Have the causes of conflict altered in the post-Cold War period Essay Example

be translated into usable influence in international affairs during simpler times in the Cold War. In other words, having nuclear weapons served as a deterrent for conflicts within the bipolar world dominated by USA and Soviet Union.

However, conflicts still occurred during this era; however involved parties would often seek assistance from one of the superpowers thus reinforcing conceptually speaking a bipolar world.

Following the Cold War, a multipolar system emerged which led to new conflicts. Mearsheimer argues that during the Long Peace, there was a balanced distribution of military power and nuclear weapons, resulting in bipolarity (Mearsheimer 1990, "Why We Will Soon Miss The Cold War").

The absence of this factor was no longer present, although some scholars argue that this era is characterized by unipolarism (i.e. US hegemony), rather than multipolarism. The majority of conflicts before and during the Cold War were between states. Read about

S

atellite Nations Cold


In the post-Cold War period, the number of interstate wars decreased, and new threats occurred, such as ethnic conflicts, rise of nationalism, global threats to the environment, and terrorism. These were dominant factors that altered global security. The United States, Russia, and United Nations were caught unprepared to handle all these new challenges, especially the conflicts that erupted within the new states of the former USSR and in Yugoslavia.

Previously, the focus in conflict resolution has been on protecting the unitary state rather than promoting self-determination since World War I. However, there has been a recent shift in this focus as new states emerge and

gain recognition on a large scale. Despite this shift, there are no clear guidelines for determining when intervention is necessary in conflicts. According to Hitchcock and Kennedy (2000), the UN and International Law do not clearly authorize intervention in matters that were previously considered "internal affairs" of states, even if these matters have regional security implications. Many believe that most ethnic conflicts did not arise due to the end of the Cold War but instead originate from long-standing religious and ethnic disputes spanning centuries. These conflicts were temporarily halted during the East-West conflict or even since World War I but resurfaced after the overthrow of authoritarian communist regimes. While all former communist states faced challenges during their transition to democracy, wars only occurred in the former Soviet Union and Yugoslavia.

Within these states, various ethnic groups expressed their dissatisfaction with their social position and desired greater participation in political decisions, more rights, and sometimes even independence. Sens argues that there were multiple causal factors behind the conflicts in former communist federations, including the clash between state nationalism and ethnic nationalism, as well as the state's inability to maintain order and prevent domestic anarchy. He further remarks that the violence and brutality witnessed in these communal conflicts have shocked and appalled most observers, with the resurgence of "ethnic cleansing" and "genocide" in contemporary international politics (Sens 2000, "Canada on the Security Council: International Security in the 21 Century").

The increase degree of intervention in internal conflicts, both militarily through Nato and diplomatically through the CSCE/OSCE, was influenced by modern information technology. According to Clark (2001, p. 8), the instantaneous flow of news and imagery overwhelmed governments' ability to

explain, investigate, coordinate, and confirm, a phenomenon known as the "CNN factor." As a result, governments became less flexible in intervening without public opinion support. Despite this, the Security Council has violated the strict interpretation of Article 1 paragraph 7 of the UN Charter, which prohibits intervention in domestic affairs of member states (Muldoon 1999, "The Challenges of Multilateral Diplomacy in 1999").

In the early 90s, major powers became more interested in and intervened in internal conflicts like the wars in Yugoslavia. Some scholars have raised questions about why they got involved. Chomsky (2001) argues that this intervention is driven by self-interest rather than humanitarian concerns. He suggests that Western dominance is maintained by using humanitarian language as a tool, employing it when convenient but dismissing it as 'idealistic' when it doesn't serve Western strategic interests. In the case of Kosovo, Western powers took advantage of the situation to demonstrate NATO's global military supremacy.

The terrorist attacks on September 11th revealed vulnerabilities in American supremacy that were previously underestimated and introduced a new threat to global peace. This event marked the start of a new type of warfare - a supranational conflict between Islamic fundamentalists and western-style political systems.

According to Prime Minister Tony Blair's speech, the term "The War on Terror" is used to describe the recent conflict. He stated that this war is fought in a new way and with different means (The Independent 2002). In the past, during the Cold War era, it was clear which countries possessed nuclear weapons and they were prevented from being used by the superpowers. Currently, the United States and its European allies, as the sole superpower, aim to maintain

control and reduce the number of states that have weapons of mass destruction like nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. Nonetheless, preventing these weapons from falling into unauthorized hands is the main concern.

Islamic fundamentalists argue that they will continue carrying out acts of terrorism against the USA and its allies, which include the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, and Australia. These attacks are seen as a way to pressure these nations into resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict due to their perceived support for the Israeli government.

Western governments, particularly led by the US, have expressed their readiness to use military force in dealing with this increasing threat. However, there is not always consensus among them when it comes to endorsing US foreign policy objectives and resorting to military action for their own interests. This disagreement is especially evident between Germany and France.

This disagreement highlights one of the issues that has emerged between the US and its allies since the end of Cold War. Nevertheless, despite internal dissent within its ranks, the USA remains committed to taking independent action if necessary.

In conclusion, this essay demonstrates how significantly conflict causes have changed in the post-Cold War era.

The fall of the Berlin Wall was a significant turning point for both the Communist East and democratic West. It marked a shift away from the dominant bipolar world of the Cold War. This event led to a new balance of power, resulting in the emergence of numerous states and the revival of old conflicts over the past decade. These developments have presented new challenges for the United Nations. In order to effectively address these fresh challenges, the UN has adjusted its approach.

The

United States of America is considered the only superpower globally. However, it has encountered notable security challenges.

Bibliography

1. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/foreign/mearsh.htm