Introduction There are many reasons why states engage one another in militarized behavior but one theme remains constant - the need to provide for their citizens. The most important and influential sets of assets a country can have are its natural resources. These resources are used strategically throughout society to accomplish many different things. One obvious set of natural resources are those utilized by a country’s economy, things that are bought and sold to manufacture specific products. While these are certainly extremely pertinent resources to a country’s strategic interests, there is a specific set of natural resources that have more influence. These resources cover the three basic needs for human survival - food, water, and shelter (land). Countries will do almost anything in their power to ensure these resources are provided to their populace, including go to war. When examining the effect each resource - food, water, and land - have on war onset, one resource stands out. It is nearly impossible to disentangle land as a natural resource from geographic explanations of war. Trying to determine the underlying motivations of territorial disputes often assume states as unitary actors, an assumption that makes analyzing this asset from a natural resource perspective undesirable and unfeasible. Food, while something highly commercialized and traded, remains to many in the world a fundamentally local concept. While certain international influences can strain supplies of
Why do notions go to war? What is the reasoning behind their actions? John G. Stoessinger analyzes these questions in his book, Why Nations go to War. Stoessinger believes that to understand the war, you must understand the leaders of the war. When you understand the leaders you understand their actions and when you understand their actions, you have the answer to the question, "Why do nations go to war?" In this review paper I am going to review each chapter individually, 1-10. I will then give a brief summary of the book and what I think as a whole based on my reading.
There are many reasons why countries go to war. One country may want to go to war to take revenge on something that another country or countries did to them. Germany, for example, wanted to take revenge on the rest of the European nations after they all unanimously agreed that the responsibility for the First World War should be laid upon Germany. Countries also go to war for another reason, territorial expansion. The crusades were a good example of this because even though they started out a holy war, they converted into wars that focused on expanding borders. There are many other reasons why wars start, but revenge and land expansion are the two greatest ones.
Militarism created an environment of fighting and military based. Many countries spent millions on their navy and army protection, and stocking large numbers of weapons such as, tanks, submarines, rifles, and airplane warfare. Throughout the start of the war Germany, Russia, and Great Britain spent more than 70 million euros in expenditure on their navy and army, (Document C). Countless countries used militarism force to solve political problems that were occurring. Militarism was simply a byproduct of Nationalism and other factors. Therefore, there are other more important causes of the war, besides each country’s desire to be the best, resulting in militarism. Conclusively, militarism would not have existed without nationalism, alliances, imperialism, or the three main causes that started the abrupt
Some resources are so valuable and are becoming so rare that countries will fight over them. Examples of these resources include gas, oil and even water. Since these resources are pretty much immobile and can’t be moved it means that countries have to take complete control of the area in which these resources are located. If this area
Although many people assume the motivations for war are determined by a territorial protection, a number of scholars have added other motivations for understanding why war occurs, among these historians one is a conspicuous example his name is Howard Zinn. Zinn has exposed that many countries go to war in order to bring economic prosperity to their region this need for gain in turn causes many of the upper class of that region to acquire fantastic levels of wealth, many of these powerful figures have denied these claims, Zinn,in reaction to these claims uses paradigm example, WW1, as a means for discrediting the upper class who incessantly deny profits during war.
This was one of the most important causes because citizens wanted to fight due to the idealization of the military. There was a great influence on military power. The glorification of the military caused countries to become arrogant and power hungry, in which countries competed for power. When a country is militaristic they don’t seem to have a problem, when it comes to war.
War is easily explained through the lens of social conflict theory, a sociological theory that suggests society tends toward conflict because it is made up of groups with competing interests and unequal resources. The theory proposes that a
anada is filled with many natural resources such as fossil fuels, mineral, and lumber. Having so many different types of natural resources helps improve the economy of Canada and living in a country with a high economy means you will have better public services since the government will have a lot of tax money. With better public services you will have better schools and health care.Canada has one of the best health care system and the better the health care system the longer you will live and it will improve the quality of life since you can easily treat diseases. Canada's natural resources place a big role on Canada's economy. Around 20% of the money made by natural resources directly and indirectly account for Canada's GDP. The natural resource
Throughout much of the history of civilizations, states have declared war for land, valuables, and resources. In the course of the mid-20th century and the 21st century, ascendant super powers have invaded foreign lands for resources such as oil, and weapons companies have profited from the ongoing cycle of war these super powers promote. The populations of these states have been fed lies vis-à-vis the media; propagandizing these “rogue nations” and promoting an ‘Us vs. Them’ mentality, to garner support for these armed conflicts. War is our primordial instinct, as humans are territorial and aggressive. That is our nature, and by looking at events in our history, one may see that war appears to be timeless and inevitable.
There are moments in our history where the citizens of the world stand up and for their beliefs, their honor, and themselves. They come together to reform the existing government that is holding them back from achieving their desired lifestyle. When this occurs, most likely, war is inevitable to follow. When war comes to a country, death and destruction is destined. Leaders and rules change, but the pride of its citizens prevails and becomes
Since the beginging of the human race, wars have erupted over disagreements on religion, economy, ……. etc. Land ………………… Land may be fought over for religious beliefs; may have once been a holy palce for their founders. Land may be fought over because of economic
As stated earlier, a state may use ethnic, cultural, historical, or religious reasons to attempt to conquer new territory, but they can also be used as reasoning for a state wanting to enact different policies in a state with different views. The United States is responsible for doing this, as numerous times we have invaded another country in an attempt to overthrow a regime and institute a democracy. States can also be compelled to invade a country due to their mistreatment of citizens, such as the United States’ invasion of Libya in 2011 “for its attacks on civilians while trying to suppress an armed uprising” (World Politics 87). In summary, systemic wars can be caused due to a desire for territory, disputes over a territory, policy disagreements, and regime changes.
This paper uses the terms natural resource(s), resource(s), and reserve(s) in many different contexts. Please use care when interpreting their usage and context.
One of the five key features of a state, as enumerated by Heywood (2007) includes territory—an area of land, or sometimes sea, that is considered as belonging to or connected with a particular country or person. According to Wiengand (2011), a territory is important because “without a territory, a homeland, a place to put down our roots. we would be lost, wandering like the tribes of Israel long ago.” Despite living in the 21st century, territorial disputes still remain to be one of the primary factors that lead to armed conflict. In the first chapter of the book, Enduring Territorial Disputes: Strategies of Bargaining, Coercive Diplomacy, and Settlement, it was said that for last two centuries, one third of the disputes that concern
The ambition of the often autocratic leaders to acquire more land, which may bring them access to oil, water or arable land. The problem according to Sørli et. al is “scarcity” and “abundance” (147). Water is scarce, and oil is in abundance, but the access to both is limited. According to our text, the new “water wars” have emerged as a major source of conflict, in addition to the “oil wars” (Anderson et. al, 226). Water is scarce in the Middle East, and will continue to dwindle as the population rises. Not every country has the same access to the water sources, which will naturally cause problems. For example, Israel has control of the Golan, and Egypt of the Nile, and Kuwait of the Persian Gulf. Oil is in abundance, but only to a limited number of countries in the Middle East causing great economic disparity between those who have, and those who do not. Kuwait, having access to the Persian Gulf, produces a large supply of oil to international players. Given its high value internationally, and its worth, oil is much sought after.