The Cycles of International Conflict

This has been an interesting week of personal reflection as I have been introduced to the concept of conflict. It is not that I was unaware that conflict exists but I cannot say that I have given it much thought other than how can we avoid it in our family. While reading about the escalation cycles of conflict in the textbook I was taken back to the patterns that developed between myself and my ex-husband. I found the description of one’s health often being compromised due to conflict to be an accurate assessment of the effects long term conflict had on me personally during my first marriage. I can see looking back now how the daily conflict regarding every conversation and decision negatively impacted my health and left me on blood pressure

The following wars have been divided between 1.) Wars caused by ethnic issues and 2.) Wars not caused by ethnic issues. After determining the cause of war, I will focus on particular aspects of the war predominantly the death toll, how long the war lasted, if core states got involved in the conflict and if so how far removed were they from the region of conflict. Finally and most importantly, I will compare and contrast the two types of wars (1.) Wars caused by ethnic conflict and 2.) Wars not caused by ethnic conflict) and determine how these wars were ultimately resolved. More specifically, I am determining if wars caused by ethic issues are resolved by internal means or whether they are resolved by external factors such as core states or states that have an invested interest in the matter.

There is a grave complexity in defining Kurdish nationalism as it has developed into modern Middle Eastern countries. Calculating to a population of over 25 million, they are the largest minority in the world to not have their own state. Their nationalist movement has remained resilient in three pivot countries: Iran, Iraq, and Turkey. Kurds have been active in the country of Syria as well, since the 1980’s. Kurdish diaspora has existed in western Europe where long-distance nationalism has been promoted. In the strife for human rights, the Kurds have suffered as any other people would in the Middle East. They have faced massacre, poison gas, mass deportation, and linguistic discrimination. The three states that

Trade, religion, and politics: these are the root causes for war. For centuries, war has been driven by the ever enduring growth of mankind. Mankind has continuously created its own barriers for success and proliferation through these barriers it has created massive tension amongst itself. The Crusades, the Russo-Japanese War, and the Boxer Rebellion are all conflicts throughout time that exemplify mankind’s yearning for advancement. The control of trade, the spreading of religion, and the projection of political beliefs are the three root agents for war.

Huntington thesis stated in his opinion that the great differences among people and the dominating source of conflicts would be due to differences in culture. He also stated that key conflicts in global politics will take place due to different civilizations among nations.

Why do some states engage in war? This has been a crucial question for humanity as well as for many international relations scholars that study the relationship between states and how they coexist in the international context. Throughout history, many influential thinkers have come up with theories to explain the nature of the international system and the behavior of states. Liberal theories such as the democratic peace theory argue that war can be justifiable if it represents the establishment of a democratic government, which would then represent a collective good for the international system. On the other hand, realist theories including structural realism believe that a state should engage in war if it means the expansion or

The aim of Samuel P. Huntington’s “The Clash of Civilizations” was to provide an academic framework to understand almost all of the conflicts that had broken out since the end of the twentieth century, to include predicting the appearance of future conflicts. According to Huntington, there will be a clash of civilizations since the world has been in an unreasonable era since the end of the Cold War and the position of the nation-state has not been of any significance. Far more than the political objectives of territorial take-overs, it is the religious element of culture that has become the main cause of conflict. It should be acknowledged that Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations” is a relatively simple theory which focuses on

In the midst of the chaos of the on-going Syrian civil war, the nation of Syrian Kurds has slowly coalesced and formed its own self-proclaimed sovereign country, complete with its own constitution and form of government. Though still in its early days, it has already collaborated with international powers to fight off terrorist groups, and remained a strong hold in the region of northern Syria. This conflict will continue to evolve and have major implications for the future of Syrian Kurds, and other groups in the region with regard to questions of resource control and Kurdish sovereignty.

Leonard Binder states, "Most observers see little good coming out of an ethnic narcissism that conduces to the demonization of the other." (p. 6) These conflicts often escalate to the point where the original crisis fades into the background, and the participants lose sight of it altogether. Each group believes that when one gains, the other loses automatically. Similarly, when one group compromises, it is also a loss. This is particularly difficult when religion is involved because groups will not compromise their beliefs and ethnic loyalties are very strong. Additionally, nation-states include ethnic strategies into their government, foreign policy, and politics in general. (Binder 8)

The occurrence and recurrence of wars are made by rational actors, but what are the prerequisites for a war? There are numerous answers to this question with a wide range of answers that give a perspective on the various sources of conflict. The first is that the cost of war cannot be outrageously high. The anticipated outcome of gaining resources, power, and/or territory cannot exceed the expected cost of conflict, including damages to property and life. The second is that a failure in bargaining must be present to create the inability of reaching a mutual agreement. Understanding war between rational actors and why bargaining fails is based on five factors:

Huntington claims that the fundamental source of conflict between civilization will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic, Huntington believes that the conflict will be more cultural which

Samuel Philips Huntington, an American political scientist brought an idea stated that the conflict in this world will not merely about ideology or economy, yet, it is about cultural and religious identity as the clash of civilization. Civilization itself meaning the highest cultural grouping of people and it is defined by common objective elements such as language, history and religion. The strong bond among one culture and religion create a strong kin at the same time. Even though coming from different region and country, the kin is influencing across the own nationality.

Samuel Huntington, the author of the clash of the civilisations believes that the World will eventually divide in accordance with cultural lines, and not political lines. According to Huntington, “the thriving East Asian and Muslim societies will soon challenge Western dominance, and the United States being the World leader will need to reevaluate its policies on foreign invention and domestic immigration to remain a major player.” During the Cold War, the world was divided into the First, Second and Third Worlds. Huntington views these ties as insignificant now and states that the remaking of the World order will be based upon cultural similarity. The different thriving civilisations according to him today are the Western civilisation comprising of North America and Western Europe, the Muslim civilisation, the Orthodox Civilisation led by Russia, the Chinese civilisation, the Hindu civilisation, the Japanese civilisation, the Latin American civilisation and the African civilisation. Huntington’s proposition of the division of the World according to cultural lines has been backed by the use of various examples by him; examples of events that have taken place in the past.

With open conflict between nations and non-nation organizations, for example the War on Terrorism, the definition above is no longer fully true. A better definition would be Hedley Bull’s, “organised violence carried on by political units against each other” (Michael Sheehan, 2014, 218). Thus if the definition of war and how it’s waged in the 21st century changed, theoretical approaches best suited conceptually and analytically that can explain and understand modern war has also changed.

In Amartya Sen's book, Identity and Violence, he discusses an article that was written by Samuel Huntington, called Clash of civilizations. The article Clash of Civilizations is Huntington's take on how violence will be caused post Cold War. . He argues that the cause of violence after the Cold War will be due to differences within cultural and religious identities. However, this article was written in 1993, and surely times have changed from then. There's been quite a few articles written critiquing Huntington's, Clash of Civilization since it was written. Of those critiques, I will be using Edward Said's article “The Clash of Ignorance,” and of course Sen’s discussion of the Clash of Civilizations in Identity and Violence.