The UN Secretary-General from the Cold War to the New Era

Author(s):  
Edward Newman
Author(s):  
Edward Newman

This article discusses the intricacies of trying to be a Secretary-General. It describes the evolution of the roles of the Office of Secretary-General in the context of international politics. The article also provides an outline of the articles of the Charter that relate to the Secretary-General, the evolution of the office during the Cold War, and how the office has encountered challenges in the ‘new era’.


Author(s):  
Joseph Heller

Kennedys presidency marked a new era, but not to the extent of fulfilling Israel’s goals. It stopped treating Jewish emigration to Israel as escalating the conflict with the Arabs, and took Israel’s security issues more seriously. That led to the American decision to supply Israel with the Hawk missiles, although Israel was disappointed because they were defensive missiles, while Egypt had already offensive weapons, such as bombers and missiles. However, US was trying hard to convince Egypt side with the west by launching a new initiative to solve the Arab refugee question. Israel knew the return of the refugees would be the equivalent of the annihilation of the state of Israel. Ben-Gurion met Kennedy but could not convince him that Israel should be treated as an ally. Kennedy did not promise the immediate supply of Hawk missiles, and warned Israel against developing nuclear weapons, which would damage American-Israeli relations, In view of Soviet–Arab alliance Israel was left with no choice but to build the Dimona nuclear facility, thus gaining a powerful bargaining card.


2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-57
Author(s):  
Davide Barile ◽  

For a long time, the sections of the Philosophy of Right dedicated to the relations among states have been neglected by contemporary International Relations theories. However, especially since the end of the Cold War, this discipline has finally reconsidered Hegel’s theory, in particular by stressing two aspects: the thesis of an ”end of history” implied in it; and, more generally, the primacy of the state in international politics. This paper suggests a different interpretation. It argues that, in order to really understand Hegel’s theory of international relations, it is necessary to consider how it is related to the momentous changes that occurred in the wake of the French Revolution and to previous philosophical developments in the Age of Enlightenment. Indeed, the convergence of these two aspects in his own philosophy of history should suggest that, according to Hegel, by the early nineteenth century international politics had finally entered a new era in which states would still interact as the foremost actors, but would be bound nonetheless by an unprecedented awareness of their historical character.


2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 141-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mao Xianglin ◽  
Shi Huiye

China’s Latin American studies during the Cold War can be divided into five phases. Chairman Mao Zedong and Premier Zhou Enlai showed concern for the development of Latin American studies in China. These studies were suspended during the Great Cultural Revolution. The field developed significantly in the 1970s and 1980s, with three academic associations being established and the five major systems of Latin American studies beginning to take shape. After 2000, Sino–Latin American relations entered a new era, and the first 10 years of the century saw their rapid development, opening broad perspectives for the field. Los estudios latinoamericanos en China durante la Guerra Fría se pueden dividir en cinco fases. El presidente Mao Zedong y el primer ministro Zhou Enlai mostraron interés en el desarrollo de dichos estudios, pero estos se suspendieron durante la Revolución Cultural. Posteriormente, el campo se desarrolló de manera significativa durante los años setenta y ochenta gracias al establecimiento de tres asociaciones académicas y conforme se consolidaron los cinco sistemas principales de estudios latinoamericanos. Después del año 2000, las relaciones entre China y Latinoamérica entraron en una nueva fase, y la primera década del nuevo siglo atestiguó un rápido desarrollo que expandió las posibilidades en el campo.


1995 ◽  
pp. 445-482
Author(s):  
Brigitte Schulz

With the end of the Cold War, much attention has been paid to the nature of the emerging new world order. By what criteria will power and influence be measured in this new era? Who will be the winners and losers? What types of allegiances will develop? Or is Francis Fukuyama's argument correct that, with the collapse of communism, we have reached the "...endpoint of man's ideological evolution" and thus "the end of history". Unlike Marx, who saw socialism at the end of humanity's arduous journey, Fukuyama tells us that the search is off because we have already arrived at our evolutionary destination: liberal capitalism...Other analysts envision less optimistic scenarios...One of the most popular scenarios over the past few years has been to anticipate growing tensions between the three main core powers: the US, Germany, and Japan... The first task of this paper, then, is to look at Germany within the context of the radically altered post-Cold War period... We argue that Germany, based on a multitude of factors which will be outlined below, is not now, nor will it ever become in the foreseeable future, a global hegemon... Indeed, as will be asserted in the second part of this paper, Germany will enter into a close alliance with the United States to form a reinvigorated trans-Atlantic marriage in which the common bonds of "culture and civilization" will replace a virulent anti-communism as the common vow.


Author(s):  
María José Cervell Hortal

The concept of nuclear nonproliferation was coined in a formal way at the beginning of the 1960s, though the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, or Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), signed in 1968, would be the text that would consolidate it. After the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, humanity was conscious of the danger of these weapons, and nuclear proliferation turned into one of the main problems of the Cold War period; their control and the implementation of strategies to limit them have become a priority since then. During the Cold War, nuclear weapons and deterrence policy were crucial elements in the peaceful coexistence of the two power blocs, and the initiatives to control them grew, as both countries were conscious of the danger that this accumulation could cause. The NPT created two categories of states: the “officially” nuclear ones, which could maintain their weapons (China, France, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and the United States) and the nonnuclear ones, which were not allowed to acquire or develop them. Two more concepts emerged: vertical proliferation (that of the five official nuclear states) and horizontal proliferation (that of the states that had nuclear weapons but rejected to be a NPT party). Other treaties—multilateral, regional, and bilateral—which also sought to control the nuclear proliferation (see Treaties and Agreements Preventing Nuclear Weapons Proliferation) were subsequently added. The end of the Cold War did not eliminate the danger. In fact, the Security Council considered in 1992 (Document S/23500, 31 January) that the proliferation of nuclear weapons “constitutes a threat for the international peace and security” (p. 4) that permitted it to activate, if necessary, chapter VII of the United Nations (UN) Charter and all the consequences derived from it. With the new millennium, the United Nations Secretary-General described mass destruction arms (nuclear included) as one of the threats to peace and security in the 21st century (see United Nations General Assembly 2005, cited under Security Council, General Assembly, and Secretary-General, para. 78). Nowadays, the nuclear question is still of great relevance. The nuclear problems in the 21st century’s international society are wide and varied and include states that withdrew the NPT (North Korea), states that fail to comply with it (Iran), states that have not yet ratified it (Israel, India, Pakistan), and non-state actors (such as terrorist groups), which are more and more interested in the wide destructive power of nuclear weapons. The adoption of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons of 7 July 2017 was a significant step, but the low number of state accessions shows that nuclear weapons are still a relevant threat.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document