Security and The International System Essay

With the united states shell-shocked from world war one, any slight mention of another war would be quickly dismissed by the average American citizen. So much so that President Roosevelt passed a legislation reassuring the nation that they will not take part in any future wars or contribution to the war. This, unfortunately, gave overseas opportunist who had a malevolent ilk to seize and control and to eliminate and preserve their nation by any means necessary without any interference. This short paper will brief individuals in the dynamic shifts of the world in which one nation's collapse is another nation's opportunity to prosper.

In summary, the author, James Rosenau, suggests that the world has changed from the previous Cold War era. There is no longer a threat of nuclear holocaust that was so prevalent in previous years. Rosenau suggests, “the global economy may have replaced the battlefield as the site of competition among international actors…the emergent global order will be relatively free of strategic underpinnings.” Governance for Rosenau is supposed to be more informal, varied, and elaborate than that of the Cold War period. People have become smarter, technology has spread, and there is a greater involvement of citizens. As shown through the absence of a hegemon, and centralizing- decentralizing tensions, power is shifting in international affairs. Issues

Even though the United States emerged as a clear victor of World War I, many Americans after the war felt that their involvement in the conflict had been a mistake (Markus Schoof, “The American Experience During World War II,” slide 3). This belief, however, did not deter the country from engaging in many other international affairs in the future, most importantly the WWII and the Cold War. Right from the Manifest Destiny, which led to expand its empire at home and abroad, to the World War I, the country had come a long way from being somewhat a lonely-land to a global superpower of the 20th century. Its influence in the international arena grew unprecedently after its commitment to the World War II, and like they say, the rest is history. If the WWII was a resounding success to the American legacy, what followed, the Cold War, put many implications on the American diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union and to the world. Although the rising Fascism in Europe and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor drove the U.S. to enter the WWII, historians over the years have laid equal blames on both nations for starting the Cold War. These two events helped in shaping up many domestic and foreign policies for the U.S.

Recently, and especially since the 1990s, a popular conception of the world is that the age of empires and superpowers is waning, rapidly being replaced by a kind of global community made up of interdependent states and deeply connected through economics and technology. In this view, the United States' role following the Cold War is one of almost benign preeminence, in which it seeks to spread liberal democracy through economic globalization, and, failing that, military intervention. Even then, however, this military intervention is framed as part of a globalizing process, rather than any kind of unilateral imperialist endeavor. However, examining the history of the United States since nearly its inception all the way up to today reveals that nothing could be farther from the truth. The United States is an empire in the truest sense of the word, expanding its control through military force with seemingly no end other than its own enrichment. The United States' misadventure in Iraq puts the lie to the notion that US economic and military action is geared towards any kind of global progression towards liberal democracy, and forces one to re-imagine the United States' role in contemporary global affairs by recognizing the way in which it has attempted to secure its own hegemony by crippling any potential threats.

At this point in time, the main actors in the international system are nation-states seeking an agenda of their own based on personal gain and national interest. Significantly, the most important actor is the United States, a liberal international economy, appointed its power after the interwar period becoming the dominant economy and in turn attained the position of hegemonic stability in the international system. The reason why the United States is dominating is imbedded in their intrinsic desire to continuously strive for their own national interest both political and economic. Further, there are other nature of actors that are not just nation-states, including non-states or transnational,

The second World War brought untold suffering to million across the globe, but it also launched the United States into the position of a superpower for the next 50 years. With the utter destruction of nations across Europe, Africa, and Asia, both winners and losers, America easily assumed a dominant position in the coming international system and captured the ability to reconstruct the world using its high democratic ideals. The United States was the most powerful nation in the world. It is said that absolute power corrupts absolutely, and with postwar America it was no different. Given the unilateral power to spread its ideals of self-determination, liberty, equality, and individualism; America instead effectively subverted these principles not only around the world, but domestically as well. The unlimited global power and Cold War paranoia of the postwar years to the assassination of John F. Kennedy proved a fatal mixture to American ideals. As World War II came to a close, the United States gained the world as the most powerful country on earth; But to maintain this power it sadly reverted to the imperalism abraod and the Red Scare at home; its reversion made her loose her soul. These hypocritical actions and policies shaped a new world not set by democratic and liberal ideals of FDR’s “Four Points,” but by the power motivated creeds of repression, greed, and violence. In the race to fill the power vacuum created by World War II, the United States abandoned its civic

President Theodore Roosevelt, well known for his extraordinary, worldly diplomatic skills, was quoted as saying, “Speak softly and carry a big stick, and you will go far.” During the early twentieth century, he brandished that big stick, or convincingly threatened to, with remarkable efficacy in support of his country’s political objectives. The big stick that President Roosevelt carried with him as a diplomat and Commander in Chief was the superior power of the United States military. “Historically, power has been measured by such criteria as population size and territory, natural resources, economic strength, military force, and social stability. Hard power enables countries to wield carrots and sticks to get what they want.”1 Power, a nation’s ability to influence other states to achieve a desired outcome, manifests in numerous different forms or elements within a state. Powerful states strive to employ all the elements of power, including diplomacy, information, economic, cultural, and most importantly military to further their national objectives. Although a reasonable person might expect that a militarily powerful state routinely triumphs over the weaker state in matters of war, superior military power only guarantees a victory on paper, not in any real war. This paper will show that when one considers a state’s relative military power, weaker states are capable of defeating more powerful states that struggle to formulate

The 20th century brought with it a plethora of technological advancements that acted as a catalyst for an important and lasting shift in the United State’s perception of its role in the world. Technological advancement in travel and communication changed the American people’s views of the world, therefore changing the direction of American foreign policy. This shift in foreign policy would eventually lead the United States into the grips of two horrific wars on the European continent. However, these wars would provide the necessary environment for the country to establish itself as the leader of the international system – a title it would desperately need tin order to attempt to create a new, less conflict-ridden global order. Though World

Leading up to mid-1941, the United States of America appeared unsure of its identity and seemed unwilling to assume an international role commensurate with its power and wealth; but, as much as America would come to shape the international system, the structure of the international system was crucial in shaping the type of role the United States was to play. The United States, being a continental country with weak neighbors, enjoyed relative

In John Gaddis’s 2005 book, ‘The Cold War, a New History’,3 Gaddis identifies that from the 1930’s, the Soviet Union and the Western allies were already at ‘war’ with each other ideologically and geopolitically, if not military. Thus it was the ending of the military campaign against Hitler’s Nazi Germany, which had previously unified these opposing ideologies, that triggered the onset of the Cold War. Gaddis theorises that the USA could not continue to serve as a model for the rest of the world after the War had ended, while remaining apart from the rest of the world. American practices of isolationism had become untenable as a result of the War and previously suppressed feelings of anxiety by the USA over Soviet expansion and the spread

One of the most vigorous debates focuses on the current status of the United States hegemony and whether or not it is in decline. This begs the question, if the United States is indeed declining in status, will it still be an influential player or not? I argue that the United States is losing its prominent position as the hegemonic leader of the world, but will still remain an influential player in global politics in the following decades to come. Its decline is an imminent result of their domestic issues, the violation of international laws and economic deficit, which have posed a grave and serious challenge for the United States. On the other hand, I propose that the United States will remain a dominant force due to its innovation,

With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the fall of its economic system the United States became more powerful than ever. Now as world hegemon, the United States continued to trump its cultural values in their quest to spread the American ways around the world. It is during this period that we adopted the grand strategy of promoting a more liberal international order. The world experienced a proliferation in international organizations as well as more open and inclusive trade

After World War II the United States was on the up and up from the long and hard Great Depression. It had reestablished itself as a superpower though due to reconstruction in Europe it could be argued that it was a bipolar power that came to follow the Second World War between the Soviet Union and the United States. These tensions came to follow after the difference in ideology became the forefront of what was to become the Cold War which would come to end in 1991 after the Soviet Union fell. (History.com staff) Though before the fall of the Soviet Union a decade long arms race between the two superpowers ensued. This led to many complications with international

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States was the unquestioned hegemon of the western world acting in a unipolar world. However, recently the United States has fallen into a series of deprival causing its reputation to fall as a state. Despite this, under the Bush Doctrine, the United States currently has a preemptive hegemonic imperative policy. Under this policy, the United States takes into account that the world is a perilous environment in need of a leader to guide and to control the various rebel states unipolarly. Under this policy though, the United States acts alone with no assistance from other states or institutions. Global intuitions that would assist under other types of policies are flagrantly disregarded in this policy in spite of its emphasis on the international level. As well as not participating in international institutions, this policy states that the United States should act entirely in its own wisdom. The UN (the United Nations), GATT (General Agreement of Tariffs and Trade), along with other institutions advice is not heeded within this self-made policy. Though the United States currently acknowledges these global organizations, it no longer takes them into account with severity. Instead of acting under the international system, the United States currently acts through its military, and large economy to instill fear within the various actors in the intercontinental system. According to this philosophy the

The purpose for an IT security policy is to provide “strategy, policy, and standards regarding the security of and operations in cyberspace, and encompasses the full range of threat reduction, vulnerability reduction, deterrence, international engagement, incident response, resiliency, and recovery policies and activities, including computer network operations, information assurance, law enforcement, diplomacy, military, and intelligence missions as they relate to the security and stability of the global information and communications infrastructure” ("Cyberspace policy RevIew", 2016).