Conflict for resources is a powerful concept. Although we as humans can become so accustomed to the proverbial elephant in the room many of us have been able to live our entire lives without giving it much thought. With the human race approaching the seven billion population marker though it becomes more difficult to not see that there truly is a need to compete for resources. How does a society successfully fulfill the needs of its members? An over simplified explanation of the history of negotiations is needed in order to highlight how we got to where we are at this juncture in time, as well as to build a platform for us to ponder the implications of negotiations in relationship to What I feel is a serious road block for the human race to overcome and an opportunity to change our perspectives. That roadblock, by the way is deterrence, as in nuclear deterrence. For time immemorial mankind usually resorted to force in order to get what he wanted, when he wanted it. As our species went from cave, to village, to farm, and then city, so too evolved our scale and ingenuity in the practice of killing “Them” which really just meant any society that was competing with the society one was in. Interestingly, on rare occasions in the early days of mankind we can find examples of certain groups thinking beyond the scope of attaining resources by force. Leaders with foresight might for instance, realize that by sneaking into their enemies encampment at night, and stealing the leader of the rival group, they could then the next morning offer to spare the life of the enemy leader in exchange for total surrender, resulting in a net gain of the spoils of war, with the added bonus of not losing any warriors, or assets in the process of fighting.... ... middle of paper ... ... easy to follow, and allows for easy breakdown of the information into easier to study categories, Dr. Lupovici does not seem to offer a concise explanation of functionality. Are we to assume that this is the groundwork for others to use in efforts to branch out and extrapolate on the use of different parts of deterrence theory in new situations? Or is it merely an attempt to compare and contrast in the hopes that dividing the old from the new will keep both branches of deterrence strong, so if the world shifts in ideology again scholars, politicians, and negotiators will have a better idea of which mode of thinking to refer to? Works Cited Lupovici, A. (2010). The emerging fourth wave of deterrence theory. International Studies Quarterly, 54, 705-732. Ghosn, F. (2010). Getting to the table & getting to yes. International Studies Quarterly, 54, 1055-1072.
CSIS Center for Strategic and International Studies, 10 Aug. 2012. Web. The Web. The Web. 07 Jan. 2014.
New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Shiraev, Eric B., and Vladislav M. Zubok. International Relations. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014. Silver, Larry.
Evera, S. V. (1998). Offense, Defense, and the Causes of War. International Security, 4(22), 5-43. Retrieved from http://www.stanford.edu/class/polisci211z/2.1/Van%20Evera%20IS%201998.pdf
Edkins, Jenny, and Maja Zehfuss. Global Politics: A New Introduction. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2009. Print.
Mearsheimer J. J. (2010). Structural Realism. International Relations Thoeries, Discipline and Diversity (Second Edition), p.77-94
Understanding the World ‘We’ Live in’, International Affairs, Vol. 80, No. I, (2004) pp. 75-87.
Mingst, Karen A., and Jack L. Snyder. Essential Readings in World Politics. N.p.: W.W. Norton, 2013. Print.
Wendt, Alexander. “Constructing International Politics.” International Security. Cambridge: President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1995. 71-81. Print.
To attract good luck need to learn the art of negotiation . It is therefore important that you read this post .
Frieden, Jeffry A., David A. Lake, and Kenneth A. Schultz. World Politics. New York: W.W. Norton &, 2013. Print.
Balaam, David. Introduction to International Political Economy, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, Pearson Education, 2005.
Mingst, K. (2011). Essentials of international relations. (5th ed., p. 70-1). New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company
Whenever world politics is mentioned, the state that appears to be at the apex of affairs is the United States of America, although some will argue that it isn’t. It is paramount we know that the international system is shaped by certain defining events that has lead to some significant changes, particularly those connected with different chapters of violence. Certainly, the world wars of the twentieth century and the more recent war on terror must be included as defining moments. The warning of brute force on a potentially large scale also highlights the vigorousness of the cold war period, which dominated world politics within an interval of four decades. The practice of international relations (IR) was introduced out of a need to discuss the causes of war and the different conditions for calm in the wake of the first world war, and it is relevant we know that this has remained a crucial focus ever since. However, violence is not the only factor capable of causing interruption in the international system. Economic elements also have a remarkable impact. The great depression that happened in the 1920s, and the global financial crises of the contemporary period can be used as examples. Another concurrent problem concerns the environment, with the human climate being one among different number of important concerns for the continuing future of humankind and the planet in general.
Dimitter, Lowell. World Politics. 1st ed. Vol. 55. New York: Johns Hopkins UP, 2002. 38-65.
Ya’akub, A. N. (2014). Negotiation. [PowerPoint slides]. Faculty of Social Sciences. University of Malaysia Sarawak.