Pre-emptive war is universally recognized as an anticipatory use of force. Despite the definition for the terms of a pre-emptive war, whether or not it is justified has become a complex and contradicting subject for states. There is the issue of morality, abiding by international law and comprehending the definition of “imminent threat”.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki did not mark the beginnings of a ‘nuclear revolution’ as it is understood. The strategic environment and technological capabilities for a revolution did not exist in 1945 and not until much later.
Given Germany’s post-war situation, it moved towards a constitutionally enshrined antimilitarist, democratic and moralist stance, which helped make Germany a smaller geopolitical actor than its potential suggested, a situation it was not altogether unhappy with. Despite the former, it does have a genuine security culture which has adapted over time.
Social control, which is essential to all social relations, is at the center of international relations. Calculation of self-interest best explains actors’ underlying incentives, and thus their willingness to comply with rules.
The intervention in Libya is being portrayed in the media as an attempt to save the Libyan people from destruction at the hands of a brutal and oppressive regime. When one looks at the evidence, various interests and geopolitical concerns confronting intervening nations, another motive emerges: realism.
The question of the compatibility of Islam and democracy has persisted for generations. The recent events of the Middle East, facilitated by these technological advances, have only heightened the talk about the role of democracy in the region.
A liberal foreign policy based on the assumption of DPT – that liberal democracies will be less likely to go to war with each other – does have flaws and weaknesses. While fixing these flaws and strengthening these weaknesses may be difficult, time-consuming and painful, the promise of peace is surely worth the effort.
The fact that Hamas and Hezbollah have participated in elections does not necessarily mean that they have abandoned Islamist ideology. The very term ‘Islamist’, or at least its application, is highly problematic. Furthermore, all Islamist organisations are very different, and are constrained by the institutional rules of participation to differing degrees.
International institutions are generally the results of leading states. Therefore, it is world powers that could eventually, under conditions of extreme political will, promote global peace and security and not the international institutions they have created in order to build their spheres of influence and increase their power in the international system.
The Euro, by design and recent accident, has been a catalyst to integration within the EU, but with the caveat that this integration is unevenly distributed. Even if there are disparities in broader levels of integration, the determination to avoid failure has unified the euro-area members and non-members alike.
Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.
E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!
Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.
