The author doesn’t forget to mention the relationship between USA and NATO. He thinks that Americans welcome NATO as a weapon for America’s affairs, not of the world’s. In his final words, it is suggested that either Europe should invite USA to leave NATO or Europe should expel America from it.
Georgia is at the hub of the south Caucasus region which is a current and historical crossroads for political and commercial activities. The region has significant strategic impact because of the large oil and gas reserves as well as the strategic oil and gas transit routes that cross this region. Georgia shares borders with three NATO partners (Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia), and with Turkey a current NATO ally. Our NATO Allies and partners in this region have similar security risks that the rest of NATO faces, such as terrorism and WMD proliferation. NATO’s goals in the region are to facilitate stability and security to therefore improve the opportunities for economic and social development.
Since the fall of the Soviet Union, international politics have shifted from policies once used during the Cold War to the unrest in the Middle East. In a time where global terrorism was thought to be the main threat to modern society, the annexation of the Crimean peninsula by the Russian Federation has reinvigorated Cold War tactics. Located in eastern Ukraine, the Crimean Peninsula harbors a strategic advantage for naval shipping. Because of the unrest and riots erupting in Ukraine due to the disdain of recently ousted President Viktor Yanukovych, the Russian Federation seized control of the Crimean Peninsula and declared part of the Russian Federation. The unrest in the Crimean Peninsula has the potential to plunge global politics into a Cold War era that could last for indeterminate amount of time.
International politics as one may imagine includes foreign affairs. This is why the topic and focus of this paper revolves around the current event within Eastern Europe. It will focus on both Russia, Ukraine, and the world, and from it, it will be analyzed by using the resources provided within class. After all it is a International Politics course, and one of the best ways to effectively put the skills and knowledge to use is to focus on an event or current event. The paper will attempt to go over in a chronological order of the events that has happened, and what is happening currently over in Ukraine. Afterwards, an analyzed input will be implemented providing reasoning behind Russia's actions, and actions of the world, and potentially some solutions.
It has been weeks since the crisis in Ukraine begun. Every nation pledged their support for Ukraine in their own ways to help Ukraine and its people out of this crisis that begun after a massive protest toppled the pro-Russian president out of Kiev. The pledged help is meant to help Ukraine out of the crisis and build a democratic, stable Ukraine in the near future. But throughout the support for help, not every nation has the same idea how to help to overcome the problem that the country is facing. Most notably, the European Union, Russia, and the United States are very involved in Ukraine’s matter from the beginning. The Russians already deployed their troops in Crimea to protect the ethnic Russian people live in the region. The United States and European Union, however, are totally against Russian involvement in Ukraine’s matter and threatened to impose sanctions on Russia. Recently, the United States moved its war ship to black sea peninsula which raised an important question: should America ever involved militarily to help the Kiev’s government push the Russian troops out of Crimea? Many critics have voiced their opposition of any kinds of military interference by the United States. Even the GOP, who are close to taking military action for any threat against America’s interest, or its allies are not as supportive this time even though there still are some hard line republicans who will support a military involvement. I believe any kind of military intervention would be a costly move for America as it could cause to long term war, economic damage, and loss of life.
The relationship between Russia and the rest of Europe has been extremely precarious throughout its existence. From looking to Europe for guidance to outright opposing the interests of Europe, the stance towards Europe has varied greatly. In the post-Cold War era, Russia’s policies have been formed in an attempt to reclaim control over their former sphere of influence, often clashing with European interests in regards to economic, energy, and security matters facing the world.
A Game of Strategy
Mark Twain once defined the term, sphere of influence to be, “A courteous modern
phrase which means robbing your neighbor—for your neighbor's benefit.” Like Twain,
many claim that economic interests have caused America to rob its Southern neighbors and
act in a self-seeking manner. Others claim that the ideological conviction that America
altruistically acts according to its neighbor’s benefit has strongly influenced America’s
international behavior. However, America, possessing a huge GDP at its disposal, a strong
government, and a patriotic society realized that these assets alone could not guarantee the
nation’s survival. It must be able to ensure national security as well as protect its interests
In March of 2014 Russia invaded Ukraine, unleashing a maddening flurry of concern across the world. Originally the concern was how to defend Crimea Ukraine from Putin’s forces, however, the concern has since changed. Seemingly overnight, Putin managed to worm his troops into Crimea, and dominate part of Ukraine. But where does this expansion of power end? Trying to delegate and monitor a power-hungry politician is now the focus of nearly every government in the Western world. In an article written by The Guardian’s Ian Traynor, it states that Putin has declared that if he wanted to, “Russian forces could conquer Ukrainian capital in two weeks.” This amount of confidence is highly unnerving considering Russia’s track record on simply showing up and invading a country seemingly out of nowhere. That specific action and behavior has been associated with Russian leader Joseph Stalin during the Cold war, and now is a continuous and growing concern with Vladimir Putin.
The Ukrainian revolution of 2014 and the Russian takeover of the Crimean Peninsula presented the US with what appeared to be unique political challenges. On closer inspection, the Ukrainian crisis is actually quite similar to the Cuban Missile Crisis, with the opponents in opposite positions. With these two crises in mind, the paper will discuss how the ability to understand one's enemies, gain public support, and effectively utilize nuclear weapons presents a significant challenge for the US to leverage its military power to accomplish its political objectives.
First of all, the GSO exists under four distinct national interests, at the core of the United States. These four core interests are established and defined as “physical security, which is generally defined as, the protection against attack on the territory and people of the United States, in order to ensure survival with fundamental values and institutions intact; promotion of values; stable international order and economic prosperity” (Bartholomees). An individual might ask, what is the GSO? In essence, they are translations of the four core interests. These core interests translate into “a promotion of American values, a preservation of American security, and bolstering American economic prosperity” (Bartholomees). While all administrations focus on these objectives, certain factors such as, evaluations of threats, individual beliefs, and predominantly distinctive circumstances cause presidents to institute different strategic ideas of America’s function in the world, resonating a shift from one goal to another. There is a possibility for insurgences to gain access to dangerous weapons. In order to achieve a high level of security, an endorsement of demo...