The Challenge of Post-Cold War Operations - Assignment Example

Cold war was a clear but constrained rivalry that developed after the World War II (Gann & Duignan 1). During World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union were allies. Soviet leader Joseph Stalin was portrayed as a popular leader, and the U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt needed Stalin and the Soviet forces to help defeat Germany. The main causes that lead to start of the cold war included the disagreement of the World War II allies on the future of Eastern Europe, and the refusal of the Soviet Union to allow free election. This made the Western power fear for the Soviet expansion steering hostility between the western bloc dominated by the United States (US) and the eastern bloc dominated by the Soviet Union, each side with their allies. US allies included; UK, France, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Portugal and Spain while the Soviet side were many of the countries of Eastern Europe including Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, East Germany, and Romania and, during parts of the Cold War, Cuba and China. The war took place from 1947 to 1991 after successful alliance against the Nazi regime (Sirimarco 3). The two sides, both with political and economical differences divided and this led to the onset of the “cold war”, a term that described the association between US and the Soviet Union. Neither side ever fought the other because the consequences would be too dreadful. However, they did ‘fight’ for their beliefs using their allies who fought for their beliefs on their behalf. For example, the Americans supplied the rebel Afghans with weapons and aid to fight the Soviet Union while they never physically engrossed; evading a direct clash with the Soviet Union (Stephen & Forster 203). The development of nuclear weapons and heavy investment in submarines took place during this period; as a result, home economy rapidly dwindled because of heavy military spending. This left other government operation crippled at least for most parts due to lack of finances. Competition between the two sides took different forms from politics, economy, and cultural aspects to ideologies, but this only overshadowed the threat of nuclear war. During the late stages of the cold war, the Soviet Union was fighting a frustrating war in Afghanistan with the high cost of weapons. The home economy was deteriorating, and this disadvantaged them; thus they relented the control of Eastern Europe. In 1990, the Berlin wall came down, borders opened and free elections ousted communist regime and in 1991, the Soviet Union dissolved into its component countries. The Iron Curtain was lifted, and the Cold War came to an end. This resulted to the United States of America being the only superpower. Post-cold war is defined as the time in history after the crumple of the Soviet Union in the year 1991 to present. There has been a lot of development in this era of post-cold war; advancement in technology, change in society and government policies and also military institutions. Also, this period has allowed China to emerge as a powerful country from a third world country. A lot of American anticipated a time full of peace and prosperity as the military spending will be cut back after the war. However, what was life like after the end of the cold war? What challenges were faced after the fall of Berlin wall and hence the end of the cold war? What happened to Soviet individual Nations after the divide and what challenges did the government operations face? These questions will be covered extensively in this paper. In early 1970s, trilateral concept was formulated to steer the international system through challenges after the cold war, and also to avoid the dominance of the United States on controlling global systems. The trilateral commission made of North America the European Community and Japan controlled 60 percent of the world economy. With the end of the cold war, many observers believed that the world will face ‘three-blocism’ and that there will be global cooperation; That the United States will concentrate on North America and Japan in East Asia whiles the European Community will be self-sustained. It was anticipated that Europe will be preoccupied with its own amalgamation as well as its relationship with the neighbors. On the other hand, it was expected that the US would turn to reforming domestic agendas while Japan if rejected by Europe and the United states, will halt her progress towards regional orientation. There were a number of challenges facing the separate blocs vision of the world, and for one, thing, the trends in technology and economics acted against these nations. The idea of separate blocks ran counter to the nationalism in many non-trilateral countries concerned about a large trilateral neighbor. America remained important to the security of both Europe and East Asia even after the end of the cold war. Concerns about the second Russian Revolution posed a potential threat to the Western Europe and to Japan because of the nuclear weapons in the hands of China and the Soviet Union. Geopolitical stability of the region faced numerous security concerns, and so was the global cooperation (Stephen & Forster 203). In this paper, challenges faced in 1990s after the cold war will be discussed in details. Among these changes is: Sustainable Global Economic Growth and Development. The trilateral countries posed 60% of the world’s economy and with only 12 % of the world’s population. In fact, china and India each already have larger populations than the trilateral partners together. This growth of the population in poorer parts of the globe made the trilateral partners become a minority over time. Rapid growth of the population made economic sustainability difficult leading to economic conflicts and protectionism. That trend eventually hurt not only the poor but also the rich countries. In that regard, trilateral countries were faced with challenges of promoting successful development of poorer countries and subsequent improvement of living standards in order to get their commitment to the shared systems (Brauch 95). Through institutions like World Bank, growth of other parts of the globe would be realized. That required technological development, which would increase the efficient use of global resources. The wealthy countries had to maintain an open international system that would allow developing countries to advance. That meant that the trilateral countries had to keep their market open, and also continue with monetary aid to allow international trade and investment. It was a challenge to keep up with that, but the alternative of not supporting the poorer parts of the world would mean that there would be deterioration in the world economy which would in no time, come back to hurt the citizens in the trilateral democracies. Peaceful Change in the Weakening Soviet Empire. Changes in Soviet Union had been crucial to the politics of the world. Failure of the centralized Stalinist economy system, and the new policies that allowed liberalization at home and abroad were the main aspects of these changes. The central cause of the Soviet turn down was the inability of the centralized economy planning system to understand the information-age economy; that was manifested in the slowdown of Soviet economic growth in 1970s and its stagnation in 1980s. In 1989, the Eastern Europe disintegrated and so there was a threat to attack the Western Europe. Trilateral countries had an interest that political changes occur peacefully. There was a concern in the authentication of Soviet nuclear weapons and also violence inside the Soviet Union, which could spill over the borders or refugees that could put enormous strain on the social systems of the neighboring countries. The Trilateral countries had a challenge of encouraging the development of political pluralization and market in the Soviet Union because a more open and democratic Russia would present less of a threat than the United Soviet Union (Lynn-Jones 397). Another challenge of incorporating the Soviet Union into the international economic institutions was the internal soviet economic and political systems. This required economic reforms and respect to human life as there was so many killings. That scenario presented a huge challenge to other country operations. Successful Transition in Eastern Europe The end of the cold war was marked by the comeback of the Eastern Europe in 1989, after a more than 40 years of Soviet Union control. This was received by many in the west as a victory of liberal democratic values and human rights. These changes greatly improved the security of the Western countries. However, it would be tragic if the trilateral countries failed to aggressively assist that transition to market economies including admission to trilateral markets. The challenge was if these Eastern countries slip back into autocracy democracy would have been compromised, and that could lead to the security situation in Europe to worsen. If Eastern Europe fragmented into a set of weak and quarrelling states, then the neighboring powers would probably be drawn to provide order (Hardt 394). The western government faced a challenge of providing debt relief and bilateral aid, as well as maintenance for reconstruction and development of Europe. The cost of assisting market liberalization in the former Communist countries of Eastern Europe was far less than the cost of military containment Further Integration of European Community Trilateral partners were interested that the process of uniting Europe continues. That was significant because it contributed to the peace and prosperity of the world. The dangers that local preoccupations could divert European attention away from wider concerns and those problems internal to the community may be solved at the cost of outsiders, this was the main challenge. On the other hand, if Europe’s trilateral partners treated Europe as an entity, they could encourage the incorporation process, but if they play off Europeans against one another that could slow down the process (Stephen & Forster 203). Management of conflict usually depends on early warning systems. NATO provided rich web contacts which helped manage arguments amid North America and Western Europe before they became difficult. It was a challenge with the view of a reduced role for NATO, and elevating attention to the role of the European Community; early warning was more difficult to implement. It was a challenge to keep NATO, but the cooperation between individual nations removed the concern about potential disputes between NATO and the Conference on defense and Cooperation in Europe as the later helped to build confidence and provided points of contact for greater precision and communication within Europe while the former provided insurance policy for the democracies of Western Europe (Hardt 394). Japan Global Role. Involving Japan in more universal roles via international institutions was a significant challenge in the 1990s. Japan’s excellent growth made it to be a potential disruptive force in the international economy as well as in international politics. It was only too large to be a free rider. Japan continued to exploit, without any attention to the effects on the international trading system and that could easily lead to the breakdown of the system. Equally, a Japan that quickly reacted to the protectionist stress of its partners with a militaristic regional approach to its economic and security troubles could be a very destabilizing aspect in the balance of power in, East Asia. Japan’s significant role in international affairs also depended on its trilateral partners. Financial contribution of Japan in East Asia was not enough to provide stability; Japan needed the US presence for security. During that time, Japan was the second largest economy in the world and also the second largest contributor to the organization’s budget but lacked a permanent seat on the Security Council. The challenge was eminent that if it Japan was to “say as well as pay,” then French and UK would merge seats into a single European seat and give the other set to Japan. That situation presented a big challenge to the operations of the governments. United Nations Collective Security and Peacekeeping. During the cold war, the United Nations Charter played useful roles on peacekeeping, for instance, its remarkable response to Iraq’s attack of Kuwait. Had the Security Council failed in such a clear cut case of aggression, the collective security would have been dead in the post cold war world. In more misty circumstances of domestic conflict and civil wars, there was a greater chance that one of the permanent members would veto Security Council action. When the gulf crisis went further than sanctions to military operations, there was a preponderant United States role. That became a challenge to establish when a greater military role for the United Nations and when it would be appropriate to use that kind forces (Stephen & Forster 203). What would happen if a veto prevents United Nations collective security operations from being implemented in future regional conflicts? It was unsuitable for the trilateral countries to conduct security operations in the world in cases where the United Nations are unable to deal. On the other hand, UN state members retained the right to individual and collective self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter. Non-Proliferation of Advanced Weapons Technology In 1963, US president John F. Kennedy predicted that there would be more than 25 countries with nuclear weapons abilities by the 1970s. Technology spreads fast, but with restraints, the rate of proliferation could be slowed to allow time to establish more favorable political conditions. In 1990, approximately 9 countries had nuclear weapons. Measures such as Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines helped to slow the spread way below what was expected. In the nuclear era, it was imperative to have Non-Proliferation Treaty by member states. The Missile Technology Control Regime that included seven nations from the trilateral region needed to expand and incorporate important suppliers such as the Soviet Union and China. This was a challenge considering the aftermath of the cold war between these blocs. In regard to chemical weaponry, the convention was held in Geneva. Controlling weapons of mass destructions were only one way. A complete ban on sale of conventional weaponry was to be, and should be imposed to areas of high tension. It was a challenge to implement that action because at low technology end of the spectrum, there were more than a dozen contractors. At the high-technology end of the spectrum, the number of suppliers was small and only includes trilateral countries (Johnsonn & Parta 145). Means to Address Transnational Global Issues. Some of the international challenges faced after the cold war were deeply rooted in societies and not simply the outcome of governmental actions. Disputes such as ecological dangers, migration, terrorism and the transnational drug trade were just part of the problems of diffusion of power to private, non-state actors in international affairs. While the Soviet threat over the past decades was very clear, the diffusion of power after the cold war also meant diffusion of danger. The nature of these transnational issues and the types of institutions and cooperation needed to deal with them were not clear. More and more, such issues did not just place one nation against another; rather they were issues in which all states tried to control non-state transnational actors or other private actors within their own societies (Johnsonn & Parta 145). While military force may sometimes play a role, traditional instruments of power were rarely satisfactory to deal with the new transnational issues. In the other case, such as ecological threats, it was crucial to organize international agreements by which states would change domestic policies. In drug areas, nations could share data about drug traffic and how to deal with diminishing domestic demands so as to confront countries which are sources of drugs. This was a challenge in the cold war rivalry states. With regard to migration, the long-run economic effects of migration could have had disruptive political and cultural effects. In such circumstances, support in dealing with refugees and exchange of data and experience about coping with migration flows could have helped the trilateral countries to deal with the challenge, but there was hardly any cooperation within rivalry states. Attention to International Institutions. Governments were losing the ability to control private actors who easily crossed national borders. Unilateral efforts to curtail interdependence often proved costly and ineffective. Thus, the challenges post cold war required more attention to international institutions that coordinated action among governments. Multilateral institutions were set up to help governments in the following ways; to start with, they were to facilitate burden-sharing by establishing principles and procedures for consultation. They were also to provide the shared information critical for effective action on matters that cross national borders. They also were to facilitate diplomacy by giving governments’ officials contact to each other’s policy-making process through consensus and private contacts which, in turn, permitted them to anticipate more assertively their partners’ reactions to theoretical events. Finally they were also to establish rules and procedures; which would help to reinforce stability and a long-term focus in contrast to what typically prevailed in domestic politics. By focusing on these interests, these institutions provided discipline in the politics of democracies and helped to secure transnational coalitions. Several of the challenges faced by trilateral countries required domestic concerns to be discussed in an international framework. The Structural Impediment Initiative talks between the Unites States and Japan for instance provided a remarkable case in point. Opposite to the initial matters that discussion of domestic matters would prove inflexible and only cause nationalist passion, the talks between the two countries proved to be a diffident success. Greater Decision-Sharing and Burden-Sharing. After the cold war, burden –sharing among allies was experienced. Economist worried about the provision of public goods. Public good is one which, if provided by any member, will benefit every member in the group. When governments relied on voluntary contribution to support the costs of public goods, many people failed to contribute fully as they knew they would likely to get the benefits whether they contribute fully or not. That was part of the challenges faced by trilateral countries. In case of providing security, if one nation provided security, others were tempted to accept it as a gift or resist paying their share in full. That situation could likely cause frictions over burden-sharing in the provision of public goods. During post cold war, there were regular fights between the United States and its allies as to whether the allies were doing enough to share the burden of similar defense against the Soviet Union. Abrasion over burden-sharing was one of the factors that fed inward-turning attitudes in the United States in the post cold war period. Since the largest states were always necessary in the provision of public goods, such attitudes became problems for other trilateral countries (Moore & Maurizio 69). The inherently complex task of agreeing on burden-sharing became even more difficult when threats were unclear, and that made it hard to define “common interest”. Before a burden was defined, there were agreements on the common interest. Whilst the Americans retained preponderant military power, it was hard for the United States to determine a general goal and then demand that others divide the burden of supporting it. However, other countries could perceive it differently and refuse to share the burden. Burden –sharing required greater consultations and also decision sharing. Even though the United States was the largest power in the post cold war world, no larger country could be able to achieve what it wanted unilaterally. If the United States wanted others to join in a coalition and share the burden of common challenges, it was to use multilateral institutions to build up the tradition of decision sharing, in simple terms, Americans had full control of the bus as it paid most of the bus fare and thus determined where the bus would go. During post-cold war, Russia stopped military expenditure significantly. That adjustment was a struggle as the military had previously employed all of the Soviet Union adults. The change left millions jobless. Russia also suffered a more badly financial crisis after it embarked on capitalist economic restructuring after the cold war. The living standards of the citizens worsened over time even though the economy resumed in 1999. Military cost by US went up, and a lot of soldiers lost their lives in the Korean and Vietnam warfare. The effects of Cold War, however, was not always easily wiped away, as many of the economic and social anxieties that were exploited to stimulate Cold War competition in parts of the Third World remained severe. The collapse of state control in a number of areas previously ruled by Communist governments has presently shaped new civil and ethnic conflicts (Moore & Maurizio 69). The disintegration of the “Soviet Empire” was tracked by the appearance, or re-appearance of numerous stern differences in several areas that had been moderately dormant during the Cold War. Some of these fresh conflicts have been taking place within the previous Soviet Union, such as the war between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh. Some conflicts also hit the roof or increased in several countries outside of it, and many developing country conflicts in which the superpowers were not intensely involved during the Cold War have kept on after it, like the secessionist activities in India, Sri Lanka, and Sudan. On top of these, other threats to international order that are, in fact, outside the full control of main powers, like the United States, the victor of the Cold War. The most distinguished ones include religious militancy, terrorism, North-South conflict, and severe rivalry over scarce resources (Johnsonn & Parta 145). Another facet of the post-Cold War period is that since the West had become the winner of the East-West ideological challenge, Western systems and Western authority, in general, started to control the whole world. For instance, the United States had clearly improved its influence in the Middle East and Caucasus since the end of the Cold War. The assault of Kuwait by Iraq in August 1990 and the following Gulf calamity, in a way, created an opening for the Unites States to put into effect its hegemonic power in the Middle East. In the subsequent years, in the non- existence of a counter-power, the power of the United States improved. With the military operation to Afghanistan and assault of Iraq after the September 11, 2001 hit, the United States continued its supremacy in the region. This exposed the US to more enemies; from the radical countries presenting numerous security challenges. Post cold war, NATO faced challenges from the Russian. NATO extended to engage Eastern Europe, a region also used to be under Soviet authority. Russia, in the beginning, tried to oppose NATO extension, posing more than a few threats, including creating a counter defense association. It was in the long run convinced with the project of “partnership for peace”, through which it conserved many of its privileges in Eastern European countries (Hardt 394). Western dominance also caused challenges towards the West. It seemed that most of the reactions took place in the Islamic world even though such reactions were appearing to be disorganized, less powerful, and thus they were far away from posing a serious challenge to Western dominance; anti-Westernism in the Muslim world and elsewhere seemed for the most part to feed terrorism, a grave danger to peace in the post-Cold War period. Although the ending of the Cold War evidently increased the readiness of governments to work through the United Nations and other international channels to resolve challenges and keep the peace around the globe, several new threats emerged in the post-Cold War era that are, in reality, outside the full control of nation-states, even significant powers. One of the greatest challenges, in that regard, was the predominance of intranational conflicts, conflicts taking place within the borders of states. These were mostly ethnically-driven conflicts over self-determination, succession or political control. Until the end of the Cold War, wisdom in the universe was that ethnicity and nationalism were obsolete concepts and largely resolved problems. On both sides of the Cold War, the tendency seemed to indicate that the world was stirring toward internationalism rather than nationalism. As a result of the danger of nuclear warfare, high stress on democracy and human rights, financial interdependence, and slow approval of global concepts, it became fashionable to speak of the demise of ethnic and nationalist activities. Another challenge faced major international organizations operations, including the United Nations designed to cope with inter-state problems historically, the principal source of threat to global peace and security. Besides, the fact that internal conflicts occurred within the borders of states made significant international actors unwilling to act as a go-between, either for legal worries or concern to avoid probable losses. For instance, during Clinton administration, the United States government issued PDD-25 (Presidential Decision Directive-25), restraining the conditions that the United States can partake in United Nations peacekeeping operations. In short, unless they really escalated, the international community had preferred not to engage in intranational conflicts (Biden 57). Post cold war has also caused religiously-driven violence intolerance linked to terror campaign in many cases. In fact, some of the world’s most precarious terrorist organizations currently, like Islamic Jihad and El-Kaida, are ideologically fed by religious fundamentalism. Most individuals in such organizations believe that direct use of violence in the name of religion is needed. They are also influenced that if they die in their “holy struggle”, they will be rewarded in the next life; they will straight go to heaven. That belief removes fear or guilt feeling, making a killing and dying much easier, as a result. Terror campaign, whether it is fed by religious fundamentalism or not, is another serious threat to peace in the post-Cold War era. While infrequent terrorist activities have been part of human history, terrorism mainly became a serious issue after the end of the Cold War, especially after the September 11 attacks (Moore & Maurizio 69). However it was defined terrorism has become a severe setback in the post-Cold War period, though as mentioned before, it is not limited to this particular period. Over the past twenty years, terrorists have committed chiefly violent acts for alleged political or religious reasons. On top of that, the United Nations peacekeeping operations were faced with a number of challenges after the cold war. Since its inception in 1945, the United Nations principal role was to maintain peace and security in the world. Founders of the UN Charter envisioned an institute that would engage in the total spectrum of disaster management and resolution from preventive measures, responses to conflicts and also to the long-term stabilization of clash areas. Peacekeeping is defined as an operation involving military personnel but without enforcement powers. This operation was established by the United Nations to assist sustain or refurbish world's peace and security in areas of conflict. Peacekeepers became a very valuable tool in UN peace accomplishment efforts. Whether they helped in cease-fire agreements, separation of parties that were in conflict or, more in recent times, monitoring elections and UN peacekeeping forces served an important role from the very commencement. The Post-Cold War presented crucial challenges. Armed conflicts mostly happened at the intrastate level. The level and extent of involvement had to change accordingly. The changing nature of conflicts that followed the Cold War made it urgent for the UN to start a new era of humanitarian interventions; some of the changes came into conflict with the concept of sovereignty. Other than that, the UN over-stretched its resources and in the end, lost much of its political sponsorship (Gann et al. 64). Peacekeeping forces were overwhelmed with conceptual and structural problems. The only way out for that plight was to restructuring and regionalization. For restructuring to be successful, it needed that the UN adapt to the changing nature of armed conflicts but, the policy of regionalization proved unsafe for the UN's credibility and ultimately, its mission. Some of the challenges that affected successful peacekeeping were considered mostly theoretical. In the past, before the cold war, peacekeepers were only supposed to separate hostile forces and monitor cease-fires or truces. Nonetheless, conflicts post cold war, involving ethnic-based disputes, internal political fights or the collapse of state institutions, made the UN act without the clear consent of the parties to the quarrel. The result was that the environment for peacekeeping was no longer a benign case. The new but also complex environment, together with the ambitious objectives of the United Nations and increasing pressure on scarce resources, made it more necessary than ever to ponder clearly about when and how the UN should be involved in peacekeeping operations. Elevation of peacekeeping to peace enforcement raised several concerns. Among them, was whether the UN was endowed with enough resources to undertake enforcement mandates. Another issue was whether the UN could develop a competent structure to undertake enforcement, including cases where the military risks were very high. A further challenge was legitimacy, and whether the impartiality that was the key to UN peacekeeping operations could be maintained. The world community was also, unwilling to provide the UN with resources to undertake enforcement tasks. The permanent five Security Council members-the United States, Russia, China, France and Britain who were significant players of the cold war often differed and that situation put immense challenge to the operations of the UN. Without the political support of the five permanent members of the Security Council particularly, the logistical, financial and political support, no operation would ever be completed successfully. In simple terms, challenges were experienced in United Nations operations, first simply because the main five states that were the major sponsors and their history were not pleasant. These were parties that previously were involved in fiancé cold war for over decades. Every state wanted to be ‘heard’, and this gravely affected the United Nations peacekeeping roles. Secondly, the question of impartiality of UN was severally questioned. Works Cited Biden, Joseph R. Meeting the Challenges of a Post-Cold War World: Nato Enlargement and U.s.-Russia Relations : a Report to the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate. Washington: U.S. G.P.O, 1997. Print. Brauch, Hans G. Globalization and Environmental Challenges: Reconceptualizing Security in the 21st Century. Berlin: Springer, 2008. Internet resource. Cimbala, Stephen J, and Peter K. Forster. Multinational Military Intervention: Nato Policy, Strategy and Burden Sharing. Farnham, England: Ashgate Pub. Co, 2010. Print. Gann, Lewis H, and Peter Duignan. World War Ii and the Beginning of the Cold War. Stanford, Calif.: Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace, Stanford Univ, 1996. Print. Hardt, John P. East-central European Economies in Transition. Armonk, N.Y. [u.a.: Sharpe, 1995. Print. Johnson, A R, and R E. Parta. Cold War Broadcasting: Impact on the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe : a Collection of Studies and Documents. Budapest: Central European University Press, 2010. Print. Lynn-Jones, Sean M. The Cold War and After: Prospects for Peace. Cambridge, Mass. u.a: MIT Press, 1993. Print. Moore, R L, and Maurizio Vaudagna. The American Century in Europe. Ithaca, N.Y: Cornell University Press, 2003. Print. Sirimarco, Elizabeth. The Cold War. New York: Benchmark Books, 2005. Print. Read More