of the spread of communism. This event had many impacts on Canada. The cold war had stimulated the Canadian Military to prepare to defend the Soviet Attacks. The Citizens are preparing for the Doomsday event of the Weapon of Mass Destruction. The government of Canada had decided to become a peace keeper, but eventually they become bounded with United States to defend against communism. Canada played an important role in the Cold War and the Cold war definitely had huge impacts on Canada.
A Cold War is not a war involving physical combat, but rather a war of political aggression between various countries involving threats, military build ups, and spying. After World War two, tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union impacted other countries around the world. This conflict eventually became known as the Cold War. During this time, two conflicting political philosophies, communism and capitalism, became global and had long lasting effects on many countries, including Cuba. In general, the Cold War lasted from 1945 to 1991 when the Soviet Union collapsed, but Cuba remains negatively impacted until this day. Understanding the international tensions of that time period in history is necessary for understanding how Cuba became so affected by the Cold War. Economic sanctions by the United States caused an embargo on products imported into and exported from Cuba. These embargoes limited Cuba’s ability to provide social services such as education and health care. Cuba was adversely impacted by the Cold War because of international tensions, economic sanctions, and a decrease in
In order to spread their influence and promote their ideologies, the United States and the Soviet Bloc have mainly used two strategies: expansionism, which aim to get the stranglehold on as many places possible and containment, which is used so as to restrict the territorial growth of the opposite camp. But these strategies have led to murderous conflicts and endless wars in some territories, especially in Asia. Finally, it appears that these strategies were at the origin of a significant competition and a rise of palpable tensions all over the world.
The Cold War (1945-1991) was a substantial war that was fought on an. economic, philosophical, cultural, social and political level. This impacted globally and changed the majority of the world’s societies to a. liberated fashion, rather than the archaic and conservative ways. Global war is a war engaged in by all if not most of the principle nations of the world, a prime example of such would be of the two great wars. Therefore the cold war can’t be classified as a global war in terms of the military and actual warfare’s, as the two superpowers (Soviet Union and USA) fought indirectly with each other, however to an extent the cold war can be said it’s a global war in terms of its politics and economics. The The effects of the Cold War were definitely felt globally and had an aftermath.
People’s ideas and assumptions about world politics shape and construct the theories that help explain world conflicts and events. These assumptions can be classified into various known theoretical perspectives; the most dominant is political realism. Political realism is the most common theoretical approach when it is in means of foreign policy and international issues. It is known as “realpolitik” and emphasis that the most important actor in global politics is the state, which pursues self-interests, security, and growing power (Ray and Kaarbo 3). Realists generally suggest that interstate cooperation is severely limited by each state’s need to guarantee its own security in a global condition of anarchy. Political realist view international politics as a struggle for power dominated by organized violence, “All history shows that nations active in international politics are continuously preparing for, actively involved in, or recovering from organized violence in the form of war” (Kegley 94). The downside of the political realist perspective is that their emphasis on power and self-interest is their skepticism regarding the relevance of ethical norms to relations among states.
The security dilemma literatures suggest that cooperation with the other states could be a best solution to deal with the dilemma, and the states should decide when they need to enforce some strategies, such as enforce arms control and one sided defensive strategy to arms racing (Brown, Lynn-Jones, Miller 1995: 380).
The balance of power is closer with first great debate. The realists also diverge on some issues. So-called offensive Realists maintain that, in order to ensure survival, States will seek to maximize their power relative to others (Mearsheimer 2001). If rival countries possess enough power to threaten a State, it can never be safe. The hegemony is thus the best strategy for a country to pursue, if it can. Defensive Realists, in contrast, believe that domination is an unwise strategy for State survival. They note that seeking hegemony may bring a State into dangerous conflicts with its peers. Instead, defensive Realists emphasize the stabi...