What I see is a flawed tactic, which has long-term consequences. We have seen this time and time again, the United States, occasionally stumbles into a country that it does not fully understand the dynamics of, and unleashes a force that it doesn’t control. From arming the rebels in Angola against the pro-Soviet movement, to the Afghan Mujahedeen. In the context of the cold war, the argument could be made that the strategy worked because the Soviet Union collapsed however, the long-term effects were devastating. Angola’s civil war lasted 27 years and we are currently fighting the same thugs we armed in Afghanistan and Iraq. A recent CIA report concluded “ In general, external support for rebels almost always make wars longer, bloodier, and
Over the course of history, the United States has a reputation of getting involved with other nations to sort out disputes, arguments, conflicts, wars, etc. One specific example of U.S. Military Involvement is the 1980 El Salvador Civil War. The El Salvador Civil War was a civil war that lasted from 1980 to about 1992. The war slowly arose due to little uprisings in society, promises to improve economy and lifestyles that were never fulfilled, and the push of communism beliefs onto the people who didn’t believe in them. The U.S. Military would not get involved unless their is a violation of human rights, or if mankind is being put into harm's way. The U.S. involved themselves in the Civil War of El Salvador because they had enough evidence and support for specific claims, had the appropriate authority, and fought for an outcome that suited the needs of humanity.
Imperialism in Africa began in the late 19th century. It began when King Leopold II began the Scramble for Africa. All of the major colonial powers went after Africa. Their goal was to gain the most wealth and to have the most territory. Having more territory and claiming valuable parts of the continent was a symbol of power. Imperialism in Africa had negative and positive consequences on both the Europeans and Africans, these can be shown through human rights issues, new industry and advancements, and wealth and influence.
There is something rather odd in the way America has come to fight its wars since World War II. It’s unimaginable that we would now use anything even remotely approaching the full measure of our military power (aside from the nuclear option) in the wars we fight. This seems only reasonable given the relative weakness of our Third World enemies in Vietnam and the Middle East. But the fact is that we were forced to take our soldiers out of Vietnam because we had lost, and today, despite our vast power, we are only slogging along in the Middle East against a hit-and-run organization that we seem unable to stop. Yet no one, including, very likely, the insurgents themselves, believes that America lacks the raw power to defeat this insurgency if it wants to. So clearly America has adopted and has an accurate sense of proportionality.
Why would such a highly developed government that has been politically stable for almost forty years give authority to those who seek primarily personal gain rather than an overall benefit for their country, leading to the country’s first military coup d’etat? This question, along with many others, cannot simply be answered with a brief explanation. It takes extensive research. Still one may never know the true reasons to why there was such chaos. However, with some quality intuition, a few hypotheses can be made. First, the exploration of whom and what gave prior-coup Côte d'Ivoire their overall prosperity will be discussed. Then, the question of why this crisis occurred will be discussed. Finally, this paper will elaborate what events give basis to certain theories behind why the coup occurred.
“The New American Foundation's Brian Fishman recommends a patient approach of training and modestly arming rebels,” said an online article for the Council of Foreign Relations. Others suggest that the U.S. should reach out for the non-extremists in Syria and work with them to most importantly secure the collapse of Assad’s regime. The U.S. helped over the
Immigration. This word is so powerful in many ways. This word shaped the world we live in today. This world is a whole new one because of this word. However, this word has been used in the wrong sense. Donald Trump issued an executive order, banning immigrants from seven middle-eastern countries. He also is proposing to build a wall, to keep Mexican immigrants out of America. This word ‘immigration’ was so powerful hundreds of years ago, but in modern society, this word can be seen as ‘disgusting’, ‘unloyal’, ‘unfaithful’, and ‘scary’. Immigrants should be allowed into America because they help economic growth, America can have better relations with foreign countries, and they raise employment rate.
There are many challenges when it comes to rebuilding failing states and retraining their militaries. The practice is done for the purposes of advancement of political objectives, also the attempt to provide stability within a hostile region, saving a fragile nation from collapse, and to provide support to oppressed groups and populations aligned with similar value structures. It is not a new policy tactic for the United States, there have been several cases where America has played a big role in nation reconstruction and redeveloping regional armed forces. While there have been some successful campaigns in these efforts to fight insurgency, improve conditions in regional civil conflicts, and stabilize areas, it has not always been effective policy. The United States has had a pretty varied legacy with these types of interventions. From different case examples, it can be concluded that when a liberator is rebuilding a state or a military, and is dealing with a population that is multi-ethnic and has deep religious divisions, the effort is probably more likely to fail than to succeed. Further research also indicated that acting multilaterally produced much better results with nation reconstruction/intervention. Usually, during intervention campaigns, short term goals were reached, although there are often issues with achieving long term goals of peace and stability.
• The famine continued to spread, the population did not recover. • What were the long-term results of the conflict? • One of the long term effects of the Congo genocide was that because of King Leopold II the Congolese people lost their heritage and culture. To this day, Congo continues to struggle economically (Kenneth, The Effects of King Leopold…).
Starry Night by Vincent van Gogh is a lively painting that illustrates the stars, the moon, the night sky, a village, and a tree. Looking at this painting, you can see swirls of various colors, which include shades of blues, greens, yellows, whites, browns, and blacks. The stars are yellow swirls mixed with white and they are placed in the night sky, which consists of blues, greens, and blacks. The moon is depicted as a crescent moon circled by a white ring of swirls in the top right corner of the painting. The brown and black tree is placed in the foreground of the paining. The tree is bare and has many curved and pointed limbs extending toward the sky. The village is placed in the distance and has bits of yellow in the windows, as if people
The four marks of the Church describe the basic spiritual portion of the church and include the church to be one, holy, catholic, and apostolic. The Church didn’t simply develop these traits, but instead has these traits adopted from how Christ acted and how he was when he came down to Earth. The qualities of one, holy, catholic and apostolic “are qualities that Jesus Christ shares with his Church through the Holy Spirit.” The four marks of the Church were not immediately established into the Church however, and were established in 381, during the First Council of Constantinople. The council was brought together from the problem of them not being united throughout the Church.
International Relations is a field of politics that takes a look at the interactions that occur in between states in the international arena. Its aim is to explain why certain events have unfolded in certain ways, as a result of how states use their power relatively to each other. Mostly the interactions that International Relations tries to examine or explain, is the conflicts that arise as a result of differing interests that states have. To provide a base for analysis, this essay is going to use the central theory of realism to explain the civil war that occurred in Nigeria in between 1967 to 1970. This essay will seek to explain
Over a period from 1960-1965, the first Republic of the Congo experienced a period of serious crisis. There was a terrible war for power that displayed senseless violence and the desperation to rule. There were many internal conflicts among the people. The country eventually gained independence from Belgium. For many countries this would be a time for celebration. Unfortunately for the people of the Congo this became a time to forget. Almost immediately after independence and the general elections, the country went into civil war. Major developed cities like Katanga and Kasai wanted to be independent from the Lumumba government. Different factions started to fight the government and Katanga and Kasai tried to secede from the rest
Sierra Leone gained its independence in 1961 but it’s not as independent as it seems. Known as the Blood Diamond of Africa is said to be one of the most dangerous places in the world. Of its top exports, diamonds are number one. Who knew one diamond could cause so much chaos especially in the land of peace and harmony, causing its own people to kill one another. Blood diamonds are infamous and play a dangerous role in the lives of many people.
4 Analyze the effects of the cold war on apartheid in South Africa or on another specified issue and region or country.
One of the greatest challenges for the anti-Assad rebellion has been fighting a well-armed, well-supported Assad regime (Sorenson, pg. 13). The United States has provide arms and support to anti-regime fighters, but not nearly at the same pace as Russia and Iran have resupplied Assad. Also, rebels lack cohesion, as there are numerous anti-Assad factions that are attempting to overthrow the government, often times competing with each other. In order to bring the rebels together, and form a stronger rebellion against Assad, this course of action requires U.S. military presence on the ground. While I do not submit that the United States lead the attacks, we should instead embed ourselves with Syrian rebels, providing direct training and mentoring to the rebels, as well as providing support from aircraft and long-range artillery. Similar to operations in Libya, the U.S.-led air attacks can directly attack Assad himself, paving the way for a more successful rebellion. While we cannot possibly unite all of the rebel groups, we must show and provide a unified front for