The Phases Of Conflict By Ceasefire And Post Agreement Essay

His approach attempts to consider deeper causes of intrastate violence than traditional case-studies have done (Newman 2014, 63). Newman identifies four general types of civil war: ethnic, political-ideological, weakened or failed state, and resource-based (Newman 2014, 63-65). Most intrastate conflicts can be characterized by a combination of these classifications and their influences. Newman defines four loose requirements for a conflict to be considered using this model. First, a conflict must mainly occur within the borders of an internationally recognized state to be considered “civil” rather than interstate (Newman 2014, 62). Secondly, civil wars are fought between organized groups rather than individuals or unorganized affiliates (Newman 2014, 62). Governmental military forces fit this mold, but are not required for a conflict to be deemed as intrastate. Third, there must be evidence of sustained violence. Newman defines this threshold as 1,000 fatalities (Newman 2014, 62). Last, belligerents must be fighting with a political objective in mind (Newman 2014, 62). This requirement is given a wide range of applicability, as almost any objectives of a group can be defined as political. The Nigerian civil war of the late 1960s fits all of these parameters, and can therefore be analyzed using the typologic system devised by

Throughout history, our world has constantly been bruised and battered by civil turmoil. Today, the civil war in Syria decimates the country; the Israeli and Palestinian conflict rages on; tens of thousands of people have been killed in South Sudan's ongoing civil war. It is not always easy to isolate what exactly ignites the flames of war, but, whenever possible, finding a workable, calm and satisfying solution to a potential uprising is preferable.

War is not a common phenomenon anymore after the post cold war era. According a research conducted on active armed conflict across the world at the Uppsala University in Sweden, of all the 101 active armed conflicted between the late 80s and mid 90s, only six were actually between two different states (Solenberg &Wallensteen, 1997). These statistics clearly indicates that the conflict in today's world is more internal and ethnic based.

John Knowles uses a simile to show how many times Phineas is observed by the school. The author compares Phineas to the weather because the weather is always being watched to know how to dress, what activities to do, etc. This is significant because Finny is always being watched and questioned about his actions not only from the teachers but his friends. With using a simile to compare him to weather helps readers realize what kind of person Finny is and why he is gaining all the attention from people around him.

In the world today, ideological differences are the root causes of many conflicts between individuals or nations and if allowed to aggravate, it becomes the brush strokes for a canvas that turn out to be the portrait of an all-out warfare. However, before countries engage in militarism, it is prudent that the leadership takes pragmatic steps towards a peaceable resolution because the misconception among architects of conflict is to further private agenda for their personal benefit. In a blind quest for gratification, these benefits are an opportunity cost for the larger society who is the unfortunate recipient of the ensuing anarchy. Nothing is fair in war; casualties caught up within the crossfire

The legacies left behind as a result of post-world war 1and 2 has caused tremendous problems that still occur in the twenty-first century. The carving of formal Palestine has fueled issues between ethnicities in the present day states known as: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Israel. As a result, promises that were made prior to the war, of what lands would be awarded to the negotiating actors had been broken; the Sunni/Shia conflict in the present day, was also the result of Sunni leaders in the in the 1920s. In this paper, you will see how these conflicts have grown over time.

John Mueller makes a claim even bolder than a decline in war, arguing that war has ceased, or nearly ceased, to exist. He argues that the general decline in inter-state war lies in the changing attitudes towards war. Mueller contends that up until the early 20th century, war was seen in a positive light, but European attitudes changed “profoundly” after WWI, and that shift of opinion was “dramatically reinforced” by WWII. Mueller explains the particular fall in civil wars in the 1990s as a result of improvements in governance and policing in developing countries. Thus these factors in combination explain the recent decline in all wars. Mueller rejects other alternative arguments for the decline of war, including economic interdependence and institutional incentives, on the basis of causality and questionable impact. Critics of his theories point out that the traditional “war” conception they are based on excludes any non-state warfare with under 1000 deaths, and thus explanations of the recent decline do not account for major instances of political violence such as the Rwandan Genocide. However, Mueller refutes these critiques with the view that such political violence is merely opportunistic thugs who are the ‘residual combatants’. Thus, Mueller’s claim that war has “ceased to exist” is qualified, particularly in light of political changes after the cold war.

In a world that is always evolving, there seems to be more and more violence and terror in the streets. Peace is rarely found in our world of cruelty and treacherous things. Some people are trying to bring peace into this world. and those people are peacemakers. And into a world that is ugly with hate, he sends us as peacemakers.

Today’s conflict environments are often asymmetric, decentralized and interconnected via the internet. These factors lead to multiple COGs that fall along the lines of structural/operational and ideological/moral. These variations of COGs are not separate, but mutually supporting

Although the authors have clearly different arguments and areas of focus, they both ultimately demonstrate that the nature of war has fundamentally remained unchanged but, that it is the character of war only that has changed and needs to be addressed for success in modern

-Betts, Alexander (2005). “Should Approaches to Post-conflict Justice and Reconciliation be Determined Globally, Nationally or Locally?” The European Journal of Development Research 17, No. 4.

Civil intervention is a sensitive topic to discuss. Is it the obligation of other countries to get involved with civil affairs that take place in foreign lands? Is there a responsibility amongst the international community to aid people, who’s rights have been violated? Many people would argue yes to these questions; however, there are several reasons why countries should never intervene in civil conflict. The words that must first be outlined and understood to properly to answer these questions are; civil, conflict, and intervention.

Each period of the conflict was characterized by either escalation or reduction of tension, but since it’s not the main concern of this research, we will only consider some of the agreements signed by the opposing sides, in order to show what attempts had been made to resolve the conflict before Palestine turned to the UN for assistance.

“Give War a Chance” is an article written by the American economist, historian and military strategist Edward Nicolae Luttwak in 1999, in the American magazine Foreign Affairs. It make an easily understandable “buzz”, since its main assumption is that most kind of peacekeeping or humanitarian operations are, in an objective point of view, a bad thing for the peace, and that it tends, paradoxically, to slower its establishment. We will analyze here the main hypothesis that Luttwak is developing among the article, the first one being the destruction of the legitimacy usually accorded to peacekeeping operations, led by the UN or by other military organizations, and the second one being the obstacle to a durable peace establishment, created

1. International conflict among countries is more likely of what we may think. Today there are many different ongoing conflicts. International conflict is a stage of opposition, disagreement or incompatibility between two or more states (Malek). The term "international conflict" referred to conflicts between different nations and conflicts between people and organizations in different nations (Mr. Turetzky lec 11). It also applies to inter-group conflicts within one country when one group is fighting for independence or increased social, political, or economic power. International conflicts can be divided into two branches: private international conflict and public international conflict. A private international conflict is a disagreement