The Character of the 21st Century Is Expected to Be War Prone - Coursework Example

 The character of the 21st century is expected to be war prone. This is because most states want to gain superpowers over other nations. Additionally, the development of nuclear weapons and the need to gain world wealth has necessitated many states to be more involved in war to show their might against other states. Many nations are struggling to survive in a world dominated by military power and technological development of nuclear weapons. Although, the nations claim existence of democracy and that international relations can be enhanced there are nations that advocate ruling the rest of the world through the wealth and military power. Any nation that tries to compete with the superpowers is attacked indirectly. Therefore, the 21st century world is likely to be dominated by wars in struggle for survival and supremacy. The 21st century is likely to be war prone because of the struggle for super powers among world nations. According to Mearshein, he came up with a number of assumptions that explain why the structure of international relations is made up of nations who have selfish gains for their own states rather than to the world as a whole1. As a result, the great power nations around the world seek for supremacy, maximum wealth, dominion over land and nuclear superiority. To gain their superpowers the great nations have embarked on “war, blackmail, bait and bleed, bloodletting, balancing and buck passing”2. Mearshein came up with a number of assumptions explaining paths nations pursue to become superpowers. The first reason is that the international relations is anarchic3. Meaning that the world is dominated by nations seeking security competition and war. In international relations, all nations are equal because there is no state government, which has powers over other states government. Secondly, most states possess some offensive military capability. Through military power, nations can destroy each when conflicts of any kind arise. Nevertheless, some states have great military powers than others, because of the availability of modern weaponry therefore proving to be more dangerous than other nations4. The struggle for supremacy is also initiated by the lack of certainty of the intentions of other nations. Even though states try to live in harmony, aggressiveness against another state can originate from nowhere leading to war. This therefore, has necessitated most states to stay alert and not to trust neighboring nations. Most nations strive for survival with diverse intentions in mind. The need for supremacy, wealth, military power and land has resulted to a number of cases of war. States that are continuing to grow in wealth than the superpowers are now involved in cold wars. States with nuclear weaponry mighty are also in disagreements with superpowers and wars may ensue any moment. The struggle is therefore, real with the super power nations wanting to remain superior, and other nations struggling to get to the level of super power nations. The 21st century is likely to be affected by war, because of the existence of fear in international politics. According to Tang, many states are faced with fear of the future5. Therefore, most states are striving for survival against the fear by leading in wars and being informed of what is happening in other states. States around the world are uncertain of the intentions of other nations. They do not know if they want to attack or if they are developing nuclear weapons. Thus, the uncertainty results to most states being alert and developing their military base, to ensure they are ready for any attacks that may take place. Moreover, most states have their own goals in ensuring they attain supremacy over other states. Nations only work together when they are faced with a common enemy. According to Tang, in international theory cooperation among nation state is practiced when the nations are facing a common enemy. Each state has its own personal gains when they advocate to be involved in war6. The states may be in fear that a new nation is developing its nuclear weapons, and that the supremacy over the world may change, the superpower nations join forces to handle the new nation leading to wars that advocate to devalue the new nation7. Due to doubts of the intentions of world states, the 21st century is likely to be dominated by war. This is because, states are engulfed with fear, fear that are resulting to nations becoming aggressive. Additionally, the superpower nations establish a common enemy to attack. Through international relations, states try to figure out the intentions of other nations making it possible for them to decide whether to engage in war or not. Therefore, the existence of fear and the insecurity of the intentions of other states makes the 21st century prone to war than peace. On the other hand, Scholte does not support the opinion that 21st century is more affected by cases of war than peace. According to him, the global civil society has allowed nations to develop and international relations enhanced. Global civil society has allowed the growth of civil groups that ensures the world lives peaceful, and that nations join forces in making the world a better place. Globalization has allowed the civil society to develop and allow peace to be enhanced through international relations. According to Scholte, global civil society involves the emergency of international non-governmental organizations that advocate for peace and harmonious living worldwide. Through the development of globalizations, intense interactions among nations interdependence has been enhanced8. Moreover, globalization has also allowed liberalization where resources of a state can move anywhere, unencumbered by state imposed laws like “trade barriers, capital control and travel visas”. Westernization has also been enhanced through globalization. The world has grown technologically and people can interact with ease by use of technology9. Friendships and interactions have been enhanced and relationships built. International relations have also enabled different states to join effort in fighting diseases, poverty and assisting nations living in wars to gain peace10. The United Nations organizations were established purpose to restore and enhance world peace with the objective of economy growth. Globalization has promoted a full scale privatization of governance where states have no involvements. Global civil society has enhanced world peace and development. The existence of diverse civil societies has enabled people to interact freely, and economic growth promoted. Technology has paved way for globalization and nations can interact and enhance relationships11. The civil societies objective is to maintain world peace and to ensure poverty is eradicated, and the nations with more superpowers assisting the developing nations to have a better life. Generally, 21st century has also enhanced globalization and enhanced world peace. The 21st century is prone to war than peace, because of the growing trend of nations seeking supremacy powers over other nations. Nation states advocate to gain world supremacy through wealth, a large and powerful military base and possession of nuclear weapons. Superpower nation’s advocate to remain in power therefore war is likely to ensue to any nation that wants to overthrow the superpower nations. Existence of fear has also enhanced wars. The uncertainties of the intentions and security of nation states has made nations to be protective of their territories and they can use aggressiveness if need arises to ensure they maintain power. Even though, globalization has promoted world peace, technological development has also allowed the growth of nuclear weaponry, therefore, putting the world at large in danger of wars among nation state. The 21st century is faced with the need of nations seeking wealth, supremacy and military powers through wars thus interfering with the world peace. Referencing Mearsheim, John. “Strategies for survival”. The tragedy of great power politics. (w.w. Norton & co., new York, 2006), 29-31: 138-67. Scholte, Jan. “Global civil society”. Ngaire woods (e.d), the political economy of globalization (Macmillan, London, 2006), 178-90. Steel, Brent. “ Liberal-idealism: a constructivist critique”. Department of political science, university of Kansas. International studies review, (2007), 9, 23-52. Tangi, Shiping. “Fear in international politics: two positions”. Rajaratnam school of international studies, Nanyang technological university. International studies review. (2008), 10, 451- 471. Read More