Can you guys here at DU give me some ideas for my Political Science paper?

[battleknight24]

I am a political science major currently taking a 4000 level course entitled "International Organization," although a vast majority of our classes have focused only on the United Nations. Last Thursday, our assignment to turn in tomorrow was to pick three topics from a list of five and write a 2 and half to 3 page paper with each topic. I stayed up till 4:30 a.m. last night writing 2 of the papers, and I am really worn out. I am a little stuck right now, so I was wondering if you guys could help. Here is the 3rd topic I have chosen.

Keep in mind, I need to like at both sides of the issue, the pros and cons...

"The international community has been torn between two conceptions of its role in the post-Cold War world. One argues the need for an active role in civil and ethnic conflict on the grounds of the fundamental importance of human rights and the consequences of global interdependence. The other contends that without the superpower confrontation, conflicts such as that in the former Yugoslavia are tragic but pose little danger to global stability and are too deep-seated to be susceptible to international intervention." Discuss.

I've been really stresses out with both school and personal issues, so any help you guys could give me would be GREATLY appreciated.


Peace,

[MrScorpio]

1. WTO, IMF, World Bank

My take: Trade/aid is extortion

Think about it

[caledesi]

2. The UN - Why it is relevant. nt

[bobthedrummer]

3. Militarism was an independent study I did in 1991

[Merope215]

4. eh

you could probably talk about the evolution of rights theory in the Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment to support the first argument, and then talk about some of the really deep-seated ethnic conflicts in places like the Balkans for the other (some Googling should get you what you need in a few minutes). You should be able to get at least two long paragraphs out of that, and then you can explain which side you come down on...

sorry if those ideas sound stupid. I've been working all day on trying to review data on a species of conservation concern to figure out whether it will go extinct or not, so I know exactly how you feel. :toast:

[mitchtv]

5. Where does Korea fit in?

How does Enron own the municipal water for Buenos Aires ? World Bank again , and Paul Wolfowitz'projected role. all the debt forgivness plans. The role of Project for a new Am Century.

[tigereye]

6. it's playing out as we speak

Bush/neocons/Condi vs Clinton/et al/ traditional diplomatic approaches. I don't know the names of the theories, but the responses of the last two administrations seem like a textbook delineation of the question. Good luck.

[welshTerrier2]

7. a quick ramble ...

what should the standard be for intervening in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation? that seems to me to be the essence of the question ...

one argument calls for an active role to address civil and ethnic conflict ... the other argues that today's conflicts, absent the cold war's stabilizing effect of "mutually assured destruction", pose no risk and would not succeed due to the deep-seated nature of most conflicts ...

of course, the question is needlessly limiting to begin with ... for example, how should the global community address worldwide famine, severe drought or an aids epidemic spiraling out of control killing hundreds of millions?

we also must understand that much of what passes for intervention on behalf of those in need is nothing more than a system of trans-national exploitation by wealthy nations against poor nations ... to argue the US comes in peace and seeks to support democracy sounds very idealistic; the truth, however, may lie elsewhere ... in his recent book, "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man", John Perkins chronicles his experiences over several decades where his job was to exploit the resources and ultimately subjugate the many countries he was sent to by his corporate bosses ... his book provided painful details of assassinations, collusion with the World Bank, and a system that brought billions to US corporations and left many third world countries in such debt that they ultimately became dependent puppets of the US government ... so the target question is at best only one way at looking at the post cold-war world ...

having said that, the question still stands as posed ... what is the right standard for international intervention? of course, any answer is by definition subjective ... my values would say that, at some level, simple human decency must dictate the policy ... given death and suffering on some great scale, global intervention is appropriate .. the standard offered in the question, i.e. posing a risk to global stability, is too high a standard to meet ... watching millions perish in tribal wars in Africa should lead to some degree of global peacekeeping ... having said that, a critically important point needs to be made ... superpowers must not unilaterally impose a military solution ... the case of the US role in Iraq should not meet any standard for intervention ...

finally, the idea that the cold war restrained US hegemony may be a bit overstated ... the US has had a long history of imperialism even during the height of the Soviet Union ... in fact, one might argue that the presence of the Soviet Union acted as a justification, real or imagined, for the US to intervene in the internal affairs of many countries throughout Latin America and South America ... one well known example of this is the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba ... rather than prevent US action, the risk of a Soviet state so close to the US prompted JFK to act ... fear of Soviet client states and the classic fear of "falling dominos" served as the basis for a very activist, interventionist foreign policy ...

finding the right measure to know when to act is not an easy task ... and doing so in an international arena and having to negotiate a common standard to be supported by the community of nations is more difficult still ... we must never allow the idealism of those who seek to make life better for the weakest and the poorest on our planet to become little more than a "marketing pitch" to allow any nation, especially a super-power, to overstep its bounds ... but the world is getting smaller and smaller every year and we must develop a set of values that provides guidance to the international community so that it knows when, and when not to, act ... this guidance should seek to way national sovereignty with human needs ... and again, all actions must have only the goals of peace and humanitarianism at their core ...

hope this helps get you started ... not enough time to really pull the whole paper together but i thought this might at least provide some discussion points you could expound on ... good luck ...

[battleknight24]

8. Thanks a lot... this is way more than I had hoped for...

... I was just hoping for a few basic points to expand on... I was getting a little stresses out, but now I feel pretty confidant.


Muchos Gracias,


Peace,