Critique the claim: strategic civilization is irrelevant when it comes to analyzing the strategic behavior of chief histrions of the international system, i.e. provinces.
Strategic civilization plays a really of import function in the international dealingss in any given state or province. Strategic civilization stems down from the geographical location every bit good as the resources that are available in the state that is under consideration. Other factors that influence the strategic civilization in any given state are its historical background, the context of its society every bit good as the construction of its political system. From this definition, it is rather clear that the function of strategic civilization is really of import when it comes to finding the international dealingss of any state with the others. Each state has a different attack to the menaces that may confront it and in this respect, the attack that the state will be able to set in topographic point to undertake the security issues and menaces confronting the province will to a big extent be determined by the strategic civilization that has been adopted in that peculiar province[ 1 ].
In the international system, the provinces relate with each other in what can be referred to as international dealingss ; in this interaction, one of the most of import and cardinal facets is the issue of military dimension. Indeed it is in times of war or when faced with security menaces that states call upon each other for aid in the military dimensions. It is of import to observe that the strategic civilization that is adopted by any state is one that evolves over clip ; it is a factor of the historical issues that have taken topographic point in the yesteryear[ 2 ]. The events that have taken topographic point in the past affect the scheme that is adopted by the province in relation to the military firepower of the state. Therefore, in relation to the international dealingss among provinces, it is of import to how the strategic behavior of a state is affected by the determinations that are taken by a province in position of its military might. The means through which any state affects war is mostly influenced by the strategic civilization of the state ; for illustration, entree to a ready coastline and unfastened ocean Waterss might intend that a province can be able to trust on its navy forces and Marine forces to supply military firepower in instance it is needed. In a instance whereby there is no entree to the Waterss, so the trust could be on air or utilizing the land military personnels. Therefore it is of import to observe that the strategic options that are available to a province will finally act upon the strategic behavior of the state ; in this respect, it is really possible to rebut the claim that the strategic civilization has no influence on the strategic behavior that affect the international dealingss between the provinces. When sing the strategic civilization of different states, it is of import to observe that different states have different attacks to the issue of war and the protection of its district. Strategic civilization trades pre-dominantly with how states are expected to respond in instance they are faced with a war. It is based on the military dimensions and options that are available to any state every bit good as the determinations that will be made and to capacity of a state to do such determinations in instance it is faced with an at hand war[ 3 ].
Some of the states like Britain have been preponderantly biased towards usage of sea power to keep its military base and has been biased towards the preparation and usage of a big ground forces. It is besides deserving observing that this is in blunt contrast to the scheme and attack that is used by Israel. Because Israel has a little geographical part compared to other military ace powers, it makes usage of its populated citizens to develop engineerings and schemes that guarantee that they are able to hold a strong ground forces. Strategic civilization is considered based on the military and the armed forces that a state is able to keep ; it is besides deserving observing that the chief aim of any authorities in the acceptance of a given strategic civilization is to be in a place to protect its people and to keep security for its citizens.
It is in this line therefore that the statement refering the strategic civilization and the strategic behavior of organisations comes into drama ; is it truly possible to claim that the strategic civilization that has been adapted by a certain province does non act upon the international dealingss of that province with the other provinces? This sentence to a great extent can non be considered to be true, it is clear that the determinations that are taken by any state sing the security systems every bit good as the actions in instance of a war are mostly influenced by the strategic civilization in that state. The type of assault to utilize in instance of a war every bit good as the determination whether a province should offer its support in instance of a given war is determined by the military capacity of that state every bit good as the policies that have been put in topographic point by the authoritiess of such provinces. It is hence really of import for there to be an apprehension of the mechanisms that are used to act upon the strategic determinations and picks likewise.
Strategic civilization provides a really of import index an a footing for understanding the relationship between provinces in the field of international dealingss ; in this respect hence, it is clear that strategic civilization can non be overlooked as a cardinal factor that influences strategic behavior of a province in the field of international dealingss. It is besides of import to observe that strategic civilization affects determination doing within a province mostly, therefore the ensuing strategic behavior every bit good as the international dealingss between states will surely be affected by the strategic civilization that is adopted by a given province[ 4 ].
What, in your position, were the chief contributing factors that led to the induction of belligerencies in the 20th century?
Most of the belligerencies that took topographic point between the assorted provinces really took topographic point during the twentieth century. It is deserving observing that most of these belligerencies were in signifier of wars, it is deserving observing that both the 1st and 2nd universe wars took topographic point in the twentieth century. There have besides been other struggles and wars that have taken topographic point during the twentieth century and most of these have taken topographic point internally every bit good as between neighboring states. It was a common phenomenon in the century to happen states turning against each other for a assortment of grounds ; the most common cause for these wars and struggles was the find of natural resources. Natural resources caused serious states because there were assorted states that wanted to command the resources that were discovered in a peculiar part. In instance of a struggle within a province, there were ever opposing groups which felt that the resources that were available were non being distributed as they ought to be. This therefore led to struggles with the authorities, most of the neighbouring states ended up taking sides in such a struggle, and this merely ended up fuelling such wars even more and more.
It is clear from this that even though natural resources can be considered to be a approval for the state that has made such an of import find, if they are non good managed, they can finally take to armed struggles. These state of affairss are more so apparent in states whose democratic construction has non been good developed and such states include the African states such as Angola, Liberia and the Democratic democracy of Congo. Such states were embroiled in internal wars and struggles for a long period despite holding huge sums of natural resources within their districts.
Differences in political political orientations led to the struggles, which resulted in wars, and struggles. It is of import to observe that most of the parties that are involved in most of the struggles in most instances belong to different political cabals[ 5 ]. The civilization of different states means that they are oriented towards different political associations. This can besides be attributed to the fact that the difference in civilizations in the assorted states leads to different determinations in the sphere of political relations ; overall, it is of import to observe that political political orientations have fuelled belligerencies to a great extent during the twentieth century[ 6 ]. Some of the states have had their democratic infinite taken off and the authoritiess have been led by dictators, so in such states, the ultimate consequence has been war as the Rebel groups gang up to contend for what they refer to as the release of the citizens.
It is of import besides to observe that due to the fact that most of the states that were led by the dictators experienced a state of affairs whereby the dictators made unpopular determinations that were non merely against the wants of their people but in most instance besides against the international community, so war prevailed in most of the fortunes. Some of the states such as North Korea and Iran have continued with their research and development of their atomic arms every bit good as the atomic capacity despite the advisories from the international Security Council. This did non travel down good with some of the ace powers in the universe who sought to stamp down the powers and capacity that was being developed in such states.
Religions played a cardinal portion in the belligerencies that were experienced in the twentieth century. This was due to the fact that some of the leaders in some of the provinces wanted to enforce on their citizens a province faith that was supposed to be adhered to by all the citizens[ 7 ]. In this instance, the members of the other faiths ended up seting in opposition and this created a great ill will among the member of the different faiths in their pursuit to protect their faiths. Once the issue of political relations was assorted up with affairs of faith so in most of the instances, conflicts an belligerencies could truly non be avoided by any opportunity.
Disputes arose during the twentieth century amongst states because of the boundary lines and limits. In this instance, it was a common phenomenon to happen neighbouring states contending over the location of their national boundary lines ; this was in a command to accomplish a given resource that might merely be located at the boundary line. Any province prides itself in its ability to support its sovereignty and being able to support its citizens, therefore it was common to happen belligerencies being heightened by a difference that occurred over a national boundary line in any instance or state of affairs. Therefore, it is really clear that the issue of boundary lines played a really critical function in the addition in the belligerencies between different provinces in the twentieth century[ 8 ]. As mentioned antecedently, the causes for some of these boundary line struggles could hold been the find of natural resources in a boundary line parts and in such a instance both of the involve states ended up desiring to be the keepers of such a piece of land.
It is hence really clear that there were assorted grounds that contributed to the belligerencies that existed between the assorted provinces in the twentieth century.