Rogue Vs Scape

The poems ‘Manhunt’ and ‘Nettles’ both explore pain however both poems explore it in different ways. The poem Nettles explores the hurt of a young boy who has been stung by nettles and his father’s emotional reaction of it. Whereas Manhunt explores the physical and emotional pain caused by war.

In “Rogues, Rascals, and Scoundrels, ” Daniel Williams claims that criminal literature in America has evolved over the last few centuries in three stages. The first stage took place in the seventeenth century, when executions were extremely popular and attended by thousands of Americans (Williams 6). Since executions were so popular, it was inevitable that the execution sermons would not be published (6). The first execution sermons were published as an attempt to make others fear God, as the narratives would include descriptions of how ashamed and remorseful the criminal was for their crimes (Williams 8). Self-hatred and sincerity were not unusual in published confessions, criminals often expressed repentance for their crimes and thanked the

The war in Darfur materialized at the wrong time for the United States, Norway, and Britain, two of which are permanent members of the U.N. Security Council. At the time, they were focused on ensuring the success of the Naivasha negotiations in Sudan. The Naivasha agreement, also known as the Comprehensive Peace Agreement was an permanent ceasefire agreement between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/ Sudan People’s Liberation Army to end the Second Sudanese Civil War. This was long time coming because the conflict had started all the way back in 1983. The Security Council used the ‘Brahimi principal,’ which states “regional organizations take primary responsibility for the problems in their backyard” to push responsibility on to the A.U. The Brahimi principle The Security Council was glad to give someone else the responsibility of Darfur so they could focus on others tasks at hand.

A few of the hundreds of NGO’s operating in Afghanistan include the World Health Organization, World Bank, British Agencies Afghan group, and Afghans for Civil Society. While each of these organizations takes on the battle in a different way, they are all aiming towards the same goal at the end of the fight; Peace for the Afghan people. Some of these organizations decide to take on this battle by aiding with things such as health care, agricultural development, building programs, emergency relief, or school reconstruction. Despite the efforts of these NGO’s, many problems have arisen, making it hard to maintain ideal structural stability for the organizations working within the state. A main concern for humanitarians across the globe is the “blurred line” that has occurred as a result of the inability to decipher between aid workers, and military troops. This has caused the Afghan people to become vary, and can result in a lack of trust for those trying to administer support. Western governments have also proceeded to voice the idea of the ‘comprehensive approach’ to peacekeeping. This approach focuses on the idea that militaries, aid workers, politicians and civilians should all work together to provide ‘complex solutions to complex emergencies.’ ("Civil-Military Relations in Afghanistan”). The inability to disentangle the

Prior to the intervention, Sierra Leone was enduring a civil war sparked by socio-economic issues of poverty, resulting in violence. Bakarr Bah (2013) states that “this civil war posed security and humanitarian challenges for the international community”. Lucy Scott mentions that insecurity, social, economic and political exclusion set the conditions for violence. The United Nation, however, became a major participant after the 1999 Lomé Peace Agreement (Bah, 2013). The agreement was a settlement amongst major figures including the rebel armies. The armies, such as the RUF, refused and tensions increased. This resulted in the military intervention of the British. Abu Bakarr Bah (2013) mentions that this intervention implied that there was an international responsibility to protect civilians. Even though the intervention was helpful in ending the war, the post conditions were set up to ensure stability of peace, hoping to promote socio-economic growth.

Keller (1997) discusses how internal civil wars rely on military support and arms from across borders. Analysts have long highlighted the relevance of “transboundary formations” that “link global regional, national, and local forces through structures, networks, and discourses that have wide-ranging impact, both benign and malign” (Callaghy, Kassimir & Latham 2001: 5). Non-state actors are able to consolidate their power through their interactions with the international and regional community (Bayart 1993). Mampilly (2011) argues that it is crucial to consider the impact of transnational actors on the behavior of rebel groups as it relates to civilian governance. These relations can bolster non-state actors, including armed groups (Guyer 1994; Ferguson & Gupta 2002). Zahar even argues that because insurgents view themselves as “independent political entities,” they “work to legitimize themselves by interacting with transnational actors” (2001: 60). Mampilly comments that transnational actors support rebel groups by providing them with resources that influence their ability and will to deal with civilian governance (2011: 89). Rebel groups incorporate these transnational actors into their governance systems in order to supplant or supplement their dependence on civilian support, and therefore, their own capacity to provide civilians with goods. And so in general, it is feasible to assume that help drawn from other states will have a damaging effect on civilian governance

On the other hand, humanitarian intervention was not in the Hutu military’s national interest, humanitarian intervention was in fact the last thing the Hutu army wanted. However the United Naitons and other third party groups are not interested in fighting in favor oIt is important to remember that humanitarian interventions purpose is to put an end to severe human rights violations, for example,

The last armed conflict in the western hemisphere is coming to an end bringing hope of a peaceful and better world to all of us. This was the message President Santos of Colombia delivered to the general assembly of the United Nations in 2014. The ongoing peace process sits down the government and the FARC with the objective of ending hostilities and negotiating a social reform. The FARC guerrilla was founded almost 50 years ago in a small town south of Colombia where the villagers were tired of the government’s inequality and bad treatments. After 50 years of conflict, the social purpose of the armed group has disappeared and now they are terrorists and drug traffickers. After 2 years of ongoing negotiations, 3 out of 5 agenda points have been agreed upon. In his speech for the international community President Santos effectively gets their support for the process using an authoritarian tone, a positive diction, and an appeal to sympathy from them showing the horrors of war and the benefits of peace. He also understands the end of this conflict not only benefits Colombia but sets a precedent for the rest of the world and convinces the other leaders of this. Nonetheless, he falls in some logical fallacies like hasty generalizations and broad assumptions that would make his argument fall apart with another audience in another context.

First, while understanding that R2P is a broad framework with preventive and reactive measures, military intervention can only be allowed when the State has manifestly failed to protect its populations and when peaceful means have proven to be inadequate. Second, intervention under the R2P must specifically protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. Third, as agreed to in 2005, R2P legitimizes the use of force only if it is employed collectively through the UN Security

In a statement made by Bolivia’s United Nations ambassador, Sacha Llorentty, “The Security Council emphasizes that the conflict in Yemen will only be resolved through the

The consensus among the international community affirms that nations, like individuals, have basic rights, namely, the right to territorial integrity and political sovereignty. When another nation violates these rights, it is considered an act of aggression. However, there certainly are situations where a violation of territorial integrity or political sovereignty is justified, namely in humanitarian intervention, “the use of military force against another state when the chief declared aim of that action is ending human-rights violations being perpetrated by the state against which it is directed.” The issue of humanitarian intervention has been at the forefront of international relations discourse, particularly after the end of the Cold War. It has been a highly contentious subject, having impact on millions of people and many regions around the world. The international community has yet to settle on a set of principles and parameters that define and characterize justification for intervention. However, writers like John Stuart Mill and Michael Walzer outline the conditions for which humanitarian intervention is permissible. A violation of a nation 's political sovereignty and territorial integrity for the purpose of humanitarian intervention is justified in Michael Walzer’s revision of the Legalist Paradigm when there is a substantial violation of the fundamental rights of life, liberty, and property, and the host nation is either complicit in the injustice or

The role of a third-party in a peace operations effort can be categorized as fragile and easily misconstrued. These groups can include international governments, UN and even NATO just to name a few. Their tasks mainly rely on incomplete data, inaccurate assumptions and the pressure from the outside world to "fix" the conflict all within a span of a CNN news hour. There are many factors which are taken into consideration by these groups. These factors are used to determine the plan and ultimately the overall success of the peace-keeping mission. The plan can include funding, demobilization, reintegration and long-term peace. These issues when not properly analyzed can cause difficulty in the

The failure of the agreement and the de facto collapse of TOGNU are foreseeable as it is inevitable. Negotiations to reach an end to the civil war reconciliation usually require at least three conditions to be successful. First, all parties need to believe that a military solution is impossible. Second, agreements negotiated need to provide equitable and sustainable distribution of power, including but not limited to "compromising elites" and the protection of minorities. Third, the terms the parties need to believe in the agreement will

Military action in Libya was sanctioned by the Security Council under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, which allows for such intervention in the case of a threat to international peace and security which they have interpreted as including grave threats to civilians. The international community, through the United Nations, also has the responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means, in accordance with Chapters VI and VIII of the Charter, to help protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. In this context, we are prepared to take collective action, in a timely and decisive manner, through the Security Council, in accordance with the Charter, including Chapter VII, on a case by case basis and in cooperation with relevant regional organizations as appropriate, should peaceful means be inadequate.

When the peacekeepers that are entrusted to protect the most vulnerable people instead make attempts to exploit their vulnerability and struggle, it is not only a betrayal of trust but also disrespect towards the values of the United Nations (Deschamps,