Which Has Exerted a Bigger Effect on War: the End of the Cold War, or Globalization?

indorse in serviceman history, there could be found more than 14, four hundred records of contends that arouse occurred in the past, by taking the lives of billions and collide withing the social and semi policy-making order worldwide. Wars in the contemporaneous world have gradually been changing in form, mainly due to externalization, by overlapping in divergent spheres of brutal counterpoints and small but extremely dangerous organizations exchangeable terrorism and insurgencies.Nevertheless, their true nature and intentions have managed to preserve through ages, as a general norm of social behavior, involving extreme personnel, desire for power and manipulation, as soundly as conflicts established on the basis of religious or ethnic issues. In addition, the end of the frigorific contend had a enormous imp procedure on the global socio-political picture by establishing a exclusively crude image of world-wide relations, forms of external associations and a stro ng pressure for a armed forces affair progress.Could snappy War Have Been Avoided?To go out the nature of contend, its influence on legitimate personal business, as well as the impact of globalization on war matters, I would first house a general definition of war, by presenting some hypothetical approaches. Eventually I would concentrate on the impact of the post-cold geological period and finally, leave off with the affect of globalization. War and theoretical approaches Scholars have of all time provided quite unrepentant definitions for a war. Indeed defining war could be a complicated task.This is due to the fact that even if the nature of a war remains constant, it always reflects the particular time and fleck in which it occurs. In other words, the catamenia time, situation, the initial core of the riddle, as well as, the direct of violence and particular actors would greatly influence and define the type of conflict. Thus, establishing a general idea of a w ar might end to be quite inaccurate. Nevertheless, I would try to present the main general definitions, base on different theoretical approaches. Quincy Wright, for xample, describes war as a conflict among political groups, especially sovereign offers, carried on by armed forces of capacious magnitude, for a considerable period of time. (Baylis, 2008, p. 213)Judging by his statement, we could dissolve that its a realist approach, emphasizing on the power of the state and the highest train of sovereignty that possesses. some other approach of defining war is the definition of Hedly Bulls claiming that war is an organized violence, carried by political units against each other. (Baylis, 2008, p. 14) This definition could be accepted as inappropriate because not every single activeness of violence is defined as a war. In addition, war could see and other internal actors except political ones kindlyred citizens for example (religious, racial conflicts). A third approach by Cla usewitz explains war as an act of force intended to compel our opponents to fulfill our will. (Baylis, 2008, p. 214) This definition is more liberal based as it stresses more on the power and affect of globalization than on the state sovereignty.Even though all of these definitions see to differ in terms of theory, we could generalize some common characteristics betwixt them, which are organized violence, state or non-state actors, as well as legions force and manipulation. To get a better understanding on the definitions, the change of war, as well as the impact of globalization and post-cold war period, I would equal to summarize and stress on two well known theories Realism and Liberalism. Realism, first of all, stresses on the power of the state and its sovereignty, representing it as the main actor on the world stage.It also expresses world governance as a self-help governance and a struggle for power between states (Baylis, 2008, p. 5), trying to dominate and maximize t heir national interests. In addition, globalization is not burning(prenominal) and does not affect political world. Liberalism, on the contrary, emphasizes on the metier of democracy, underlying that states are not the only main actors. Transnational actors, multinational corporations and organizations ( manage terrorism) are also playing a key role in defining warfare and its evolving. Also, liberalists admit the importance of globalization, economic and milieual issues.Considering the current international affairs, as well as the decline power of state actors, we could assume that the Liberal theory quite successfully matches with the recent socio-political slips. Thus, I would further analyze the change of warfare from the perspectives of the Liberal approach. Post-cold war period The fall of the Soviet Union in 1989, resulting in the end of the Cold War, put a new evolution in the structure of the international relations and the international system. That indeed brought som e influential domestic attributes like democracy system in some post- communist states.In addition, the number of wars astutely declined but not and their crucial brutality. A lot of ex-Soviet Union members, as well as some eastern European countries like causality Yugoslavia experienced tremendous crisis. Many states disintegrated, which led to bloody cultured wars and insurgencies. some other great factor was the new system of democracy that former communist states had to accept. Some states indeed benefited from that but for others that turned out to be a vast and sudden change resulting in more economic crisis and nuthouse in the population.In addition, this led to the active participation of world organizations like the United Nations, as well as NATO and EU in preserving the heartsease and avoiding any brutal conflicts that could follow. Such intervention and anti-conflict actions influenced not only the warfare but gay morals, as well. Peoples understanding of politics, economics became more globally based, not just state-isolated. A state problem eventually turned out to be a global problem, like the war in former Yugoslavia, 9/11 and the current affairs in Egypt. The post-cold war period gave the first strong push of a massive globalization.Indeed, globalization has always existed in human history and has always been an inevitable surgery nevertheless no one has particularly mentioned it forrader the end of the Cold War. Another great change that affected the warfare was the absolute hegemony power that the USA gained. With the fall of the Soviet Union, the international system changed from a phase of bipolarity into a phase of unipolarity. Thus, USAs global influence speeded up even more the going on process of globalization, turning it in to Americanization. (Baylis, 2008, p. 13)USA was surely outstanding in terms of armed services power and technical constructs nevertheless it did nothing to prevent the up-coming events of organized viole nce and particularly terrorism. A good example is the 9/11 event and the Iraq War in 2003. Even though USA had a excellent superiority in terms of weaponry, technical and communication technology, the responding asymmetric attacks that followed, as well as the terroristic actions in London and Madrid proved the hammy changes that have occurred in terms of warfare.Globalization The revolution in military affairs that followed in the 1991, right after Gulf War, built a new image and form of the contemporary warfare. With the vast development of technology, communication, net and media, war was eventually converted into a new form of a war conflict, unfamiliar for the old Westphalian Order ideas. The primary Westphalian characteristics of a territoriality, better boarders, self-determination and states as only key-actors completely contradict with the contemporary current global affairs. And indeed, Globalization is more than just interconnectedness.It involves much more than coope ration and international relations between states. It eventually dissolves the state boarders, turning the world into a shared social space, (Baylis, 2008, p. 18) as well as, placing the economical and political activities into a completely new transnational global scale. Another important factor of globalization is the time-space compression. (Baylis, 2008, p. 18) Nowadays, any power or military actions could be exercised from a distance and fulfilled for a relatively little(a) period of time.Globalization has broken any possible barriers involving distance, space or time with the help of Internet, communication and media. These factors have resulted in an entire new generation of warfare. In such a new era of innovation and high technology, new non-state actors have managed to transform both cyber place and media into a real battlefield. From one hand, this has led to the creation of highly effective and entangled weaponry machinery, ensuring better protection and momentum respo nds to military actions.On the contrary though, that also leads to terrorism, organized crimes, violence as well as, weapons of mass destruction. With the powerfulness of producing and exporting such powerful technology, the safety of humans and the brutality of contemporary warfare are surely not on the way of declining. Another negative consequence of globalization results in the different economical level of the world countries and the continuous growing gap between them. Indeed globalization is useful and helpful for powers like Japan, USA and Russia but other countries like Sierra Leone or Eritrea definitely lack the benefits of globalization.This creates poverty, eventually crisis, which could lead to civil wars and more bloody violence. In the past decade, 95% of the armed conflicts have occurred within states rather than between them. Such new wars take place in states where the economy is extremely poor or even collapsing. deduction Many of the characteristics of warfare mentioned above are not new features of war conflicts. They have been existing for a long time since early human history. That includes religious or ethnic confrontations, or any other kind of conflicts performed with extreme brutality.What really empowered the contemporary warfare and made it so massively destructive is globalization. It is the human ability and necessity to protect or manipulate, to defend themselves or just to apply control over a state of civilians. It is hard yet to predict what other crucial impacts globalization would have on humanity and eventually on warfare. Whatever the effort though, wars would never stop to exist and they would be always a human norm of a social behavior, that would adopt according to the current environment and current period of time.ReferencesBaylis, John, Smith, Steve and Owens, Patricia (eds.) (2008). The Globalization of World Politics An Introduction to internationalistic Relations, Oxford Oxford University Press (4th ed.)Boyer, P. (2001). The Oxford Companion to United States History. PostCold War Era. Retrieved January 29, 2011 from http//www.encyclopedia.com/ mercantilism/1O119-PostColdWarEra.htmlEncyclopedia of the new American Nation. Cultural Relations and Policies Globalization and the cold war. Retrieved January 29, 2011 from