The Inevitability of U.S. Military Force

2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Kim-Mitchell
Keyword(s):  
2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesse Tumblin

This article examines the way a group of colonies on the far reaches of British power – Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and India, dealt with the imperatives of their own security in the early twentieth century. Each of these evolved into Dominion status and then to sovereign statehood (India lastly and most thoroughly) over the first half of the twentieth century, and their sovereignties evolved amidst a number of related and often countervailing problems of self-defence and cooperative security strategy within the British Empire. The article examines how security – the abstracted political goods of military force – worked alongside race in the greater Pacific to build colonial sovereignties before the First World War. Its first section examines the internal-domestic dimension of sovereignty and its need to secure territory through the issue of imperial naval subsidies. A number of colonies paid subsidies to Britain to support the Royal Navy and thus to contribute in financial terms to their strategic defense. These subsidies provoked increasing opposition after the turn of the twentieth century, and the article exlpores why colonial actors of various types thought financial subsidies threatened their sovereignties in important ways. The second section of the article examines the external-diplomatic dimension of sovereignty by looking at the way colonial actors responded to the Anglo-Japanese Alliance. I argue that colonial actors deployed security as a logic that allowed them to pursue their own bids for sovereignty and autonomy, leverage racial discourses that shaped state-building projects, and ultimately to attempt to nudge the focus of the British Empire's grand strategy away from Europe and into Asia.


Author(s):  
Iakiv Serhiiovych Halaniuk

The article highlights the author’s approach to improving coopera- tion mechanisms of the State Border Service of Ukraine with public organiza- tions and population. There has been analyzed public control as a means their cooperation and priorities of improving the cooperation, particularly, forms and methods of organizing citizens’ feedback, introduction of the assessment pro- cedure of the efficiency of the SBSU and population and public organization. There have been stated conceptual pillars of the public control development in the SBSU, developed by the author, including public control forms and resource provision. There has been considered a mechanism algorithm of the public par- ticipation in the development of the border administration through submitting petitions or proposals concerning a legally enforceable enactment draft (or the legally enforceable enactment currently in force). There has been represented a mechanism model of discussing legally enforceable enactments and public peti- tions, developed by the author. It is noted that one of the mechanisms of interac- tion of the SBSU with the public is effective public control, which becomes an in- tegral part of ensuring national security and political stability. The conditions of permanence of Ukraine's threats in the border area, and in certain areas and their exacerbation, along with further reforms of the institutes of Ukrainian statehood, cause the problem of establishing and implementing public control in the border area as an important and urgent one.It is proved that public control is intended to determine the correctness of the military-force policy in the border area, the validity of the scale and optimality of the forms of activity of the border guards. In accordance with all this, in the subject area of public control should be: political decisions on issues of border security, including international agreements; the expediency and validity of government programs for the provision and reform of the border authorities of Ukraine, assess- ment of the effectiveness of these programs and the procedure for making changes to them.


Author(s):  
Mats Berdal

The post-Cold War era witnessed a growing tendency to justify the use and the threat of use of military force in international relations on humanitarian grounds. Freedman’s writing on the use of armed force in pursuit of humanitarian goals and his contribution to the field are explored in this chapter. He rejects the traditional dichotomies in International Relations scholarship between Realism and Idealism. Freedman’s work on ‘New Interventionism’, with the Chicago Speech contribution at its core, suggests that it is unhelpful to delineate sharply different existing schools of thought, or paradigms. Freedman draws a distinction between ‘realism as an unsentimental temper’ and realism as a ‘theoretical construction.’ Liberal values are important for Freedman and their universality is to be asserted, but that does not mean being naively oblivious to dangers and difficulties inherent in seeking to promote them as standards against which Western governments should be judged.


2021 ◽  
Vol 115 (3) ◽  
pp. 567-572

On February 25, 2021, the United States conducted a strike targeting Iranian-backed militia group facilities in Syria. The strike, which came in response to a February 15, 2021 attack on U.S. interests in Iraq, marked the Biden administration's first known exercise of executive war powers. As domestic authority for the strike, President Joseph Biden, Jr. cited his authority under Article II of the U.S. Constitution and did not rely on the 2001 or 2002 Authorizations for the Use of Military Force (AUMFs). For international legal authority, Biden relied on individual self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter, stating that Syria was “unwilling or unable” to prevent further attacks on the United States by these non-state actors within its territory. The strikes garnered mixed reactions from Congress, where efforts are underway to repeal or reform extant AUMFs as well as the War Powers Resolution (WPR). The Biden administration is also undertaking a review of current U.S. military policy on the use of force, and during this process, it has prohibited drone strikes outside of conventional battlefields, absent presidential approval.


Author(s):  
Vasilii Lebedev

Abstract The North Korean police were arguably one of the most important organisations in liberated North Korea. It was instrumental in stabilising the North Korean society and eventually became one of the backbones for both the new North Korean regime and its military force. Scholars of different political orientation have attempted to reconstruct its early history leading to a set of views ranging from the “traditionalist” sovietisation concept to the more contemporary “revisionist” reconstruction that portrayed it as the cooperation of North Korean elites with the Soviet authorities in their bid for the control over the politics and the military, in which the Soviets merely played the supporting role. Drawing from the Soviet archival documents, this paper presents a third perspective, arguing that initially, the Soviet military administration in North Korea did not pursue any clear-cut political goals. On the contrary, the Soviet administration initially viewed North Koreans with distrust, making Soviets constantly conduct direct interventions to prevent North Korean radicals from using the police in their political struggle.


1969 ◽  
Vol 8 (I1) ◽  
pp. xi-xii

The contents of ILM for the period from 1962 to 1969 reflect several significant developments: (1) the entry on the international scene of many new countries and their establishment of relations with the developed countries, particularly in the fields of commerce and trade and of investment; (2) the prevalence of armed conflict and the use of military force in the unsettled conditions resulting from the decolonization process and from continued antagonisms between the superpowers; (3) the pervasive role of international organizations, both global and regional, general and specialized; and (4) the continued predominance of national courts in the judicial consideration of questions of international law and the shift from general to specialized tribunals in the resolution of disputes by international arbitration and adjudication.


2014 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 377-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lloyd J. Dumas

AbstractThe indirect effects of military spending on security are stronger and more important than its direct effects, and its long run impact more telling than its short run impact. In the short run, military spending can be a source of both physical security and economic stimulus. In the long run, it can be counterproductive in terms of physical security and will be a dead weight on the economy. How a society’s productive resources are deployed, as between military spending and more economically productive activities, sets it on a long-term course with powerful implications for the ability of its economy to do what it is supposed to do – provide for the material well-being of the population as a whole. The mechanism by which the extensive and extended diversion of productive economic resources to economically unproductive military spending drags an economy down is analyzed. Furthermore, it is possible to use properly structured international and domestic economic relationships in place of threats or use of military force to increase national and international security, while at the same time enhancing, rather than degrading, economic wellbeing. Three principles for structuring such a “peacekeeping economy” are set forth.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document