Trend and Pattern of Armed Conflicts since the Cold War - Essay Example

?Trend and pattern of armed conflicts since the Cold War Introduction The continuous change in the social, political and economic characteristics of countries worldwide has led to the development of conflicts for protecting the interests involved in the various phases of this process. These conflicts have not been standardized – being influenced by a series of factors, including the global political and financial trends but also the availability of resources for supporting the relevant initiatives. Current paper focuses on the examination of the changes in trends and patterns of armed conflicts since the end of Cold War, i.e. the period that followed ‘the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1989 and the disintegration of the USSR in 1991’ (Colas et al. 2006, p.71). It is proved that the post-Cold War period has been characterized by the change in trends and patterns of armed conflicts internationally. It seems that the end of confrontation between the East and the West – as this confrontation has been developed through the Cold War – led to the beginning of new forms of armed conflicts in countries around the world; at the same time, certain forms of armed conflicts, as existed in the past, have still remained active; for instance, the Civil Wars (the Rwanda and the Sudan wars) and the Interstate armed conflicts (Gulf war). In any case, since the Cold War armed conflicts have been changed drastically, being characterized by the end of phenomena, like the short – term duration of conflicts and the fight towards a country’s enemy; armed conflicts in the post Cold-War era have been characterized by the development of terrorism, the control of Black market and the increase of their duration, in the context described below. 2. Armed conflicts in the post – Cold War era; trends and patterns 2.1 Conflict - overview In order to understand the change in the nature of armed conflicts since the Cold War it would be necessary to refer to the term ‘conflict’ as used today in order to describe the battles developed internationally. Traditionally, the term ‘conflict’, as a concept referring to military interventions, has been related to the following two missions: a) the protection of a country’s borders from invaders and b) the invasion in other countries and the occupation of their territory aiming to improve the invader’s strategic or economic position. Today, the term conflict describes a different situation: the use of weapons for protecting specific interests or to gain access to critical natural/ energy sources. Of course, such conflicts existed also in the past – i.e. in the pre-Cold War period; however, at that period, these conflicts involved in countries and not in groups, as today. Reference should be made at this point to the categorization of armed conflicts, in order to understand the level of their effects internationally. Armed conflicts are likely to be categorized in accordance with the related deaths; in this context, the following three types of conflicts can be identified worldwide: a) the minor armed conflict – ‘at least 25 deaths annually’ (Feste 2003, p.153), b) the intermediate armed conflict –‘at least 1,000 deaths in total, but fewer than 1,000 deaths annually’ (Feste 2003, p.153) and c) the war – ‘at least 1,000 deaths annually’ (Feste 2003, p.153). On the other hand, armed conflicts can be state-based, i.e. supported – directly or indirectly – by the state, in terms of the participation of the national army; there is also the case of the non-state armed conflicts, which are developed among groups or communities without the active involvement of the local government. It should, further, noted that the state-based conflicts can be further categorized into interstate (between states), intrastate (within the state), extrastate (between the state and a group outside the state), the Civil wars and the state-formation conflicts; these categories must be taken into consideration when having to characterize and evaluate the type of armed conflicts are currently developed internationally. 2.2 Current pattern and trends of armed conflicts – changes since the Cold War Regarding the modern conflicts over resources, the following change can be identified – compared to the forms of these conflicts in the past: the ‘roots of these conflicts are the same but their manifestations have been changed’ (Adebajo et al. 2001, p.28). The above change has been developed under the influence of two major factors: a) in many countries, which were traditionally involved in such conflicts, a democratic regime has been established, or at least a regime which has certain democratic characteristics. In the study of Adebajo et al. (2001) it is explained that the end of Cold War was followed by the establishment of democratic regimes in countries like Zambia and Zair; this fact has resulted to the differentiation of armed conflicts developed in these regions. In the context of these regimes, two major changes were developed in the methodology of management of these countries’ natural resources: a1) social groups were developed which aimed to intervene actively in the management of the natural resources across their country’s territory, a2) these social groups believe that the use of weapons is justified in order to get the control and ensure the protection of natural resources (Adebajo et al. 2001, p.28); b) the second factor, influencing the change of armed conflicts in countries worldwide has been the depression; the severe pressures on the economies of countries have caused critical social turbulences; the development of armed conflicts should be considered as an expected phenomenon (Adebajo et al. 2001, p.28) – reference is made especially to poor countries where the conditions of living of the population are extremely bad – for example, most of the countries in Africa. The development of conflicts because of various social or political reasons is another characteristic of the post Cold-War period. In accordance with Thackrah (2008) armed armed conflicts are likely to be developed today because of ‘ethnic and religious differences between urban centres and the countryside’ (Thackrah 2008, p.53); this is a case of conflicts based on socio-cultural criteria, another phenomenon of the modern era; these conflicts are totally different from the major conflicts developed among countries in the two World Wars. One of the most important changes in the characteristics of armed conflicts since the Cold War has been the transformation of battles from international to regional ones; conflicts no longer involve many countries simultaneously – like in the case of world War I & II – but they are rather developed locally, being an internal phenomenon developed under the influence of local interests. The control over natural resources is the most common cause of conflicts in the post-Cold War era. In accordance with Talentino (2005) the change of conflicts from international to national has been related mostly to the period of 1990s onwards; it is noted that in 2000 only 2 cross-border conflicts were identified - among the 25 armed conflicts that were in progress in that period (Talentino 2005, p.60). Another key trend in the armed conflicts since the Cold War has been the involvement of great-powers; even if these conflicts are, at their high percentage, local, since they are likely to attract the interest of other states – probably because these conflicts are, in most cases, related to the control of natural sources. This problem is analysed in the study of Thackrah (2008) where emphasis is given on the following fact: ‘the poverty and general weakness’ (Thackrah 2008, p.53) of countries suffered from armed conflicts in their internal have led to the increase of vulnerability of these countries towards the great powers. Indeed, the involvement of great powers in armed conflicts developed within countries of the South Africa – poor countries in their majority – is a common phenomenon of the period that followed the Cold War. In any case, the Cold War involved ‘the political and strategic confrontation between the superpowers’ (Lepor 1997, p.162); USA had to compete Russia in the context of the opposition between East and West. Through the above competition, the type and the extension of armed conflicts have changed drastically; it seemed like the confrontation between USA and the Soviet Union represented the last major conflict in the context of the international community; the end of the Cold War was followed by the end of wars – as forms of conflict among several states, as for example the two World Wars. In this context, since the Cold War different forms of conflicts have been developed in countries worldwide – as described above; these conflicts have been minor – almost all of them, apart perhaps the conflict in Iraq, which could be characterized rather as an average conflict, taking into consideration the deaths among civilians; the conflict in the former Yugoslavia would be also another example of intermediate conflict – as the term was described previously. Another characteristic of the post Cold-War era has been the fact that in this period the two superpowers have cooperated for controlling conflicts internationally; their intervention in armed conflicts worldwide has not been always successful – for instance the case of former Yugoslavia; there were also cases that their intervention helped to resolve local crisis, like the case of El Salvador and Cambodia (Lacquement 2003, p.80). At least, their joint efforts for the limitation of armed conflicts have been an important characteristic of the period that followed the end of the Cold War. In accordance with Hale et al. (1997) the development of common views by the superpowers regarding a series of critical political, social and economic issues is still in progress. The end of the Cold War has been also related to a series of additional alterations in the patterns of armed conflicts developed globally; current armed conflicts are not based on conventional armies – like in the past, for instance in the case of the two World Wars (Brands et al. 2003, p.165); rather they are based on the use of professionals. On the other hand, the number of conflicts has been decreased, compared to the past (see Graph 1, Appendix); however, the duration of the conflicts has been increased. The pattern of conflicts has been also changed. In accordance with the study of Kim (1996), among the 89 armed conflicts which were developed between 1989 and 1992, the 86 were ‘internal conflicts and state-formation conflicts’ (Kim 1996, p.7), a fact that clearly proves the change in the patterns of armed conflicts in the post Cold-War era. In accordance with a recent report, the armed conflicts, which are currently in progress worldwide can be estimated to 37 – see Table 1; a decrease in the number of conflicts – compared to the figures presented above is clear. This fact proves a change in the trends of armed conflicts, in addition to the changes in their patterns as explained above. 2.2.1 Intervention in the post-Cold War era Following the changes in the patterns and trends of armed conflicts in the post-Cold War period, the intervention in these conflicts has been differentiated since the Cold War. However, this differentiation has not been always clear; for example in the study of Feste (2003) it is noted that from 1989 up to 2000 similar modes of intervention have been reported in armed conflicts worldwide; in accordance with the above researcher an exception was identified in 1993 when foreign intervention took place in ‘four civil conflicts’ (Feste 2003, p.153). In order to understand the forms of ‘military intervention’ since Cold War it would be necessary to refer to the characteristics of this term. In accordance with Von Hippel the military intervention could be described as ‘a coercive tactique used to manipulate a country into taking a certain path that would not otherwise have been chosen’ (Von Hippel 2000, p.3); in the above context, military intervention is likely to have two different forms: it can be expressed either as ‘military involvement or as encouragement for the use of force’ (Von Hippel 2000, p.3). In other words, the participation of a country in a military intervention project may not be always clear or identifiable. It should be noted that apart from the military intervention, armed conflicts might be related to humanitarian intervention, which aims to respond to the humanitarian needs of the local populations. At this point, the following problem has been identified: the terms of humanitarian intervention are not always clear; this problem is highlighted in the study of Davis (2004); the above researcher suggests that humanitarian intervention projects should be aligned with the standards of relevant treaties; primarily, the regional standards and rules should be applied and where these are not available, then the appropriate international rules should be used (Davis 2004, p.13). Such need would exist also in the case of plans for military intervention. One of the most important characteristics of the post-Cold War period has been the increase of the power of UN to intervene in armed conflicts worldwide – under the terms set by the relevant international law. However, the ability of UN to intervene drastically in these conflicts and resolve local crises has been often proved to be limited. An indicative example is provided in the study of Francis (2005) where reference is made to the failure of the intervention of UN in Angola; however, it is noted that the above failure resulted because of the conditions of the above armed conflict, i.e. it was not a failure in terms of the design of the relevant project or the resources involved (Francis 2005, p.78). The above view is further justified by referring to the successful intervention of UN forces in Mozambique (Francis 2005, p.78). In accordance with Antizzo (2010) military intervention has been traditionally considered as one of the most important ‘USA’s foreign policy tools’ (Antizzo 2010, p.12). This fact indicates that military intervention is not always developed in order to terminate an armed conflict – as it could be possibly expected; rather, it could be used independently, as a tool for changing local political conditions, especially when these are considered as opposed to the interests of the international community; the case of Iraq has been the most appropriate example of such intervention. Emergent humanitarian needs and risks have been also often used as a reason for military intervention – as, for example, in many African countries. 2.2.2 Reconciliation since the Cold War Reconciliation in areas where armed conflicts are in progress is usually attempted through the United Nations – usually under the terms that the relevant efforts to reach a solution through discussions between the parties involved have failed (Avery et al. 2010, p.195). In certain cases, the use of diplomacy for resolving the crisis is not adequate – referring especially to the cases or armed conflicts during which severe crimes have been committed. Such issue exists in the following cases: when there has been no justification for participation in the relevant conflicts – i.e. it was not an issue of defence but rather of attack for serving the interests of one or more individuals. In these cases, the use of International Courts is necessary in order for justice to be attributed. This fact is highlighted in the study of Linnan (2008) where reference is made to the transitional justice used in the post Cold War in order to punish crimes committed against the humanity (Linnan 2008, p.327); the monitoring of the relevant processes by reconciliation commissions ensures the validity of the decisions taken (Linnan 2008, p.327). In accordance with Lehti (2003) the development of reconciliation efforts – for resolving armed conflicts internationally – has been made easier since the end of the Cold War. The reason is that the end of the Cold War allowed the development of politics across Europe; in fact, after Cold War, Europe has become a ground where reconciliation can be effectively promoted (Lehti 2003, p.108). From a similar point of view, Mason (2006, p.2) notes that the effectiveness of reconciliation since the Cold War has been improved; the reason, in accordance with Mason, is that the knowledge on the reason of international and internal armed conflicts has been increased; in this way, appropriate schemes of action can be identified so that the interests of the humanity – and the local population – are better protected. However, it is necessary that the relevant projects are carefully designed and monitored; in accordance with Greenberg et al. (2000) reconciliation projects need to be developed not just ‘at governmental level but also at all levels of civilian society’ (Greenberg et al. 2000, p.138). It is implied that there can be reconciliation projects that promote the interests of specific groups rather than of the whole population; such perspective would eliminate the value of reconciliation process as a tool for controlling the effects of armed conflicts internationally. Also, the need for a reconciliation initiative should be carefully evaluated; in certain cases, the intervention, even for promoting a reconciliation process, in an armed conflict may not serve the public interest; moreover, appropriate mechanisms should be established for addressing emergent needs for reconciliation, as for instance in the case of armed conflicts in Somalia where a need for an emergent reconciliation plan has been identified (Scott 1998, p.333). 3. Conclusion The trends and the patterns of armed conflicts have been significantly changes since the Cold War. This differentiation is related to certain points, especially the limitation of duration and casualties, the engagement of paramilitaries rather than of conventional armies and the lack of ideologies for the justification of these conflicts. Additional remarks and assumptions could be developed regarding the armed conflicts in the post Cold-Era by referring to the characteristics and the conditions of each one of them. For example in the study of Antizzo (2010) the cases of four armed conflicts – Panama (1989), Iraq (1990-1991), Somalia (1992-1994) and Kosovo (1999) – have been used for showing certain important characteristics of armed conflicts in the period after the Cold War. It is noted that the above cases have four common elements: a) all ‘involved the direct commitment of US forces in the armed conflicts’ (Antizzo 2010, p.10), b) lack of ideology for their support, c) lack of fear for the involvement of the former Soviet Union and d) they were all developed after the end of the Cold War. It is made clear that different interpretations can be given to the patterns and trends of the armed conflicts since the Cold War; however, most of their characteristics are standardized – in the context discussed above. At the same time, further changes in the trends and patterns of armed conflicts internationally are always possible – under the influence of the strong turbulences in economies worldwide. References Addington, L. (1994) The patterns of war since the eighteenth century. Bloomington: Indiana University Press Adebajo, A., Sriram, C. (2001) Managing armed conflicts in the 21st century. London: Routledge Antizzo, G. (2010) U.S. military intervention in the post-Cold War era: how to win America's wars in the twenty-first century. Louisiana: LSU Press Avery, C., Holmlund, M. (2010) Better Off Forgetting? Toronto: University of Toronto Press Brands, H., Pierson, D., Kiefer, R. (2003) The Use of Force After the Cold War. Austin: Texas A&M University Press, 2003 Butler, M. (2009) International Conflict Management: An Introduction. Oxon: Taylor & Francis Colas, A., Saull, R. (2006) The War on Terror and the American 'empire' after the Cold War. London: Routledge Davis, M. (2004) International intervention in the post-Cold War world: moral responsibility and power politics. New York: M.E. Sharpe De Nooy, G. (1996) The role of European naval forces after the Cold War. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers FAO Newsroom (2005) Armed conflicts leading cause of world hunger emergencies, [online]. Available from < http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2005/102562/> Feste, K. (2003) Intervention: shaping the global order. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group Francis, D. (2005) Dangers of co-deployment: UN co-operative peacekeeping in Africa. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2005 Global Conflict Trends (2010) Measuring Systemic Peace [online]. Available at < http://www.systemicpeace.org/conflict.htm> Global Security (2011) The world at war [online]. Available at Greenberg, M., Barton, J., McGuinness, M. (2000) Words over war: mediation and arbitration to prevent deadly conflict. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Hale, W., Kienle, E. (1997) After the Cold War: security and democracy in Africa and Asia. London: I.B.Tauris Kim, S. (1996) China's Quest for Security in the post-Cold War World. Darby: DIANE Publishing Lacquement, R. (2003) Shaping American military capabilities after the cold war. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group Lehti, M. (2003) Post-Cold War identity politics: northern and Baltic experiences Cass series--nationalism and ethnicity. Oxon: Taylor & Francis Lepor, K. (1997) After the Cold War: essays on the emerging world order. Austin: University of Texas Press Li, H., Yee, S, Wang, T. (2001) International law in the post-Cold War world: essays in memory of Li Haopei. London: Routledge Linnan, D. (2008) Enemy combatants, terrorism, and armed conflict law: a guide to the issues. Westport: ABC-CLIO Mason, t. (2006) Conflict prevention and peacebuilding in post-war societies: sustaining the peace. Oxon: Taylor & Francis Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan (2011) Armed Conflicts around the World, [online]. Available from < http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/un/disarmament/weapon/conflict.html> Moir, L. (2002) The law of internal armed conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Scott, J. (1998) After the end: making U.S. foreign policy in the post-cold war world. Durham: Duke University Press Talentino, A. (2005) Military intervention after the Cold War: the evolution of theory and practice. Ohio: Ohio University Press Thackrah, J. (2008) The Routledge companion to military conflict since 1945. Oxon: Taylor & Francis Von Hippel, K. (2000) Democracy by force: U.S. intervention in the post-Cold War world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Wallensteen, P. (2007) Understanding conflict resolution: war, peace and the global system. London: SAGE, 2007 Werner, S., Davis, D., De Mesquita, B. (2003) Dissolving Boundaries. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell, 2003 Appendix Table 1 - Current Conflicts worldwide (source: Global Security, 2011) Algeria Insurgency 1992 --> Angola Cabinda 1975-2006? Burma Insurgency 1950 --> China Senkaku Islands 1968 --> China Spratly Islands 1988 --> China Uighur 1996 --> Colombia Insurgencies 1970s--> Congo (Zaire) Congo War 1998--> Georgia Civil War 1991--> India Assam 1985 --> India Kashmir 1970s--> India Naxalite Uprising 1967 --> Israel Palestine 1967 --> Ivory Coast Civil War 2002 --> Korea Korean War 1953 --> Kyrgyzstan Civil Unrest 2010 --> Laos Hmong Insurgency 2000 --> Mexico Drug War 2006 --> Namibia Caprivi Strip 1966--> Nepal Maoists 1996-2006 ? Nigeria Civil Disturbances 1997 - Pakistan Baluchistan 2004 - Pakistan Pashtun Jihad 2001 - Palestine Civil War 2007--> Peru Shining Path 1970s--> Philippines Moro Uprising 1970s--> Russia North Caucasus Insurgency 1992 --> Somalia Civil War 1991--> Spain Basque Uprising 1970s--> Thailand Islamic Rebels 2001 --> Turkey Kurdistan 1984 --> United States Afghanistan 1980 --> United States Djibouti 2001 --> United States Iraq 1990 --> United States Philippines 1898 --> Uzbekistan Civil Disturbances 2005 --> Yemen Sheik al- Houti 2004 --> Graph 1 – Armed conflicts from 1946-2009) (source: Global Conflict Trends, 2010) Read More