TheMelian dialogue is a piece of debate by ancient Greek historiansabout the invasion of Melos Island by the Athens. The Atheniansdemanded the Melos to pay them tribute, or else they destroy them. Inaddition, they argued them to accept Athenians rule rather thanengage in war. However, negotiation failed after both parties failedto influence each other. The melians vowed to protect their land andfreedom, and they could never accept the Athenians to rule them(Macgregor,2014).
Toprotect their land, the Melians appealed for justice and democracy.They tried to convince the Athenians to show some pity and act withsome morality. This way, they reasoned that the Athenians would aswell preserve their empire reputation. On the other hand, theAthenians were against this appeal and believed it would be easier ifthe Melos accepted to be under Athenian’s rule. Melians urged it isunfair and unjust for a big and strong country to take advantage of asmall and weak country.
Additionally,the Melians pointed out that they were a neutral country and not arival. Therefore, they wanted to be left alone to live in harmony.The Athenians considered themselves stronger than Melians hence, ifthey failed to rule a small and insignificant country, they would beweak as well. Conversely, the Melians urged that if they were “smalland insignificant,” then, the Athenians were to leave them alone(Macgregor,2014).This is because they were not a threat to them in any way.
Further,the Melians argued that although the Athenians appeared stronger thanthem, there were still chances of winning the battle. In addition,they believed their gods would help them because of they were morallyjust. Furthermore, they believed the Spartan Kin would also come fortheir rescue.
HistoricalContext of Contemporary International Relations
TheFrontline film, The Rise of ISIS, is a documentary film thatinvestigates the mistakes and miscalculation behind the ISIS brutalrise (The Passionate Eye, 2015). Martin Smith, a correspondent,reports from Iraq where he explains the country process after theAmericans withdrew their troops. He also explains what it means ifthe American were to join in the war once again.
Theprogram consists of interviews with journalists, governmentofficials, analysts, and experts. Some of the interviewed peopleinclude two former ambassadors to Iraq, Gen. Martin E. Dempsey andformer Defense Secretary, Leon E. Panatta, the chairman of the JointsChiefs of Staff and also the deputy of the national adviser, BenRhodes. However, the viewer has to trust Mr. Smith and his teambecause they rarely make room for rebellious voices. So far theIslamic states of Syria and Iraq are veritable countries based onterror and extremism. After the watching all episodes of the film,the viewer is likely to draw an ineluctable conclusion to stop ISIS.
Thefilm begins by recapping the domino-crash of Iraq. Smith narrates howShiite-led Iraq government failed after refusing to share power withthe Sunni minorities and how the Sunni militants took advantage ofthe situation. However, they blame the United States president,Barrack Obama and the former Iraq prime minister, Nuri KamalAl-Maliki (The Passionate Eye, 2015). The film follows theconventional explanations for renewed conflict in Western Iraqbecause it is a public record. It intelligently tells Iraq and Syriastories since the exit of the American military. Indeed, The Rise ofISIS film it is a definitive account. It gives a complete summary ofhow it was after Bush decision to invade Iraq, the Obamaadministration, numerous policy errors that proceeded after the U.Stroop withdrawal, and so forth.
TheKlare documentary film on blood and oil phenomenon relates to theclass system theory. This is evident from the use of military troopsto achieve their objectives. For instance, the United States deployedits military troop even before the Gulf war to the Saudi Arabiacountry. Initially, it main aim purpose was to protect the oilreserve, but as a result, many people died in the region. Klares(2011) classifies the presence of military troop in an oil miningregion as an outside invasion. Unfortunately, such cases result towar that claims millions of lives.
Klaresfilm brings out the concept of imperialism that relates to classsystem theory. Imperialism is whereby one nation exploits anothernation economically (Klares, 2011). In the film, Klares points outthis concept of imperialism between Saudi Arabia and United Stateswhere the US government takes control of the oil mining in SaudiArabia. The US government controls the oil industry that is the keyeconomic factor in Saudi Arabia hence, hampering its growth.Consequently, many people lose their lives from constant war againstimperialism.
Further,the Klares film points out the concept of greed andself-centeredness. Klare (2011) uses class system theory to explainwhy some nations never develop fully. In this case, the Saudi Arabiaslow development can be endorsed to the greed and self-centerednessof the Americans. Generally, the American protects the oil miningreligion for their own benefits without putting their counterparts’welfare into consideration. Up to date, the Americans are still incharge of oil reserves in the Saudi Arabia. All the same, othertheorists have compelled a positive response to the Klare critique.
Directedby Barbara Sonneborn, “Regret to Inform” is a documentary filmthat was made for over ten years. The film featured Barbara Sonnebornand her journey to Vietnamese countryside. On her twenty-fourthbirthday, Sonneborn received news about her husband death. JeffGurvitz was killed in a mortar attack as he was rescuing his woundedradio operator. Later, Sonneborn, a visual artist, and a photographerdecided to search the truth about her husband death, war, and itslegacy. She visited the Vietnamese countryside to explore the meaningof war and loss. She interviewed American and Vietnamese widows, whogive flamboyant testimonies of the war legacy. After twenty-fiveyears, it is evident that battle scars are permanent. Fortunately,there is still a chance of healing and reconciliations.
Thefilm presents a more gendered picture of war and conflict because itfocuses more on widows than widowers. It enlightens its viewers aboutthe impact of war, especially to women who lose their husband. Thefilm storyline centers Sonneborn journey after her husband death andhow she was determined to get answers concerning her husband death.She wanted to understand war legacies, as well as lives of other warwidows (Langis,2011).As the widows share their emotional testimonies, the viewersunderstand in a deeper length, the consequences of war. Listening todifferent women perspectives, one can recognize how their emotionscontracted: the inevitable participation of the Vietnamese women andthe helplessness of the United States women (Langis,2011).The film clearly explains the unseen grieve of women who becomewidows as a result of the war. Further, the film raises importantconcepts such as historical legacy, memories, and way remembers anddocument history. After twenty-four years, Sonneborn still isinterested to learn about her husband death. She wants to feel andsee the places where Jeff spent his last days.
Fukuyamadefines “end of history” as the end of the struggle betweencompeting ideologies, and the creation of liberal democracy(Fukuyama,2006).He claims that in 1806, the history had come to an end after thebattle of Jena. He asserts that the two chief rivals, communism andfascism, run their courses but ended into disrepute.
Inhis article “End of History”, Fukuyama gives predictable changeslikely to occur at the end of history. Fukuyama urged that politicalliberalism and the victory of economic occurred at the end of 20thcentury (Fukuyama,2006).However, he still urges that events these events are likely to occurat the end of history. While other government are characterized byirrationalities and grave defects that lead to their collapse,liberal democracy is free from such issues. According to Fukuyama,liberal democracy marks the end of humanity ideological evolution, aswell as final human government. He constitutes this to the end ofhistory. He urges that other forms of government such as communism,fascism, and monarchy fail because they lack freedom. On the otherhand, liberal democracy government offers humankind with the greatestfreedom possible. Therefore, it is likely to triumph because of itsself-realization nature. However, end of history does not only meanthat all societies become successful liberal societies, but they endtheir ideological ideas of presenting human society.
Further,he equates the end of history with the end of cold war. He alsoequates it to the end of humanity ideological evolution. Fukuyama(2006) urges the end of cold war increases liberal democraticnations, which were previously in warfare. Correspondingly, end ofcold war results to end of global conflicts.
CharlesHermann, advocate that all leaders should undergo training on theforeign policy behaviors (Connor,2013).In fact, foreign policy training should be an official training toall government officials. When analyzing the foreign policy, Hermannemphasis more on the actor. He urges that actors are in a betterposition to take care of government resources and to prevent otherentities from reversing their positions.
Hermannstates that a leader who has undergone foreign policy training islikely to be more influential on the government foreign policy,unlike other leaders without the training. Government officials withsignificant knowledge on foreign affairs have the expertise to relyon. They can predict what will succeed or fail at an internationalplatform. Based on their previous experience, such leaders can easilydevelop styles and strategies to deal with a foreign situation. Onthe contrary, leaders with no or little training for foreign affairshave no expertise on rely on (Connor,2013).They lack experience hence, cannot even suggest an action plan at aninternational platform.
Accordingto Connor(2013) foreign policy training enables leaders to become aconciliatory hence, they can easily establish and maintain friendlyrelation with other nations. In addition, they can participate inmany foreign policy forums, learn their values and borrow some totheir countries, and seek alternative solutions. Such leaders arealways updated with international affairs.
Thiscalls for President Barrack Obama to have adequate knowledge onforeign policies. During his first term, for instance, Mitt Romneyfelt Obama was not adequately equipped with international knowledge.Likewise, Obama should ensure his government officials are as welltrained on the same matter.
Peacestudies theory analyzes the absence of war, as the existence of peaceand peace-promoting structure (Swanson,2014).Although war is inevitable, strategies can be used to avoid it and/orlessen its damage. Unfortunately, peace studies theory has faced alot of criticisms from individuals and groups of people.
ANational Post columnist, Barbara Kay, criticizes the views ofProfessor Johan Galtung, a modern peace leader. Galtung characterizesviolence into three categories direct cultural, and structural. Kayurged that Galtung wrote about structural fascism, and his views donot offer practical prescriptions to manage and resolve globalconflicts. Also, Kenneth Boulding criticized Galtung peace studiesand urged that Galtung refer structural violence as “anything hedislikes.” According to Boulding, this is too wide to besignificantly useful in peace building (Swanson,2014).Moreover, he views the depiction of interdependence betweenstructural and direct violence to be simplistic. Further, Boulding isagainst the terms “structural violence” and “negative peace”and he considers them misleading. He urges that the process thatcreates and sustains poverty is different to that that creates andsustains violence. To him, peace does not mean absence or opposite ofwar. He claims war and peace are complex phases with differentphenomenon with distinct causes and characteristics.
Additionally,Bruce Bawer, a City Journal editor criticizes peace studies. He baseshis arguments that most peace studies programs are run by eitherfar-left professors or Marxist. According to Swanson(2014), Bawer also believes that most peace theories dominate fromthe belief that Americans are the world’s problem. Bawer is alsoagainst the idea that terrorists should be respected at thenegotiation table.
Upto date, the world still makes the peace studies theory unrealistic.Scholars and academicians accuse the peace theories due to their lackof objectives. They reason that the theory derive their support frominexpert sources hence they support war instead of rejecting it.Furthermore, the theories are well said than practically done.
Upto date, Nye has the most influential discussion of interdependence.Nye argues that dependence is the situation whereby a nation reliesupon external forces that correspondingly affects its autonomy andbehavior. On the other hand, Nye argues interdependence is asituation whereby two nations rely on the same external forces(Crescenzi,2005).It involves costs and benefits. Costs emerge once two states makeeconomic ties. Benefits are significant as they act as incentives fornations to move towards interdependence. Costs and benefits are basedon the demand and supply ideas. Nye states that it is impossible fora country to supply fully for its own country.
Accordingto Crescenzi(2005),benefits created by economic interdependence are beneficial to allcountries involved. For instance, the new technology is minimizingthe distance between countries as days goes by, both in respect oftravel, as well as the information. Economic interdependence haspositive impacts whereby it brings different countries together andmakes them act in a cooperative manner. For instance, this iswitnessed in American international relations with countries such asGermany, France, England, Netherlands, among others. These countriescreate policies that can enable them become partners, and succeedeconomically.
Interdependencehas extended opportunities and shared responsibilities. Countriescan rely on each other for survival. Today, countries are linked tothe global economic system, and a country can sell its products andservices to another country. Interdependence has enhanced productionof a variety of products.
Nonetheless,some countries use economic interdependence as the weapon ofdestruction and mass chaos. For instance, the big and powerfulcountries can oppress the small and weak countries in the name ofinterdependence. For instance, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Cubahave suffered overwhelming effects from economic interdependence botheconomically and developmentally.
ReferencesTopof FormBottom of Form
Connor,S. (2013). Is it natural for humans to make war? New study of tribalsocieties reveals conflict is an alien concept. Retrieved October 16,2015, fromhttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/is-it-natural-for-humans-to-make-war-new-study-of-tribal-societies-reveals-conflict-is-an-alien-8718069.html
Crescenzi,M. J. C. (2005). Economicinterdependence and conflict in world politics.Lanham: Lexington Books.
Fukuyama,F. (2006). Theend of history and the last man.Simon and Schuster.
Klare,M. (2011). The New Thirty Years` War: Winners and Losers in the GreatGlobal Energy Struggle to Come. Retrieved October 16, 2015, fromhttp://www.commondreams.org/views/2011/06/27/new-thirty-years-war-winners-and-losers-great-global-energy-struggle-come
Langis,T. (2011). Why Women Need to Be Part of the Peace Process. RetrievedOctober 16, 2015, fromhttp://www.commondreams.org/views/2011/07/05/why-women-need-be-part-peace-process
Macgregor,D. (2014, September 25). Obama and the Road to Hell in the MiddleEast. Retrieved October 16, 2015, fromhttp://www.counterpunch.org/2014/09/25/obama-and-the-road-to-hell-in-the-middle-east/
Swanson,D. (2014). Why War Is Not Inevitable. Retrieved October 16, 2015,from http://www.globalresearch.ca/why-war-is-not-inevitable/5384132
ThePassionate Eye. (2013, April 10). The Rise of ISIS – The PassionateEye. Retrieved October 16, 2015, fromhttp://www.cbc.ca/passionateeye/episodes/the-rise-if-isis