Arms embargoes are “one type of sanctions that can be used to coerce states and non-governmental actors to improve their behaviour in the interests of international peace and security” . The prohibition of military transfers includes: provision of military aid, military cooperation, arms sales and security assistance . This essay aims to examine Dominic Tierney’s assertion whether multilateral ‘arms embargoes are both easy to introduce and difficult to lift’ . Prior to 1990, the UN introduced arms embargoes on two occasions only: against South Africa and Rhodesia . Since 1990 there have been in total 25 cases of UN mandatory arms restrictions, of which 13 remain in place. The EU is the other major embargo imposer with a total 33 cases and 20 still un-lifted . The 1990s in particular, were characterised by Cortright and Lopez as the ‘Sanctions Decade’ during which 50 multilateral sanctions were introduced, with arms embargoes being the most employed form of sanctions . Thus the statistics suggest that the UN and the EU have been more frequently resorting to arms embargoes. However, little is illustrated about the dynamics involved in issuing and removing an arms embargo. In part one this essay proposes that an arms embargo is simple to initiate, primarily because it meets the demands for action in circumstances of conflict and violent repressions, and requires minimum political consensus among the UN member states. Nonetheless, the failures of many arms sanctions during the past two decades could either maintain or alter this situation. Furthermore, the second part of this essay will argue, with specific references to the EU’s sanctions against China and Syria that embargoes are not difficult to lift per se, but their removal ofte... ... middle of paper ... ...eview the EU arms embargo on China: the clash between value and rationale in the European security strategy”, Perspectives. Review of International Affairs (2004) 22 pp. 43-58 Moore, Matthew, “Arming the embargoed: a supply-side understanding of arms embargo violations”, Journal of Conflict Resolution (2010) 54 pp. 593-615 Niblock, Tim, “Pariah States” & Sanctions in the Middle East (London, 2001) Shambaugh, David, “Lifting the EU Arms Embargo on China: An American Perspective”, Discussion paper prepared for the CSIS/SWP conference “China’s Rise: Diverging U.S.- EU Approaches and Perceptions,” Berlin, April 28-29, 2005 Tierney, Dominic, “Irrelevant or malevolent? UN arms embargoes in civil war”, Review of International Studies, (2005) 31 pp. 645-664 Vennesson, Pascal, “Lifting the EU arms embargo on China: symbols and strategy”, Euramerica (2007) 37: 3 pp. 417-444
...in Blockade and the Use of the United Nations’, Foreign Affairs, 50, 1, 1971, p. 172
Tarzi, Shah M., The threat of the use of force in American post-cold war policy in the Third World. Journal of Third World Studies v. 18, no1, (2001): p. 39-64
Wu Riqiang. “Why China Should Be Concerned With U.S. Missile Defense.” The Center for International Strategy, (2012): 1-19.
Mingst, K. A. and Arreguin-Toft, I. M. (2011) Essentials of International Relations, 5th edition. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.
The article, “Here Be Dragons: Is China a Military Threat?” features a debate between the two authors, Aaron L. Friedberg and Robert S. Ross. The subject of the debate is simply; is China a military threat? Aaron Friedberg argues that China is a military “menace” that we should take as a serious threat while Robert Ross contends that China’s military threat is a “myth” that should be disregarded. The article concludes with a rebuttal from both authors, each offering a counter to the others argument.
According to some estimates, anywhere from sixty to eighty million people, civilian and combatant alike, were killed. Through its carnage, the international community, long divided and discordant, emerged to combat expansionist and genocidal ambitions. As the immeasurable devastation of the war became omnipresent, those concerned with its administration turned their attention to the question of its aftermath. How must a world so thoroughly shaken by war rebuild? As no conflict before it compared in its scope or its brutality, no solution for reconstruction and development dreamt of before it would suffice. The international community as it existed would be tasked, be challenged, with developing an ambitious and viable solution to the difficulties that Western Europe and parts beyond would face. What was resolved was the need for an international system capable of handling economic and monetary regulation and development. What has yet to be resolved, however, are questions of that development, its intentions, and its lasting effects. In the case of the latter, the question is fixed upon international institutions, whose past acts shaped international norms and whose continued presence engenders deep mistrust and resentment among some in the community of states.
China is the most populous state in the world, with over 1.3 trillion inhabitants (Central Intelligence Agency 2010). Because of its large population base, China also has the largest military and a booming economy that is third only America and Japan in terms of GDP; however, economic trends show that Japan’s economy is stagnating, while the American Chinese economies continue to spike upward (Google, Inc. 2010). Despite its growing economy and large military force, China lags behind America in technology and naval power. Chinese Admiral Wu Shengli said, “The Navy will move faster in researching and building new-generation weapons to boost the ability to fight in regional sea wars under the circumstance of information technology” (Xuequan 2009). This quote shows that China wants to remain a regional sea power, and not develop a blue-water navy that can compete with the American navy. Furthermore, a Popular Mechanics article showed the world that China was stealing American military “leap ahead” technology, or technology that is decades ahead of Chinese technology (Cooper 2009).
Wendt, Alexander. “Constructing International Politics.” International Security. Cambridge: President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1995. 71-81. Print.
The members of the League recognise that the maintenance of peace requires the reduction of national armaments to the lowest point consistent with national safety and the enorcement by common action of international obligations...
78, no. 1, pp. 137-146. 5 (3), 27-45, http://www.politicalperspectives.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Sino-US-relations1.pdf 9. Wang, Hui, “U.S.-China: Bonds and Tensions”, RAND Corporation, 257-288, n.d., http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1300/MR1300.ch12.pdf 10. Yuan, Jing- Dong, “Sino-US Military Relations Since Tiananmen: Restoration, Progress, and Pitfalls”, Spring 2003, http://strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/parameters/articles/03spring/yuan.pdf 11. Yan, Xuetong. "
..., Asian or otherwise, for mastery of Asia-Pacific. As demonstrated in the paper: China has expanded its national security objectives; China has changed its patterns in the use of military force; China is developing a modern war machine and sea control capability and; China is attempting to build an anti-American and anti-West alliance. There can only be one reason for these activities. These are not moves directed at local oponents or guided by the principles of self-defence. This is a move aimed at the world's sole remaining superpower, the United States. American superpowership rests on the fact that it is master of the North and South American continent, the oceans that surround that land mass, and a forward presence in strategically important regions of the world such as, Western Europe, the Persian Gulf, and Asia. If China and the PLA can marginalize the United States in Asia, then they can challenge the United States' mantle as the world's only superpower. Only time will tell if they can be successful in their ambition.
The unregulated and uncontrolled trade of small and light weapons is a persisting problem all around the world. This trade creates chaos and encourages violence everywhere. Small arms are easy to obtain. They're light, easy to handle, and they are rather cheap too. Since these types of weapons are small, they are easy to hide and transport. Some small arms may not create massive problems worth noticing, but their massive accumulation is what causes these problems to get even worse. This conflicts create a cycle. The accumulation of small weapons creates big problems, decreasing security and increasing violence, which ends up creating more demand for these types of arms. Most of the deaths caused by conflicts are directly related to the use of small weapons. This arms are the most used tool for criminals. They make much easier the violation of several human rights. These include: murder, rape, mutilation, torture, forced disappearance. The majority of these violations of the human ...
In his book After Victory, John Ikenberry examines what states do with the power that comes after winning major wars. He believes the desire to maintain power encourages the states to seek ways to limit their own power to keep other states happy. Increasingly these limits are found in international institutions used to create ¡°strategic restraint¡± on power. Ikenberry believes increasing reliance upon institutions causes the postwar order to increasingly take on constitutional characteristics. In this paper I am primarily interested in the institutions of the European Union. More specifically I would like to examine the European Union¡¯s struggle to develop its own institutions for maintaining international order. These are collectively known as its Common Foreign and Security Policy.
Mingst, K. (2011). Essentials of international relations. (5th ed., p. 70-1). New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company
Wei-Wei Zhang. (2004). The Implications of the Rise of China. Foresight, Vol. 6 Iss: 4, P. 223 – 226.