Leaders, History and Political Science - Article Example

Question 4: How important are individual leaders in determining the content and direction of U.S. foreign policy? What factors limit the influence of individuals? Cite specific examples from class where leaders were influential and specific examples of constraints on leaders’ decisions. Question 6: Compare and contrast the traditional Realist view of National Security and the Liberal view of Human Security. Are these two views always in contradiction to each other or could they be complimentary? In your opinion, which view of security should be paramount? Question 7: Gender empowerment is based on the conviction that only when women are given full rights and equal protection can true human development takes place. Discuss the ways in which women are marginalized in many societies. Why is it so difficult to change attitudes towards women? Discuss differences in treatment of women in different parts of the world. Question 8: How a state treats its own citizens used to be its’ own business. Now, members of the international community are claiming that the humane treatment of individuals is fundamental to human rights. Are there such things as universal Human Rights? What should they include? Why do you think the United States hasn’t ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights? Question 9: Some people would argue that given state Sovereignty, intervention in the domestic affairs of another state is never justified. Others argue that with Sovereignty comes responsibilities, and when a state violates the rights of its people, it has abdicated its right to Sovereignty. When, if ever, is humanitarian intervention justified? 1. How important are individual leaders in determining the content and direction of U.S. foreign policy? What factors limit the influence of individuals? Cite specific examples from class where leaders were influential and specific examples of constraints on leaders’ decisions. Individual leaders play vital role in determining the type or restriction of the United States foreign policy. One of the main factors that limit the influence of individual leaders is human rights. Most of the leaders attempt to practice dictatorial leadership where they harass the citizens for their personal benefits (Shifter 56). A good example of such is the US policy toward Venezuela. The Venezuela President Chavez was bitter with US due to their denial to include Venezuela and other countries in America into United States (Restrepo 33). In fact, the whole of Venezuela was bitter and resentful with the US and that contributed to Venezuela president Chavez to make democracy in the country an intimidating influence to other people. He begun harassing the citizens of the country as a why to show his anger. However, US had to come in, its policy towards Venezuela was that democracy, and the leaders of the country should practice equitability (Shifter 71). In other words, every citizen in the country deserved equitability and democracy not harassment and enslavement. Therefore, it was individual leader; President Chavez who determined the content of US foreign policy to Venezuela (Restrepo 64). The same happened to Syria where US policy towards Syria was elimination of Assad from power due to his dictatorship and unusual elimination of citizens particularly the University students who protested for murder of their colleague. However, this case was different in that the citizens of Syria supported United States’ policy over President Assad while in Venezuela; the citizens supported President Chavez although he denied them democracy (Shifter 82). 2. Compare and contrast the traditional Realist view of National Security and the Liberal view of Human Security. Are these two views always in contradiction to each other or could they be complimentary? In your opinion, which view of security should be paramount? The traditional realist view of national security is that the state is the main actor on the world platform. Realism concentrates on the high national security politics as well as the association between eminent powers. According to realism, the states are the only bodies able to practice military authorities in the global environment (Doyle 87). Nevertheless, the world is shifting from gigantic entity where every part was seen as separate to the other into a more interlinked entity through economic globalization and through the influence of transnational political organization and growth of population. Liberation on the other hand is actually the contrast of realism in that it sees both state and non-state actors as significant (Rose 147). It also views the international associations’ implications to define the performance not only of great powers but also of minimal powers. According to liberalism, states are disaggregated into entities where some of them functions trans-nationally. The disaggregation process differs from one nation to another through reflection of their levels of pluralism. Therefore, it is clear that realism and liberalism views of national security differ greatly and are somehow contradictory in the sense that they never agree even to a single concept (Doyle 179). However, according to me liberal view of human security should be paramount because it focuses on global security with regard to both state and non-state actors (Rose 152). 3. Gender empowerment is based on the conviction that only when women are given full rights and equal protection can true human development takes place. Discuss the ways in which women are marginalized in many societies. Why is it so difficult to change attitudes towards women? Discuss differences in treatment of women in different parts of the world. Women are still mistreated in different societies in the world today. Distinctions between individuals with any given state or culture are much superior to differences between groups. Social standing, education, personality, past experience, belief structure, affection shown in the home and countless of other factors will influence human behavior and culture (Wanjek 63). For example in African cultures, women must stay home and perform all the house chores. There was also a belief that if the husband do not beat his wife, then he does not love her that much. This means that women were frequently beaten and mistreated without any form of defense because people believed that it was a sign of love therefore, there was no need of intervention. Just like any other state, India has the men marrying women but it is interesting to note that it is women who pay dowry instead of men (Buer 30). Besides, the African culture also believed that women are bound to stay at home while performing all the home chores. They were never taken to be important people in society. Therefore, they were not supposed to work in offices and other nice places in order to earn their own money (Buer 30). That was unfair treatment of women and need not to be encouraged in society today. Women are normal human beings as men and are able to learn, educate, instruct, work in offices, and even, become leaders in societies. Therefore, women empowerment must be practiced in the world to eliminate such treatments of women in older days (Wanjek 89). 4. How a state treats its own citizens used to be its’ own business. Now, members of the international community are claiming that the humane treatment of individuals is fundamental to human rights. Are there such things as universal Human Rights? What should they include? Why do you think the United States hasn’t ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights? Unlike the ancient days where citizens used to be the business of an individual state, nowadays there are international human rights under global organizations such us United Nations which ensure that the citizens of all nations are protected by the global human rights (Broomhall 52). It is evident enough that there are universal human rights which are protected by international law courts like the International Criminal Courts located in the Hague, Netherlands. Any form of violation of human rights by individual leaders is undertaken by the jurisdiction of the court (Brouwer 34). For instance the Albashir case who is still being hunted up to date for violating human rights in Sudan. The same happened in Kenya where there was post election violence and the case is still in the court. Other cases to be heard include Muamar Ghadaffi’s son who is yet to face the court as well as the former president of Ivory Coast (Broomhall 34). However, the United States has not approved the international covenant on Economic, cultural and social rights because almost each community has its culture and it can be very hard to monitor each and every culture of a single community as well as its social life (Brouwer 67). In fact, I do not think the ratification will take place soon because according to me, it is still difficult to control a community over its social and cultural life. However, it is trying to eliminate other dynamic cultural practices like female genital mutilation (FGM). 5. Some people would argue that given state Sovereignty, intervention in the domestic affairs of another state is never justified. Others argue that with Sovereignty comes responsibilities, and when a state violates the rights of its people, it has abdicated its right to Sovereignty. When, if ever, is humanitarian intervention justified? I strongly feel that people who argue that given state sovereignty in the conjugal affairs of other nations is never justified are very wrong (Crawford 194). This is because the world is becoming a single entity and many actions are justified internationally meaning that when a state violates the rights of its people, the international bodies must come in (Ti-chiang 89). this is happening in several nations across the world. The best example is the US policy towards Syria where US had to come in to ensure president Assad steps aside because he was violating the rights of its citizens. Other examples include the Egypt case where international bodies came in to eliminate President Hosni Mubarak from power (Ti-chiang,101). The same happened when Sudan was separating to form Southern Sudan Country. It is evident enough from several instances that humanitarian intervention is justified when sovereignty comes in and takes responsibility in case human rights are violated in a country. Hosni Mubarak violated the rights of Egypt citizens and used his powers wrongly through killing people anyhow. The country itself tried to eliminate him but the sovereign states had to come in to ensure he goes out of power (Crawford 219). Therefore, justice is acquired to the minor citizens of a nation only when the sovereign states come in to intervene in the situation. Works Cited Anne-Marie de Brouwer, Supranational Criminal Prosecution of Sexual Violence: The ICC and the Practice of the ICTY and the ICTR. Antwerp – Oxford: Intersentia (2005). ISBN 90-5095-533-9. Bruce Broomhall, International Justice and the International Criminal Court: Between Sovereignty and the Rule of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press (2003). ISBN 019927424X. Chen, Ti-chiang. The International Law of Recognition, with Special Reference to Practice in Great Britain and the United States. London, 1999. Conrad, Lawrence I.2006. The Western Medical Tradition. Cambridge University Press. p. 137. ISBN 0521475643. Crawford, James. The Creation of States in International Law. Oxford University Press, 2005. ISBN 0-19-825402-4, pp. 15–24. Doyle, Michael. Ways of War and Peace: Realism, Liberalism, and Socialism (Paperback). 1997. London: W. W. Norton & Company, esp. pp. 41-204 Gideon Rose, "Neoclassical Realism and Theories of Foreign Policy", World Politics, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 144-172 Mabel C. Buer, Health, Wealth and Population in the Early Days of the Industrial Revolution, London: George Routledge & Sons, 1926, page 30 ISBN 0-415-38218-1 Restrepo, Dan.  US-Venezuela Policy. Worshington D.C publication, 2006. Retrieved from www.americanprogress.org Shifter, Michael.  What to Read on Venezuela. New York press, 2011. Retrieved from www.foreignaffairs.com Wanjek, Christopher 2002. Bad Medicine: Misconceptions and Misuses Revealed, from Distance Healing to Vitamin O. Wiley. pp. 70–71. 2002. ISBN 047143499X Read More