Congress as An Admirable and Enlightened Example of International Co-Operation
When the Napoleonic Wars came to the end, the European countries held
the Congress of Vienna to settle down the problems. After that, the
European powers decided to hold conferences in the coming years to
maintain the peace of Europe and solve the problems by talking,
discussing, but not by wars. These congresses, which included Congress
of Vienna (1814-15), Congress of Aix-la Chapelle (1818), Congress of
Troppau (1820), Congress of Laibach (1821), and Congress of Verona
(1822), formed the Congress System, which can be also called
Metternich System or the Concert of Europe. This essay is going to
have a look that if the Congress System is an admirable and
enlightened example of international co-operation.
First of all, the definition of admirable and enlightened should be
stated. Admirable means excellent, and deserves others to respect with
pleasure and satisfaction. Enlightened means free from prejudice,
ignorance. Based on these definitions, the Congress system should be
admired if it had reached its aims, which were maintain the peace of
Europe and solving the problems by discussing and without war, unless
the latter was a necessary and unavoidable. The Metternich System was
an enlightened one if it was a new system which is better than the
ones in before.
Before find out could the Congress System maintain the peace of Europe
or not, it is essential to know that the powers had different
definition of the word "peace". In the eyes of British statements, it
means maintaining the balance of power and stick on the Vienna
Settlement. However, the Rus...
... middle of paper ...
...owers acting themselves to taking action
together. This could prevent some wars.
As the Congress System succeeded, and it has a number of advantages,
people later still adopt this system. Based on the congress system,
there was Congress of Berlin, etc. Furthermore, the League of Nations,
which was made after the Great War, and the United Nations nowadays
have the same spirit as the Congress System, that's solving the
problem by discussing instead of fighting.
Considering all the above, the Congress System could maintain the
peace of Europe. It also set up a method, which was better than the
one before, to solve the problems between the countries in Europe.
Furthermore, its spirit still conquers today. Therefore, it deserves
to be described as "An admirable and enlightened example of
international co-operation."
Commensurate representation was the first issue faced by the Confederation Congress. The Articles mandated a continuation of the structure used during the Revolutionary War, whereby each state had one vote in Congress, but some of the states disagreed. “If distance made unreasonable the notion that the thirteen colonies could be well governed from London, distance made almost equally far-fetched the notion that the thirteen states could be well governed by a single national government” (McDonald). Thus, the large states advocated a form of repres...
The. The Foundation of An Alliance." Anti-Comintern Pact -. Ed. Scott Wolfrom.
In conclusion, even though some of the Congress processes and its structure seem to be made to slow things down and to reduce effectiveness, they exist to, as discussed in class, protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. After all, one of the main objectives of having a government is to create a balanced society, and to reduce the chances of having social convulsion and anarchy.
... middle of paper ... ... What hinders the capabilities of Congress is that minorities and factions exist: dissent takes place, not disagreements. Verbal brawls take place rather than actual argumentation, and that is what kills democracy.
Congress has helped develop the Presidency as we know it today. This is because Congress argues over proposals and legislation proposed by the President. They are a major determent in whether bills turn into laws. But it’s not easy. One reason for this is because there are many powerful groups out there who argue about what should be discussed such as air pollution with the EPA or jobs.
The Tsar put forward a proposal at the Congress that the Great Powers of Russia, Austria and Prussia should agree to act jointly, using force if necessary, to restore any governments which had itself been overthrown by force. This was known as the Protocol of Troppau. This was a very disastrous to the liberals and nationalist everywhere who were trying to set up a better system.
During the years of Cold War, the House on Un-American Activities Committee or HUAC was created to investigate and conduct search on all the activities, groups and people who are involved or have a connection with Communist in the United States. The House of Committee has the capability to send an individual to prison if a person refuses to cooperate or provide a testimony during the legal proceeding or prosecution by issuing a subpoena. Legal proceedings were held to investigate or examine the involvement of an individual with the Communist and it could affect a larger number of people including the one in the entertainment industries. In addition, there are ten directors including writers invited and questioned by the committee.
The title “Era of Good Feelings” is given to the time period of 1815 to 1825, which is recognized for the young nation’s flourishing development. For the most part this label is inaccurate, since sectionalism was profoundly more predominant than nationalism in the country, after the War of 1812. Even though, the nation showed moments of unity portraying success, the tensions pulling the nation apart are more evident. Situations involving internal issues were covered up through solving foreign problems. Thus, the underlying disputes in America were neglected and the nation chose to concentrate more on the country’s international diplomacy. The “Era of Good Feelings” was a suitable description for U.S.’ approach to global matters, but when the conditions at home are studied inclusively, the “good feelings” happen to be an illusion.
In conclusion, Rousseau very convincingly points out the strengths of a confederation of states for ensuring peace, but overstates the case in discussing obstacles to the formation of such a union. He presents an elegant and appealing, but overly simple, explanation of the impossibility, giving no consideration to any other possibilities, including the historical example of the enlightened despot mentioned above.
Metternich is well known for the Metternich System, which was put into practice during his most notable success, the Congress of Vienna of 1815. Metternich, additionally, was the guiding spirit of the international congresses, Aachen, Carlsbad, Troppau, Laibach, and Verona and was the chief statesman of the Holy Alliance. The Congress of Vienna, though, and the agreements that followed were the basis for, "no war involving several powers until the Crimean conflicts of the 1850's and no major war embroiling the whole of Europe until 1914." Metternich's goal, however, was not a peaceful Europe for the sake of peace, but for the preservation of the Austrian Empire who was threatened by possible aggressors on all sides, as well as, his personal loathing for liberalism and revolutionary behavior. Moreover, the Congress of Vienna gave Metternich the opportunity to instill his values of conservatism into the other leaders of Europe in a time when liberalism and revolution were the predominant political trends. Even though Metternich was a firm believer in the conservative values of his time, he worked to spread those ideas in 1815 for the more pragmatic reason of balancing power in the European Concert rather than for abstract ideologies.
Internationalism is good for the country, because of the fact the country is so involved in other nations affairs that if the country backed out it would upset other countries. This country is too involved as it is to not be. But Isolationism is also good in some ways. Internationalism is good for the nation to have allies, and others who will help in a time of need. The question is whether the United States is still internationalist. Or whether the policies of internationalism have changed.
Throughout history, negotiation has been a powerful tool used by world leaders to avoid violence and resolve conflict. When negotiation succeeds, all parties can feel that they have achieved their goals and met their expectations, but when negotiations go awry, countries and relationships can be damaged beyond repair. The Munich Agreement of 1938 is a primary example of this type of failure, which was one of the catalysts to the start of World War II and Czechoslovakia’s loss of independence. The Czech people were greatly overlooked during this agreement process, which still in some instances affects the country today. The 1930s were a challenging time for Europe and the powers within it due to the aftermath of WWI and the worldwide economic depression.
The Congress of Vienna was a series of conferences held in Vienna, from 1814-1815. In which many European heads of government met to establish long-lasting piece, preventing revolution and any other nations from becoming to powerful, on the European continent after the defeat of Napoleon. Even though many countries came together to discus an issue, “the Congress of Vienna was more successful than many other peace meetings in history” (Beck, 241). The most influential of these representatives was the foreign minister of Austria, Prince Klemens von Metternich (Beck, 238). An additional great influential representative was the French foreign minister Prince Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand, who was sent behalf of the French monarchy (Mikaberidze, 1047). The Congress of Vienna played an important role of creating peace in the European continent after the Napoleonic War, with two significant foreign ministers of two nations, Prince Klemens von Metternich of Austria and Prince Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand of France.
Throughout the history of America past presidents and government officials in Congress have dealt with foreign affairs in which they used foreign policy to deal with the many conflicts which include war,trade,peace and many other things dealing with foreign affairs. During many centuries America used foreign policy all the way back to its conception when America became a country.The idea of American Foreign Policy was created in 1978 by Samuel P. Huntington and his friend Warren Manshel. “A central function of the U.S. government is to conduct relations with the almost 200 other nations in the world. A nation is a sovereign country, and as such, possesses the highest authority over its territories. All sovereign states are theoretically equal”
This essay will describe the characteristics of the modern nation-state, explain how the United States fits the criteria of and functions as a modern nation-state, discuss the European Union as a transnational entity, analyze how nation-states and transnational entities engage on foreign policy to achieve their interests, and the consequences of this interaction for international politics.