Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

South Ossetia Independence Claim – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

SUMMARY

The Caucus region is located at a crossroads of civilizations and an economic artery for the petroleum industry that fuels the world economy. This intersection is a historic battleground for control by outside empires and a local struggle for autonomous rule and ethnic survival. Over the centuries Moscow has influenced the region albeit not effectively yet nevertheless still the Kremlin confidently dominates the region. The Republic of Georgia, fiercely independent in the early stages of independence, began to establish new ties to lessen its dependency on Russia. As modern international law creeps into the old Soviet empire, and the region adapts to globalization, the Kremlin continues its two­pronged foreign policy. South Ossetia has become a usable pawn for Russian foreign policy as political and military power seem to trump rule of law regarding Georgian sovereignty. The region has seen a decade of strife and Russia’s actions in the region not only fuel conflict but are not aligned with international law.

INTERPRETATION – Politcal Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz Academic Research

Has South Ossetia successfully obtained recognizable independence and what are the
consequences for the mixed ethnic populations within its border?

EVIDENCE – Politcal Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

conventions
The territorial integrity of the Republic of Georgia has been legally guaranteed by several
treaties and resolutions over the past nine decades. Commencing with the 1924 Constitution of the Soviet Union Article 4: “Each one of the member Republics retains the right to freely withdraw from the Union.”¹

­­Further examination of the document states the existences and formation of autonomous “oblast” but grants no rights of withdrawal to become a sovereign state . The Republic of Georgia also ascended to the CIS in December 1993 after the dissolving of the Soviet Union. Furthermore we find recognition of Georgia and its sovereign rights in the Commonwealth of Independent States(CIS) Charter Section I. Purposes and Principles Article 1 and Article 3.² This right is clearly stated in the first article:

“The Commonwealth is based on the foundations of the equality of all of its members. The
member states are independent and equal subjects of international law.”

And in the third the duties of charter members:

In order to achieve the purposes of the Commonwealth the member states, based on generally recognized norms of international law and the Helsinki Final Act, shall build their relations in accordance with the following interconnected and equal principles: respect of the sovereignty of the member states, the inalienable rights of peoples to self­ determination and the right to determine their fate without outside interference; the inviolability of state borders, the recognition of existing borders and the rejection of unlawful territorial annexations; the territorial integrity of states and the rejection of any actions directed towards breaking up alien territory; rejection of force or the threat of force against the political independence of a member state; resolution of disputes by peaceful means in such a way that international peace, security and fairness are not threatened; supremacy of international law in interstate relations; non­interference in internal and external affairs of each other.

Additionally the Republic of Georgia is a member of the United Nations (31 July 1992) with all the rights and duties of sovereign nation. The Russian Federation seems to disregard both international law and its own constitution in its dealing with the situation in South Ossetia. The Russian Federation’s support of South Ossetia is promoting civil unrest and resultant violence in the Republic of Georgia disregarding the UN Charter Chapter 1 Article 1:1. “The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.” In addition the current Constitution of the Russian Federation Article 15 proclaims:

1. Universally recognized principles and norms of international law as well as international agreements of the Russian Federation should be an integral part of its legal system. If an international agreement of the Russian Federation establishes rules, which differ from those stipulated by law, then the rules of the international agreement shall be applied. Moscow also declares the universal right of self­determination for a people as a smoke screen to disrupt the internal affairs in Georgia while attempting to annex territory.3 The one and half year civil war in South Ossetia ignited on the government in Tbilisi decision to have Georgian as the official language. No official action was taken to repress Ossetian culture in a systematic way. When we examine line 2 of the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; “The 3UN Charter Article 2(4) All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the UN.

States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to guarantee that the rights enunciated in the present Covenant will be exercised without discrimination of any kind as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.”⁴ We can not regard the use of an official language as discrimination against an ethnic minority. The remaining 27% of Georgia’s ethnic minorities did not protest or rebel this decision. The reaction by South Ossetia starting a small ethnic civil war does not seem to fit the profile of recognizable republic. Further complicating the issue is Russia’s issuing passports to ethnic South Ossetians. The nature of the civil conflict may reveal further the violations of international law. South Ossetians who may be charged with crimes will have immunity as the Russian ederation’ Constitution does not allow for extradition of its citizens.⁵

Throughout the previously cited treaties no guarantee for the right of self­determination or state sovereignty are granted to a former Soviet oblast. Earlier in the 20th century the League of Nations charter called for self­determination of colonized peoples. However the South Ossetian population was never colonized but rather migrated to Georgia to avoid the Mongol invasions. The autonomous rights of South Ossetians to use their language as a Soviet oblast were not transferable as a duty for the Republic of Georgia. There is no legal basis under treaty law which South Ossetia can justify its attempt at independence. Treaties regarding territorial borders of sovereign states are self­executing clearly giving the Republic of Georgia dominion over its domestic affairs.

­­custom

Various tests are used by the international customs of nations to determine the status of a belligerent community and resultant recognized rights and duties. South Ossetia may claim legal international personality by de facto control over population and terrain but its ability to effectively govern is questionable. At least one third of South Ossetia’s populace is ethnic Georgian and denied the right to vote therefore it does not have complete support of the populace. Secondly by disenfranchising ethnic Georgians who refuse to change his or her citizenship to Russian, the election results have met with near universally protest. While acquisition of international personality can be accepted if done
outside constitutional norms, the civil war­like nature of the conflict and added outside influence of the Kremlin’s agitation into Georgian affairs cast doubt on the South Ossetians claim. Subjectively examining South Ossetia as a future state one discovers an isolated insurgency that economical survives through illegal trade in arms, drugs, and counterfeit currency. Violation of International Convention for the Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency sends a signal to the international community that South Ossetia permits acts that disrupt public order in other states.₆ Such toleration by the de facto government impedes its acceptance as a recognized state. If these internal problems are overcome, the fact that the Caucus mountain range divides South Ossetia from North Ossetia negates a substantial economic link urging the need to be annexed northward. An isolated insurgency without such ties has small chance of developing into a peace loving nation that could fulfill international legal obligations. Approximately 130,000 Ossetians refugees were created by this movefor independence. 100 thousand fled to North Ossetia and 30 thousand into Georgia, placing a heavy burden on the economies. This brings to the table an economic issue that the self­proclaimed Republic of South Ossetia will need to deal with in addition to political questions. The disregard for fair elections and dependency on Russia for protection displays not only inability to be independent but also shows no intent of respecting international law. South Ossetians are one of over ten different ethno­linguist groups in Georgia and a mere three percent of the total population.₇ Customary international law follows that issues regarding ethno­linguistic disputes are a domestic affair and nations have no right to interfere through subversive intervention.₈ ­­General principles of law Elections in South Ossetia have been conducted without universal and equal suffrage. The requirement of surrendering Georgian citizenship to obtain a Russian one for the right to vote has deemed the election results and referendums in South Ossetia to be invalid by the international community.₉ One may also view the South Ossetians choice of first resisting Tbilisi by use of arms as counter to the generally accepted principles of law. South Ossetia did not exhaust all legal and political
means to resolve their grievances but rather chose violence.
­­
JUDICIAL DECISIONS – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

The Russian Federation has issued passports to all etnnic Ossetians in South Ossetia in an attempt to extend its influence in the region. With the inhherent duty to protect their citizens from violence and establish a Russian passport as a requirement to vote. One can question the validity of such bestowed citizenship. In the Nottebohm Case the court ruled that no durable link existed in substituting one nationality to the next in order to fall under the protection of a neutral state.10 South Ossetians, though linguistically different, have been associated with Georgia for over 800 years. Moscow’s attempt to project nationality in hopes of limiting liability falls below minimum standards accepted by the international community.¹¹

CONCLUSION – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

The legal problems with resolving conflicts with the original Cold War twins, Korea and Vietnam, seem minor in comparison current conflicts that were frozen during the reign of the Soviet Empire. As modern international law and liberal idealism thaw these areas, centuries old differences are reemerging. Most stubborn of all is Moscow’s inability to relinquish control over its former soviet republics. The concept of self­determination for a people from the early 20th century are being stretched beyond its intended purpose of resolving situations in Europe and her colonies. The Kremlin is simultaneously using Czarist techniques in foreign policy while at the same time trying to ascend to modern treaty law for acceptance in the World Trade Organization. Situations present in the Caucus region can not just be put before a court hearing. The short comings of modern international law with the United Nations being unable to resolve it, will take patience and negotiation for a peaceful long term settlement. This approach could have been taken in the first place to save thousands of lives as the Soviet union disintegrated.

COUNTER ARGUEMENTS – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

Modern law does have its shortcomings when applied to ethno­linguistic mixed population striving for autonomy. The nightmare of the Balkans during Yugoslavia dismemberment under the watchful eye of European Union could have been avoided. The Balkans conflict was in a historical
region of influence yet they did little. Russia has been involved with Caucus region for centuries even having been invited in by Georgia to protect it from Muslim forces from Persia. Without the Kremlin’s willingness to become involved with the region’s peacekeeping duties, who will? The West may declare South Ossetian de facto independence unlawful and unwilling to support its obtainment of de jure sovereignty but at what cost of lives and properties will they again ignore a region? South Ossetians are former citizens of the Soviet Union, the issuing of Russian Federation passports has been compliant with ours laws. And most importantly where does the United Nations or any nation draw the
line and create a status quo for judging these types of conflicts? Each region is different and requires a unique solution. The issue of equality among sovereigns must be balanced against the equality among peoples.

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Politcal Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

1 1924 Constitution of the USSR http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1924_Constitution_of_the_USSR#ARTICLE_2 accessed: 12 November 2006.

2 Charter of the Commonwealth of Independent States http://www.therussiasite.org/legal/laws/CIScharter.html accessed: 5 November 2006.

4 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/a_cescr.htm entered into force: 3 January 1976 accessed 818 November 2006.

5 The constitution of the Russian Federation; Adopted 12 December 1993. Article 61(1) A citizen of the Russian Federation may not be deported from the Russian Federation or extradited to another state. (2) The Russian Federation shall guarantee its citizens protection and patronage abroad.

6 International Convention for the Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency Entry into force: 22 February 1931, http://untreaty.un.org/sample/EnglishInternetBible/partII/Treaty­14­a.htm. Accessed: 16 November 2006

7Republic of Georgia by Georgi Kokochashvili Norwegian Refugee Council. Tbilisi, regional office http://www.angelfire.com/ga/georgian/history.html accessed: 6 November 2006

8 von Glahn and Taulbee, Law Among Nations,­ An Introduction to Public International Law 8th ed.(New York: Pearson­ Longman 2007)

9 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 25(b) To vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors. entered into force: 23 March 1976. http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/a_ccpr.htm, accessed: 22 November 2006

10 The Nottebohm Case (Lichtenstein v. Guatemala), International Court of Justice 1953.

11 von Glahn and Taulbee, Law Among Nations,­ An Introduction to Public International Law 8th ed.(New York: Pearson­ Longman 2007) 207.

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Politcal Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

BIBLIOGRAPHY – South Ossetia Independence Claim – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

Alic, Jen. 15 NOV 2006. “Kosovo vs South Ossetia”. International Relations and Security Network (ISN).http://www.isn.ethz.ch/news/sw/details.cfm?ID=16920. Accessed: 20 NOV 2006.

Chew, Allen. An Atlas of Russian History, Eleven Centuries of Changing Borders. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1970.

Mchedlishvili, Nona. 6 NOV 2006 “Russia: Ossetia Pipeline Adds Fuel To The Georgia Fire”. Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty. http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/11/13dacbc1­7f2e­4b99­ 8e88­079ca5a7f35f.html. Accessed: 14 NOV 2006

Riasanovsky, Nicholas. A History of Russia, 2nd ed. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1969.

Rousseau, Richard. 10 NOV 2006. “South Ossetia’s Illegal Referendum”. Georgia Today. http://www.georgiatoday.ge/article_details.php?id=1932. Accessed 20 NOV 2006.

Von Glabyn, Gerbard and Taulbee, James Larry. Law Among Nations, An Introduction to Public International Law. 8th ed. New York: Pearson Longman, 2007.

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

---

The S.S. Lotus Judgment No. 9, Sept. 7, 1927 – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

League of Nations Official Journal: Parties: France and Turkey

SUMMARY

An incident of collision occurred on August 2nd, 1926 between the French mail steamer Lotus and Turkish coal transport vessel Boz­Kouri located on open seas outside either country’s territorial jurisdiction. The Boz­Kouri sank and eight out of eighteen Turkish nationals on board perished. The Lotus proceeded to its destination Constantinople, Turkey where the French officer on watch during the incident, Monsieur Demons, reported the incident. There he was arrested, put on trial, and convicted of offenses against Turkish citizens and property under Turkish Civil Codes. His sentence was for a duration of eighty days imprisonment and fined twenty two Turkish pounds.

The French Government mounted a protest stating they were not notified of his arrest and that Monsieur Demons be released from imprisonment and handed over the French Authorities. They also stated they had the right to jurisdiction under the Treaty of Lausanne which Turkey was also a signatory of. Turkey declined stating criminal offenses were committed against their citizens and property and they under their domestic civil codes had the jurisdiction in detaining and prosecuting Monsieur Demons. To resolve the case both parties promised to abide by the decision of League of nation’s Permanent Court of Justice. The court decided in favor of Turkish authorities in their actions and
monsieur Demons was not due any compensation.

INTERPRETATION – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz Academic Research

The question was that international law did not limit jurisdictional application of Turkey’s domestic civil codes.

EVIDENCE – Politcal Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz Academic Research

­­conventions

France’s desired the Treaty of Lausanne Article 15 to be interpreted to demonstrate Turkey violated the principals of general international law. Drafting amendments and reservations among the powers resulted in a clause limiting Turkish jurisdiction to Turkish soil was omitted. Italy and France had reservations to this amendment but did not have them included in the treaty. Common consent among the signatory parties was given to refer to the general principles of international law in regards to jurisdiction. The arguments for limiting Turkish jurisdiction during the treaty drafting could not be discovered by the court nor were these arguments brought forward by agents of the French Government. The Treaty should have been specific instead of leaving interpretation open to the generalities of customary law.

­­custom

France’s efforts to demonstrate custom of who had civil jurisdiction was not relevant to the actual question of Turkey’s limiting the extension of its jurisdiction in a criminal case. First many States had previously chose not to act in extending their jurisdiction in similar cases involving criminal acts and there was no international law preventing them from doing so, their inaction was not due to an obligation but a choice. Secondly some had extended their jurisdiction to prosecute crimes, the court citing a murder committed by a British national while on board an American vessel in international waters that was pursued by the British Government. The wide spread usage or a continued duration of the practice of limiting jurisdiction in criminal cases could not be demonstrated.

­­general principles of law

The action of Turkey detaining and prosecuting Monsieur Demons did not cause injustice. It is generally accepted by domestic legal systems to make reparations in cases involving a violation of their domestic laws. The pursuit of redressing the charges of manslaughter were legally executed.

­­ judicial decisions

If the court acted in denying Turkey the right to extend jurisdiction in a criminal case it could not base it on previous consistent judicial decisions in similar cases.

­­writings of jurists and publicists

These were cited by the court as equally supporting both view points. The court stated that just because some jurists’ writings state a wide application of principles in regards to jurisdiction in such cases this does not make them into law.

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

International Telecommunication Union (ITU) – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

The largest man-made structure on the planet is the immense telecommunication network. From mobile phones to communication satellites, this system has become a seamless part of daily lives and international relations. Being one of the fastest growing aspects of the 20th century, an era of great strife for humanity, one would expect its regulation to have been equally chaotic. However, its importance to modern society has established it as a model of cooperation not often found amongst sovereign states. The international governmental organization mandated to oversee this is the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). Virtually every member of the United nations(UN) has acceded to its convention and it has defectively reigned although it has no enforcement authority.¹

The ITU is a unique model for cooperation and in this easy a chronological description of its creation and past functions will be used to understand the issues it faces today. The rapid advance of telecommunications has paved the way for increased interconnection of states leading to overlapping of jurisdictions and calls for reform. The success of the ITU as a cooperative body has stood the test of time but as one shall learn, may soon either evolve into a governing body or become a political battleground as globalization’s unknown course rushes into the future. The ITU is a specialized UN agency created in 1947, revised in 1967, then reformed in 1997. A UN member states accede by signing two documents, the ITU constitution and convention.

Withdrawal is possible but has an effective date one year after signing out. Membership is possible for non-UN members in the private and public organizations and requires approval by vote by two-thirds of member states. These are called sectors members, are a national entity, and have non-voting status. Assisting in development of standards and supporting/financing study groups are its function.² Additionally, Associate Members may join the ITU, also non-voting, to assist in study groups. Voting rights are only allocated to UN Member States, Sector and Associate Members views and advice are represented by their respective member state. Currently there are 191 UN Members, 575 Sector Members and 150 Associate Members. Headquartered in Geneva, a plenipotentiary conference of members convenes every four or five years, at which it elects an administrative council of 29 members. Daily functions are managed by a permanent General Secretariat. The ITU employees 702 people from 83 different countries. Employment attempts to promote diversity while hiring only extremely qualified experts. The stringent qualifications for employment aid in its acceptance of its Recommendations by sovereign states when setting international standards.³ To accomplish its tasks, 197 different activities, the ITU has a biennial budget of US$320 million. The mechanism for determining dues is based on a specific unit and members donate according to financial ability to pay a fraction or multiple fractions of a unit. The system is somewhat complex and instead a simple breakdown of contributions is as follows:

• Member States, which account for 67.3%
• Sector Members contribute 11.4%
• Associates contribute 0.9%
• Sale of publications, project execution, satellite notifications 15.1%.4
• Income from interest (5.3% of total funding).

The complexity of the world’s telecommunication has the ITU departmentalized in three sectors: Standardization ,Radio communication, and Development. The basic mandate of the ITU is to maintain, extend, and harmonize international cooperation in all aspects of telecommunications.₅

The main areas of concern are:
• Standardize and regulate international radio and telecommunications.
• Extend and improve telecommunication by allotting radio frequencies.
• Encourages the establishment of low rates.
• Perfect communications in rescue operations.⁶

Standardize, extend, improve, encourage, and perfect are smooth words which are rarely used by a Realist entrenched the concept of Westphalian sovereignty. Furthermore, its convention’s preamble states, “While fully recognizing the sovereign right of each State to regulate its telecommunication”. The concept of telecommunication and its ease of penetrating borders can be a threat to a sovereign state.

So how is it, without the means of enforcement, does the ITU accomplish its mandate? There is an ITU strategy:

• Stay on top of technological advancement, taking input from interested actors.
• Make recommendations which receive formal international recognition.
• Suggest mechanisms for disputes.
• Considers impacts on all actors- states, organizations, and citizens.

The uniqueness of its function is in the method of cooperation. Since telecommunication affects states, regions, businesses, individuals , and non-governmental entities, one would assume an overwhelming amount of conflicts of interests.

The ITU has five major factors allotting its operation– 1) its longstanding as the accepted body for the task by the international community. 2) the preemptive nature of avoiding conflicts 3) its non-political nature, choosing pragmatism over international law to overcome politics 4) experts that recommend the best possible solution (and consequences. 5) An accepted dispute resolution mechanism.

The can easily comprehend the above items 1 though 4 and only 5 needs explanation. The ITU will provide the parties involved “special assistance”, neutral & professional advice. Having no real enforcement power the ITU has four options states can choose in settling disputes.⁷

1) Use the existing bi-lateral or multi-lateral instruments between states.
2) Agree upon any other method
3) Arbitration- single arbitrator* or a collegiate court composed of 3 members
a) one appointed by each party or side
b) then jointly select a third, neutral member.
*If no agreeable single arbitrator is found, each side nominates one and then is selected by the ITU Secretary drawing lots. This process is also used to determine the third
member of a collegiate court if none is agreed upon.
4) Optional Additional Protocol- a portion of the ITU member countries have accepted a compulsory arbitration. This based on the extraordinary expertise of the ITU and its avoidance of political matters.

Still, these decisions are not binding. The arguments against these methods is based on the extreme importance of telecommunications. Adherents for change demand more power to settle disputes. Those in favor of these methods counter with historical facts, actors are more likely to resolve a problem quickly when offered various means of resolution.⁸ Being the second oldest international organization makes a chronological look at past challenges and adaptations a challenge. However, it is essential to understand the effects telecommunications has had on sovereignty. There is exponentially rapid development in the relationship between international communications and issues such as positive and negative human rights. Understanding how this will play out, how it will be resolved, and who shall decide in the near future, are a few of the questions. Yet in telecommunications the unforeseen has been the status quo. The ITU states, ” international cooperation among peoples…”, but as one shall see, the definition of “peoples” has changed. The 19th century ushered in the telegram (1844) and a host of issues, one being access to telegram service by the general public (1854). A decade later multilateral and bilateral treaties were established to send early communiqués via telegraph across state boundaries.⁸

The conglomeration of protocols diminished the effectiveness of state to state communication. Then in Paris in 1865, 20 states signed an agreement creating the International Telegraph Convention. This would indicate a positive move in the international relations but in reality it monopolized the system into a sovereign club as they were free to regulate access and tariffs upon their populations. Telegraph services, and the newly invented telephone,came under governmental jurisdiction. Britain was excluded from the union until 1871 until it finally nationalized its privately owned communication system.⁹ The basic objectives of the union are still in existence today. Sovereign states had surrendered little authority over their dominions and received tremendous benefits from this regime. The early twentieth century ushered in radio communications at an astronomical rate without a viable regime to oversee it. A prime example from 1902 on the chaos involved a well wishing Prince Henry of Prussia departing the United States after a visit with President Theodore Roosevelt. The radio telegram sent on a Telefunken unit from his sailing vessel was refused a relay by a US-based operator on the grounds that they were receiving a the transmission on a Marconi unit. This led to the first International Radio Telegram conference (1906) in Berlin. Oddly, the United States was hesitant to attend until it was deemed constitutional legitimate for the federal government to become involved in this area of commerce. The issues became slightly political as more sates joined various communications unions that covered each new technological development. European powers began insisting on voting rights for their colonies to increase the weight of their influence on regulations. The ITU as we know today , an umbrella for all aspects of telecommunications, was founded by a merger in 1934 of the original ITU (1865) and International Radiotelegraph Convention (1906) both based in Europe. The importance of this fact is that attempts were being made in Washington in producing a regime. In 1927, while the IRC began allocated frequency bands to different radio services, the International Radio Consultative Committee (CCIR) was established at a conference held in Washington D.C.¹⁰ In the following decades there was an explosion in the number of international shortwave radio stations and arrival of television broadcasting, increased conflicts between ideological systems, capitalism versus communism, a world war, and a
collapse of the European colonial system. The 1934 merger creating ITU withstood it, had separate competing regimes been in place, today’s world of cooperative telecommunication would be a distant fantasy. The modern ITU from 1947 was established as a UN specialized agency right at the start of the Cold War.

One would expect the ITU to be involved with disputes regarding Voice of America and Soviet broadcasts but this is not the case. As sovereign states still monopolized content and the ITU regulating standards and frequencies. The real challenge was ushered with the successful launching of the Soviet’s satellite Sputnik in Soon the ITU would be faced with some very difficult decisions, from what angle should they regulate this new technology, on the basis of international law during an era of opposing ideological systems or pragmatism?11 The issue was settled by a decision in 1964 by the Kennedy administration, realizing treaty negotiations would be too complex, to allow access to US communication satellites to further increase cooperation and prosperity amongst its democratic partners.12 As per usual, the ITU began studying the question in 1959 before the issue reached an apex. The pragmatic recommendations in allocating frequencies and uses put forth by the ITU were accepted by both East and West. The real challenges to the ITU were to soon arrive and the lock down on control of telecommunications by sovereign states was soon to be challenged. The transistorized age of communications created an era of change that one today takes for granted. This change opened up the state monopoly on communications. Two theories, the little bang and big bang, attempt to explain this. The former in that the massive influx of new technologies developed by private industry overwhelmed state telecoms. In the latter case, due to pressure from private industries and consumers, governments lessened their grip on domestic markets.13 States had been using domestic markets in a pyramid scheme.

High tariffs on international communications supported the domestic telephone systems, high domestic telephone tariffs supported a monopoly allowing high wage union jobs, and additional income from controlling all telecommunications help support domestic postal systems. These changes wereresulted in a revision of the ITU in 1967 that began allowing Sector and Associate members. In the following decades, both international competition in telecommunications and the voices of lesser developed countries (LDC) increased, resulting in the opening of domestic markets to foreign competition. In 1985 the ITU responded to LDC demands and every country was allocated at least one satellite orbit and band of frequencies.14 The previous system allotted on a first come, first serve basis. Soon afterwards, the ITU began providing technical assistance to LDC and reshape its image.15 The 1990’s saw a major shift as markets themselves began controlling telecommunications as opposed to states. As private companies began launching satellites and packaging ditial services, the ITU in 1992 reformed itself to adapt to the changing world.16 To increase flexibility, it divided responsibilities into three sectors; Standardization , Radio Communication, and Development. Consequently, consumer protection these reforms began adding a layer of protection from market controlled telecommunications, something that was difficult to accomplish while states reigned over domestic markets Before examining today’s challenges, there are two past incidents regarding politics and international law, that shed light on the future of the ITU. In 1982, the Arab States began using the plenipotentiary meeting as pulpit on which to vent political ideology condemning Israel. This was quickly ended when the United States threatened to pull out of the conference and union.₁₇

The concept here is that the state financing a majority of the ITU budget could influence the behavior of sates in the union. This may have ramifications for the ITU as the world’s wealth is shifting to various axes. And on a side political note, many Arab states add reservations to agreements at conferences stating, ““that the signature and possible ratification by their respective Governments of the Final Acts of this Conference, should not be valid for the ITU Member under the name“Israel”, and in no way whatsoever imply its recognition by these Governments.” An interesting thorn in the pawn of international law was the explosion of pirate radios tations (PRS) starting in 1959. As member states accept the norms of international telecommunications under Recommendations of the ITU, the PRS slipped through both the cracks of international law and ITU convention. Freedom to transmit from vessels outside sovereign territories is permissible the High Seas Convention yet is contrary to ITU regulations. Without the power to enforce regulations, it must rely on the state of a ship’s registry to do so, and it may not be capable or care to. The ITU forward two solutions to combat this but they ended up being ineffective. When the conventions were modified to include floating vessels from illegal broadcasting, PRS only needed to attach to the sea floor to skirt this regulation. The next attempt was to allow port authorities to search vessels for equipment used by PRS when docked. But they could only report their findings and not take any action. These examples only illustrate the fragile nature of the regime in regards to enforcement. The 21st Century’s impact on telecommunications by the use of millions of devices are not only raising calls for additional authority to be embellished in the ITU, but also is forcing a merger between different international regimes. Glottalization for example is causing a new hybrid form of telecommunication as mobile phones and the Internet become inseparable. How shall international regimes distribute authority over the Internet, telecommunication, trade in services, and developing affordable access? If one examines this chart from created by the Working Group on Internet Governance, a brief discussion can be made possible mergers, conflicts , or redundancy in jurisdiction that may occur.

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is a non-profit us based company acting under an agreement to control the ARPA addressing system of the Internet.18 As telecommunication and the Internet merge the question has been put forth on why much of the Internet is under is under US control.19 Counter to promoting technology to assist LDC, up until October 2009 the system was based on Latin
characters excluding a majority of the world’s population.20 But if ICANN’s responsibilities are shifted to the ITU will sovereign states gain more domestic control as the only voting members. The ITU convention preamble clearly states , “While fully recognizing the sovereign right of each State to regulate its telecommunication.” If we combine this with the fact ITU financial support comes from state donations and the world’s fastest growing economy is steered by an authoritarian regime, will the future Internet be steered according to the wealthiest actor? Will technological assistance in the future to LDC be a way for a authoritarian regulator of the Internet to extend power? And if sovereign states reel in control rather than market forces, what will be the impact on the citizenry? Hedgemons often set standards and in this age of information its
impact is unknown.21 If the duties of WIPO are transfered to the ITU, then the entire nature of the system changes into a police security oversight agencies? But then again where would enforcement lie? Where the copyright material was violated, where the violators committed the act, or which country the violators are citizens of? This issue obviously needs to stay clear of merging with the ITU. The WTO currently ignores the billions of dollars in traded services flowing through ITU jurisdiction, what if they were negotiate settlements contrary to current norms?22 Would the ITU respond to encroach on its territory with a Recommendation, or allow international law to win out as stated in its
first method of dispute settlement? The result would be a whole new ITU. Since the current system adapts and is a long respected regime, some cross over in jurisdiction should be considered an inconvenience. Finally, UNCTAD’s responsibilities in developing e-commerce might benefit from the overlapping due to ITU expertise and extensive non-state sector and associate members. Reality is how one perceives it and the inclusive, professional, and objective operations of the ITU are model for other UN agencies. But in a evolving world with these crossover mandates and jurisdictions, it is surprising to see the current list of topics roaming the headquarter halls in Geneva.23 • Accessibility : Achieving equitable communication for everyone

• Confronting the financial crisis : Its impact on the ICT industry
• Climate Change and ITU : Promoting the use of ICTs to combat climate change
• Cyber security, Spam & Cybercrime : Confidence and security in the use of ICTs
• Connecting the unconnected by 2015 : Bridging the digital divide
• Saving lives : Telecommunication is critical at all phases of disaster management
• Networks of the future : Next Generation Networks & Global Standards

It seems that everything under the sun comes up on their radar screen and crosses over with a multitude of UN agencies, governments, international governmental and non-government organizations, as well as businesses and local agencies. The guiding instrument as a recommending body may either be further elevated or completely reformed into a more authoritative body under these kinds of circumstances. How will the agency react when constituent members begin to engage in cyber wars? Is this an aggressive act condemned by the UN Charter or does it require the ITU to be involved? Will member states remain and support the ITU if a cyber war occurs? With no enforcement mechanism, will its internationally recognized norm of Recommendations be an adequate measure in a cyber conflict. The ITU has been extremely effective in dealing with the most rapid changes in human history by the most humble means. Its fundamental objectives since inception have always been at the forefront trumping politics and conflict. Even sovereign states have come to terms over technological issues in this arena while denouncing each other at the podium of the UN General Assembly. Indeed, the world has realized it cannot function in the modern age without the ITU. The challenging issues which are now called for to be included into its mandate will only drag in politics as usually. Its motto is “connecting the world”, not “correcting the world.” A regime that attempts to provide fairness and objectivity to benefit all members, may need to be isolated from social, economic, environmental, and political issues. If not we may find the answer to the first question sent via telecommunications, “What has God wrought?”

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Politcal Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

1 The exceptions are Palau, East Timor, and Taiwan. The Palestinian Authority has observer status.

2 Many international agencies which set standards do not have this unique characteristic. 3 The word, “Recommendations”, is capitalized when referring to the ITU, symbolizing its acceptance.

3 The word, “Recommendations”, is capitalized when referring to the ITU, symbolizing its acceptance.

4 Limited free information only available, via the ITU website, as required by a UN agencies.

5 International Telecommunication Union Website . http://www.itu.int. Accessed 28 OCT 2009.

6 Medical transports in conflicts are an exception as they are permitted to broadcast in any available frequencies in chaotic situations under “Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949” superseding ITU Recommendations.

7 International Telecommunication Union Website . http://www.itu.int. Accessed 28 OCT 2009.

8 Lacking standardized equipment, messages were walked over borders, and retransmitted to the next frontier.

9 Williams, M.B. “International Standards for Telecommunications.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Vol. 289, No. 1356,(1978): 186.

10 Concerning fixed, maritime and aeronautical mobile, broadcasting, amateur and experimental radio.

11 Dalfe,C.M., André Bissonnette, Pierre Juneau, and Ivan Vlasic. “International Legal Problems of Direct Satellite Broadcasting.”The University of Toronto Law Journal, Vol. 20, No. 3 (1970): 331

12 The US launched its first first geostationary communications satellite Syncom-1 in 1963.

13 Kishan, Daya. “Lost in Space.” Foreign Policy, No. 124 (2001): 70.

14 Staple, Gregory. “The New World Satellite Order: A Report from Geneva.” The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 80, No. 3 (1986): 700.

15 Röller, Lars-Hendrik and Waverman, Leonard. “Telecommunications Infrastructure and Economic Development: A Simultaneous Approach.” The American Economic Review, Vol. 91,No. 4 (2001): 912.

16 Peter Cowhey. “The International Telecommunications Regime: The Political Roots of Regimes for High Technology.” International Organization, Vol. 44, No. 2 (1990): 179.

17 Gegg, Donna. “Capitalizing on National Self-Interest: The Management of International Telecommunication Conflict by the International Telecommunication Union.” Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 45, No. 1, (1982) 42.

18 ARPA is a backronym for Address and Routing Parameter Area, the Internet addressing system.

19 The U.S. private sector controls about 85 percent of the Internet’s underlying infrastructure. European nations often complain about the legality of the US government assigning authority to a private organization. Andrew Muarry and Colin Scott. “Controlling the New Media: Hybrid Responses to New Forms of Power.” The Modern Law Review, Vol. 65, No. 4 (2002): 516.

20 For example [email protected] , will soon be accessed by Путин@кремль.рф.

21 Lazer, David.”Regulatory Capitalism as a Networked Order: The International System as an Informational Network.“ Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 598, (2005): 52.

22 Gilston, Samuel. “A Weekly Report for Business Executives on U.S. Trade Policies, Negotiations, Legislation, Export Controls and Trade Laws.” Samuel Gilston Vol. 26, No. 48 (2006). 1-2.

23 International Telecommunication Union Website . http://www.itu.int. Accessed 28 OCT 2009.

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Politcal Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year

BIBLIOGRAPHY – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

Cowhey, Peter. “The International Telecommunications Regime: The Political Roots of Regimes for High Technology.” International Organization, Vol. 44, No. 2 (1990): 169-199.

Dalfe,C.M., André Bissonnette, Pierre Juneau, and Ivan Vlasic. “International Legal Problems of Direct Satellite Broadcasting.”The University of Toronto Law Journal, Vol. 20, No. 3 (1970): 314-332

Gegg, Donna. “Capitalizing on National Self-Interest: The Management of International Telecommunication Conflict by the International Telecommunication Union.” Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 45, No. 1, (1982): pp. 37-52.

Gilston,Samuel. “A Weekly Report for Business Executives on U.S. Trade Policies, Negotiations, Legislation, Export Controls and Trade Laws.” Samuel Gilston Vol. 26, No. 48 (2006): 1-2.

Kishan, Daya. “Lost in Space.” Foreign Policy, No. 124 (2001): 70-71

Lazer, David.”Regulatory Capitalism as a Networked Order: The International System as an Informational Network.“ Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 598, (2005) 52-66.

Röller, Lars-Hendrik and Waverman, Leonard. “Telecommunications Infrastructure and Economic Development: A Simultaneous Approach.” The American Economic Review, Vol. 91, No. 4 (2001): 909-923

Williams, M.B. “International Standards for Telecommunications.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 289, No. 1356,(1978): 185-205

Murray, Andrew and Scott, Colin. “Controlling the New Media: Hybrid Responses to New Forms of Power.” The Modern Law Review, Vol. 65, No. 4 (2002): 491-516. Staple, Gregory. “The New World Satellite Order: A Report from Geneva.” The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 80, No. 3 (1986): 699-720

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

---

Eastern European Politics – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

An independent study of Eastern Europe has offered me an opportunity to pinpoint crucial areas briefly covered in traditional studies. In selecting an advanced study of the Balkans and the Eastern European countries before, during, and after Soviet domination, not only enlightened me to its historical and economic development but also the impact on world events. Often this region appears in history only when major states interact and it is if these nations did not exist otherwise. My majoring in International studies requires the development of analytical skills in a world sphere as compared to a vacuum. For example Napoleon’s loss at Waterloo redirected a century of continental history while the Battle of Mohacs changed Hungarian politics for centuries yet the weight given to the events is often imbalanced. When comparing the United States history some of our actions in the 1930’s to save agricultural sector by governmental buying at guaranteed prices then dumping at low prices on the world market are praised as saving the nation from socialism. Yet at the same time this depressing of agricultural products prices in Southeastern Europe devastated their economies paving the way for right-wing takeovers.

The cultural uniqueness of the Balkans region however is overshadowed by the clash of civilizations and the failure of the major powers to resolve the centuries of conflicts. The new frontier in political science with the end of the Cold War will be at the borders of major civilizations, the Trans-Caucuses, Southeast Asian Peninsula, Central Asian Republics. As we awaken from our Cold War attitude that these regions were not just the battle grounds for super powers but historical time bombs that have been reactivated. By examining each of the Balkan states I have not focused on just learning the encyclopedic facts of who lead the nation or which and how much of what crop they produce rather the internal and external forces that have shaped the political environment that they are currently in. The analysis of the lingering problems in the region will help me better understand and apply a thorough analysis of any multi-cultural irredentist lands I may encounter. Instead of a major review of facts I would like to present my opinions on possible solutions for the current situation in Eastern and Southeastern Europe.

The exposure to Eastern European history has remarkably raised my comprehension of American and Russian history. Observing changes in a domestic policies of a major state having devastating effects on the populace of Eastern Europe. Current development in this region which was retarded under Soviet control has again returned to where it left off in 1919. A spark of democracy followed by a shift to the political right and entrenchment into a nation sate. As is the post-World War I era, the post-Soviet era finds the region entangled in legacy. This new flat world has eroded some of the legacy that has retarded economic growth for the Asian Tigers, Ireland, and India as prime examples. Eastern European attitudes have returned to previous goals along previous ideologies. rather than embracing this new world. When states are becoming less important, the governments seem to retreating into self centered policies. The attempted ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia has in reality wiped clean any ideas of foreign investment in the region for years to come. Recent Polish elections have shifted both the Sejm and presidency to the right-wing platforms. Combined with recent confrontations with Russia over trade and energy has taken Poland from possible status as a link in Europe to a thorn. Current events in Moldavia have bridges in cities barricaded halting trade, the reason a dispute over which alphabet to use in schools. The industrial sector of Hungary is once again attaching itself to Germany as place of low cost outsourcing and of course the Ukrainians split over elections during the Orange Revolution. Is it possible to find any movement forward in the region? And how do we in the West view these future states after going from decades of planning to penetrate their airspace to penetrating their markets. I have come to a few conclusions about what could be done in the region and how we as the victors in the Cold War, or at least the ones left standing, are missing an opportunity.

Academia has many theories into what caused the collapse of the Soviet Empire:

• Loss of legitimacy and popular support.
• Inefficiency of a command economy
• Unenthusiastic leadership and diminished belief in their mission.
• Popular unrest.
• Globalization, modern communication, and travel.
• The reforms of Gorbachev.
• Communism was a foreign ideology to the region
• Nomenklatura went from shooting each other to bribing one another.
• Market economy outpacing in the arms race.

Regardless of the theory the fall came fast and hard. The West was unprepared yet popular belief has a bold new world ahead of us with better times awaiting. if we learn anything from this it is that erosion of a system is due to unheeded warnings. Similar to the alarms sounded before the shake up we are currently faced with leadership unwilling to make hard choices for the future. Taking that which I learned in this independent study is we are faced with a similar situation. The Cold War is now an Hot War, from the largest atomic bomb to the smallest computer chip, the world is racing forward. The challenge of academia today is not only the identification of the erosive factors but involvement in the influencing our leadership of these currently ignored dangers. Capitalism did not bury Communism economically by design but the latter’s choice of direction base too firmly on ideology and not reality. Are we currently so entrenched in a open free market system that we also are ignoring some of its rotting realities?

The understanding the Ottoman Empire’s influence in the Balkans for the last 400 years and the complexity Russian Foreign Policy in the 20th century are crucial elements in my International Studies career. The Ottoman Empire is labeled the Sickman of Europe but never defined in detail as to why. When I look at the command structure, influences of Islamic law on foreign policy, and corruption that existed in its domination of the Balkans One can see how it did not evolve to meet changing world challenges. I was fascinating at the fairly decent treatment awarded the Balkan populace as opposed to annihilation. Yet the region was frozen in a vacuum and had not defrosted until Tito’s death. The corrupt Ottoman magnates i not only created a resentment as a legacy to their corrupt rule but by not allowing the necessary institutions to develop, the future of the Balkans in embracing the modern world is bleak.

When I previously looked at the countries of the Warsaw Pact I was under the impression they were a cohesive unit ready to spearhead westward into Europe . The exposure to the individual countries’ development and directions attempted under Soviet influence was extremely varied. The Soviets in the East failed to cultivate these differences to strengthen them as potential allies just as much as the West is doing now. The revolts and eventually changes in the Soviet world is so much more than the fall of Berlin to the fall of the Berlin Wall. Had the Soviet elite followed the Roman Empires style of controlling the conquered by separate treaties and negotiations with each country, they may have held their empire together longer. History shows however that these satellite nations closely watched Moscow’s treatment and amount of tolerance each was allowed with the others reacting according. The ruling Communist Party seemed intoxicated by Marxist ideology and all its decisions towards reforms in the satellite states were Stalinist in nature.

One of the most overlooked aspects of the Balkans troubles is the agriculture sector. So much attention is paid to the current ethnic and religious differences compounded by irredentism, that the basis of creating modern civilization, successful agriculture, is still not addressed. I hope to offer my in sights to key areas that are opportunities in improving this dilemma. Success or failure in the fields of a nation transfer to the political foundations of a society. Looking at the post-WWI American rural sector in the case of failure and upsetting a political structure to the reforms in China’s policies in rural markets propelling a nation towards economic fulfillment, land reform and the institutions to compliment it are of utmost importance. My reaction to agricultural reforms after the Great War were that though filled with good intent were destined to fail. Bureaucracies never seem to comprehend a peasant’s view of the world. Giving a man a financial loan, the right to vote, and fixing prices on inputs does nothing for someone illiterate that needs land and markets. Creating functional institutions that assist in educating a farmer with his needs should take precedence over a government agency created to oversee the distribution of funds.

The world is now engaged in competing in the only surviving economic system from the Cold War. Opinions are varied on what caused the Soviet to implode but little is said about what steps could have been corrected to “bury us”economically. We only need to look at the success of Red china to see a successful economic model for growth. The Chinese relaxed regulations on agricultural policies away from collectivization, priming the economy and while backing off on heavily centralized industrialization. The Soviet model was successful in centralized heavy industry built by the parasitic destruction of the agricultural but as in all rapid economic growth reached a plateau. Here is where the continuation of both collectivization and lack of consumer goods allowed the economy to deteriorate. If we include all the potential consumers of the Soviet Empire, add in some liberalization of agricultural combined with light industries, the collapse could have been stopped. I base this on two things that has happened since the collapse, peoples desire for the past benefits and security of Socialism (it provides much more for people than autocracy) and the underlining jealousies towards the West as modern communications penetrated eastward noting what they were lacking. Just a small growth in consumer goods would have had a major psychological impact on the oppressed masses of the East. The riots in Poland were over increases in food prices, in Hungary over restraints on the attempts at small economic reforms, and the Czechs desire for “communism with a human face”. The Soviet Army had liberated these areas from the grip of Nazi Germany and with the memory of pre-war dictatorships, any improvement would have been cherished. In today’s world we witness economic success in formations of regional zones that collaborate, European Union and NAFTA as prime examples. The opportunity missed in reforms under Khrushchev were the first holes to appear in the hull of the Soviet ship.

The future stability of Eastern Europe revolves around economic issues as the era of nation states aggressively taking territory seems to have ended. Involvement of outside major European powers has left a regional legacy of economic backwardness. As with in other underdeveloped countries the influence of economic aid is often wasted by corrupt leadership leaving a debt ridden nation begging for loan forgiveness. After all of the World Banks efforts and eventually bailouts one major lesson can be learned. Reform must take place for this economic assistance to blossom. Unfortunately an impoverished nation’s leadership will not impose the reforms necessary as the lead to sacrifices for his people. These changes often cause the government to loose power as the cycle of economic stagnation continues. Why is this important? If we look at Eastern Europe and the Balkans closely we can pinpoint the strengths of the region and offer solutions. Stability is achieved through the creation of a middle class and democratic institutions.

The mosaic of countries all offer a piece to the puzzle in solving the regions problems. Before examining each country I recommend the formation of regional unions to resolve issues. Just joining the European Union is not a cure all. I have heard economists state the changes necessary to meet entry standards are pressuring change. Once again European history is repeating itself as the West attempts to force Eastern Europe in its own image. On an individual basis, these eastern nations had failed in modernizes there institutions in the 20^th century. The Wilsonian blade that carved out democracies evolved into Nationalistic fiefdoms interested in expansion over development. In the 19^th Century the struggles of the regions people to form independent nations shifted in mild Fascism. Hungary’s Magyar elites, Poland’s Marshall Pilsudski, Bulgaria’s Stamboliski, and Romania’s King Carol II are just a few examples of the regions right- shift away from parliamentarian democracy. What we are witnessing now is the resurgence of this nationalistic tendencies in some parts of the region.

When I recommend the European Union as not being an answer for a remedy than what is? First a look at Poland which contrary to my previous statement, rightly entered the EU. The is an imbalance of power with the Franco-German coalition in the EU and Poland’s entry combined with its growing ties with Great Britain and the USA, will keep the EU off balance. The aging population, high unemployment combined with a generous social safety net is a growing problem. I view EU expansion in the east as their solution to resolving longterm economic problems that they do not currently have the political courage to change now. It will be a great disadvantage for Southeastern Europe to attach itself without the economic muscle of its own to politically compete in the EU. Poland as a ever present thorn in side of its eastern neighbor, Russia, in its last elections moved to the political right. With unavoidable internal reform necessary and a millennium of misunderstanding with Russia, the EU should in my opinion stay off the world stage and strengthen its region. Getting involved with external conflicts at this time be it in the Balkans or Middle East while it is a house divided would be disastrous. As a political union it needs more maturity to be a world leader. Dragging old world Catholic Poland into the EU could have been a large enough bite to chew on.

One would predict a nation like Hungary and Czech Republic to be preferred candidates for the EU but I would have choose otherwise. With less economic ties to Russia’s heavy industries and a history of collaboration with foreign nationals within its borders ,I would choose them to lead a regional organization in Southeastern Europe. Both have an educated population, experience at lighter industries (easily convertible to consumer goods), and most importantly, they understand how to keep their institutions functioning in the advent of foreign domination. Rather than allowing Southeastern Europe to become a destination for outsourcing by the West’s corporation, the region needs some self-determined involvement in its future. If economic based decisions are made from outside, development will be uneven and not coordinated towards long term growth. Examples could start in the areas of infrastructure and economic co-ordination. Recent problems along the Danube River have made headlines in the. Would a regional river authority in the nature of the Tennessee River Valley Authority be successful? The two prong attack of taming the river and creating electrical energy for economic growth seems a wonderful idea, but should not be funded conditionally by outside investment. The World bank with its economic requirements or the US with political allegiance and human rights demands are not the answer. An internally based solution giving these nations something at stake will bring peace and prosperity. Alternatives are Hungary becoming a EU industrial site for the production involving hazardous materials, Slovenia as a tourist destination (currently rated as the EU’s number one destination, Bulgaria as Europe’s poor gardener, and a Serbia sweltering in anger. Hungary and the Czech Republic have had numerous border shifts and would be politically sympathetic in co-ordinating a regional union.

Avoidance at looking to outside the region for economic ties and political alliance should be a goal of the region. The improving water, rail, and roads between the nations to allow increased trade and mobility of cultures within would make the region more stable by developing institutions necessary but a string region would attract foreign investment. The Balkans has been blessed with beautiful terrain but cursed with transportation obstacles. The cost of getting to the region to do business should be shared by nations desiring entry into this market. Desperate for foreign business, all too often governments gamble on port , bridge, or airport construction only to place the tax burden on its population. The leading economic powers have the necessary capital to invest in a region for longterm interests. Foreign powers have attempted to use alliance as pawns with the results being revolutions and world wars. An political alliance of Southeastern Europe’s nations built up from economic collaboration would hold together much better than a piece of paper from France or England. An alliance of Slovenia, Croatia, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Bulgaria, and Romania would be my recommendation for the region. I view the minor coalition on settled nomadic tribes and small ethnic minorities coalition as having the best chance of prosperity in the region. By our standards probably not successful but the process of modernization has failed by the influence and intrusion of the outside forces. In leaving out Serbia-Monte Negro and Macedonia I am not acknowledging failure at a solution rather an understanding at their ancient behavioral problems that are rectifiable.

Centuries of Ottoman domination and resulting legacy of Muslim’s influence in the Balkans seem to have left a recipe for continued violence in the former Yugoslavia. When ethnic violence erupted between Muslims, Croats, and Serbs, the Western European nations did not have the resolve to enter and put an end to the genocide. If they had economic interests their behavior may have been different. Setting up assembly and light manufacturing to outsource work is not an lasting economic commitment as such operations will always move to areas with lower costs. Where does a benefit arise in the Ottoman legacy in the Balkans? Looking at the recent resistance of Europeans towards the Turkey’s entry into their Christian club, there has to be an alternative. Alienating Turkey away from Western Christendom during heightened frictions between the Middle East and modern world is short-sighted. Having a successful SE European Union that has experienced a Christian-Islam mix as a buffer between the clashing continents may bridge the cultural communication gap rather than becoming a wall. The region has long been a cross roads for trade, reinstating its importance would in the long term seem essential.

In closing, my independent study course not only provided detailed knowledge but also increased my enthusiasm in my other courses. My current classes include 20^th Century Russian History, Comparative Economic Systems, and American History 1900-1945, combined with working knowledge of Eastern Europe, I am able to “link” all the courses together. I was unaware before this work of the amount of primary source documents covering the ancient nomadic tribes that settled in Europe, to 19^th century poems of Hungarian patriots, and the tell-tale telephone conversation between dictators and would-be-liberators of the Soviet Era. As a Liberal Arts student given the freedom to chart a course along my interests has been inspiring.

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

---

Trade interdependence and peace – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

An end to discussion [political] and an agreed standard economic model [one-size fits all] would seem to be a decree of economic intelligentsia about a decade and half ago as “the” solution to world’s ailing economies. Cold War goals no longer placed free market
capitalism in a race for supremacy with communism and the ideological guidelines that outpaced the socialist experiment had solutions based on economic models observing ceteris paribus. Liberalism was no longer responding to the left’s call for equity as market efficiency was the clear victor in modeling growth oriented economies. The stripped-down solution to fix LDC (Lesser Developed Countries) problems are the product of agreement on what economic model worked in the Western world. Any ideas outside this “consensus” were left out because this pre-scaled structure would produce not only economic benefits from growth but reduce a myriad of injustices as a side product. Equity would basically fall like fruit from a growing tree of economic efficiency. Yes indeed reducing intervention by the states promotes competition in markets around the globe but unfortunately the results were laissez-unfaire. The results of such a straightforward solution can be given the following analogy for economic aid using as an example an often abused substance, alcohol. Here’s a statement we can all get a consensus on, “Alcohol (aid) relieves pain”. You (LDC) are in pain ( social, financial, political) and you go see the Doctor (IMF / World Bank). We will all admit the well-trained medical physicians are assumed smarter about health so we rely on them. Our choice of doctors is limited and the only one willing to treat you has an easy solution for pain… alcohol. Since you need help and he’s there, you except. A little ingestion of alcohol and we all agree we feel better. Remember when you made that appointment, they asked you the reason and you said “pain”? Since the Doctor has one solution, why should he diagnose your problem? Your there, you trust him, and it’s easy to relieve the pain- but we all know alcohol affects everyone differently at different times and in different amounts. And the first person to blame when the pain killer subsides but the pain is still there? The person who prescribed the medicine to you? You get hooked- you are going to beg for more? Some people should never touch the stuff? We all have friends who are fun or mean drunks. I do not think I need to continue to show the analogy, the answer is simple, the Washington Consensus has gone on too long and the problems that have surfaced from it will require a not only rethinking but double the commitment. The patient suffering needs to be part of the solution and supplier of the medicine needs to be more educated on its effects. All the fundamental economic rules are there in the WC (Washington Consensus) but continued crisis around the world seemed similar to substituting your stock broker for a bailbondsman. Having a working model to apply is one thing, keeping committed to adjusting it is another. Is growth the simple solution? Obviously not and this liberal idea of open markets comes from a central authoritarian economic committee who’s technique much resembles other failed economic systems. I will try and examine the consensus commandments and hopefully we can sober them up enough so they can walk home on their own. Often an author’s point of view is critical in examining their ideas but since this is a consensus, I felt a few words about the environment of where he is published would be relevant to understanding the POV of WC supporters. Williamson’s articles are typically published by Institute for International Economics located in Washington DC. From their website one can look at their board of directors, or should I say Economic All-Stars. Rather than mention the list, though I was stunned by the experience gathered in one place, I tallied the board’s thirty-five members backgrounds pie-charted it accordingly. ( I wish I had the list from 20 years ago) The backgrounds seem to weigh in the side of liberalism. The nurturing side did show one member of from the Arts and 4 female members. What seemed to be missing was any representation from the countries that missed reaping the benefits from years of the WC implementation- South America, Africa, and former Soviet Republics. The US dominated board contained only four “foreigners”, China, Singapore, Poland, and Mexico (countries who are not doing so badly in restructruing). The institute could also be called the Institute for International Paternal Economics or the Think [like us] Tank of Economic Wizards! Socially conscience Western Europeans need not apply.

1. Fiscal Discipline
Large fiscal deficits add to inflation and capitol flight. State control is a foundation of Realism and here it can be applied. This is most righteous choice for number one on an economic consensus list. The necessary efficient government institutions are not in place in LDC (have they ever been?) leading to fiscal trouble and more borrowing. The cycle feeds itself draining resources that could be used for social equity. The rich hide their resources outside the country while the working classes suffer paying off economic burdens from government deficits. A major radical criticism I came across was for LDC just to default on all their loans and turn their economic focus towards socially just and ecologically sustainable development. Seizing the riches of corrupt leaders, taxing the land of rich
property owners, and direct foreign aid not loans were also tossed in as solutions. These revolutionary popular fronts have historically changed personnel and not the actually functioning behavior of governmental institutions. None of these ideas offer a workable solution.
A viable yet firmer solution to promote fiscal discipline may be to first look at the winners and losers in that arena. There are two categories that standout in developing countries, those who habitually default on loans and those who go through the economic pain of restructuring to pay off their debts. I would simply not assist the abusers of the system and would put them in contact with those countries who have restructured and who are getting loans. It would transfer the pressure away from the loaning institutions and as their economic systems of LDC came under pressure, internal domestic forces may be more effective. This may be a “cold turkey” method but initial “moral” assistance would be obtained from another country that has restructured. A fraternal-based system to help build institutions capable of enforcing rule-based fiscal discipline. If some LDC do not want to play and fall behind that’s fine. Referring back to the alcohol analogy, at an AAA meeting you find a room full of people who have successfully controlled the disease to offer you support and guidance.

2. Redirection of Public Expenditures
There are definitely class differences in LDC therefore I will classify this theory under Marxist theory. The inequity solutions seemed to be Realist based with state control necessary instead of revolution. The long history of LDCs, class struggle without a spark, is my basis for calling this overall a Marxist idea. Socialism was a step the Soviets used towards their goal of Communism. Will improving social conditions by focusing on them along with economic considerations be a better alternative? The first decade of the Washington Consensus implementation should economic grow but not else changed. There are plenty of socially institutions in place functioning in place. A small amount of capitol invested there would show a higher return on an investment than in just in an industrial sector. Though you could not measure in a hard currency, a fertile soil is necessary for growth to take root. The trickle down theory just is not going to accelerate growth. though an emphasis on improving education, health, and other social conditions are the responsibility of the state, all the money in the world will not help if structures of these institutions are not efficient. I recommend the use of IGOs in leadership in these activities. The seemingly behemoth United Nation’s bureaucracy will not suffice. Rather I would use RGOs (Regional Governmental Organizations) to work hand in hand with regional development programs and treaties. Under the NAFTA banner, the possibility of improving healthcare amongst its member nations would be more efficient and have a stronger impact on the psychological morale. A regional hegemon could anchor, coordinate, and deliver social programs with greater efficiency that world organizations.

3. Tax Reform
Liberal in nature, the emphasis on efficient use of and equal sharing of the tax burden would be a very fundamental principle. This factor weights the pendulum of policy reversal between parties more than anything else. Fairness would not be my reason for tax reform. A wise choice would be to have a tax base that is like a good investment portfolio makes more sense than dictating areas of taxations. An economy could endure more with government stability based on this principal. This may relieve some of the sting in business cycles. The balanced use of tax revenues being just as crucial, too much in invested in social policies while ignoring infrastructure necessary for economic growth is a potential problem. My reading on this topics show that an evenly structure tax base is not the trend of the based decades. Labor is carrying the tax burden more so than capitol. This is debatable on why- social democracy tax their labor more yet return more in social programs. Or is the trend shifting to labor as not to scare off new capitol? I am at the point of wondering if it’s not a conspiracy amongst democratic open market societies that have transformed into puppets controlled by MNCs. A wild alternative could be a very small global tax on capitol that would be used to relieve economies damaged by capitol flight due to speculation (as opposed to war, natural disaster, bad government policies). If a LDC is restructuring and has it’s ducks in a row, it would not be penalized for its efforts if investors’ tastes switched to chicken over night. For now, I better keep this idea to myself.

4. Interest Rate Liberalization
A Realist POV for self-determination, a very useful government tool in regards to inflation and foreign capitol investment. It is mentioned that it can also be misused to distort economic distribution. Not sure if I understand that completely but my criticism is that states should have some coordination on interests through an IGO. I fully believe that sates should do this for competitiveness and domestic market health but be subject to limits. Suggestions to this, more emphasis should be put on personal savings instead of corporate investing as to give people a sense of involvement in domestic economics.

5. A competitive exchange rate
Liberal policy, a gold based system needed to give way to paper-gold, and using that thought, we need to prepare for an electronic based system. Off of that tangent, having currencies loosely tied together builds a sense of interdependency and makes market transactions smoother between trading economies. I say loosely tied as states still need not to feel threatened and may behave irrational with unforeseeable consequences. I am referring to Britain’s Pound Sterling detached from the Euro when different policy issues pulled them apart. Here is where I think there is too much IGO control in propping up or letting currencies fall. I think states should work once again in RGOs to keep currencies competitive. Stronger regions would possible take the brunts of economic shots and recover faster if more of the system were organized.

6. Trade Liberalization
Need I say Liberalist theory, danger has been when markets open too quickly with all the promised benefits not reaching the poor through income distribution. Major opponent is special domestic interest groups rhetoric. State is needed to guide this liberalistic transition as it is not a guarantee for wealth and development. My course of action would be to build models using both successful and decimated economies when pressuring a state
to liberalize trade. Allowing them to open markets at their own pace and within the limits they can comprehend the changes would be best for long term growth. I would promote short term use of import tariffs using this time to prepare domestics industry but then allow the market to take its course.

7. Liberalization of inflows of foreign direct investment (FDI)
This healthy form of liberal economic growth (and the most dangerous) though not only capitol but skills importation, is a key factor in closing the gap between rich and poor states. The drunkenness of massive capitol inflow, if based initial on speculation, can have
devastating effects if it quickly flees a countries of other speculative. How and what type of control should be placed on this by states? It may be tough to say but if anything will make news headlines, its capitol flight out of a nation. Once the Red China’s model of inflow of direct investment’s bubble finally has its first burst, an analysis of that would hold some policies than I might agree with. Surely governments can not pick winners all the time when directing foreign investment but the Chinese model had an interesting twist. They were using export tariffs to stiffen competition domestically and intentionally close place that could not perform. Overall the states should use conditions to control FDI but shy away from demands. An IGO to control this may be cumbersome and short-term effective with long-term damage. I would suggest a small but strong IGO set up help countries suffering from FDI flight. Not a financial safety net but to analyze and advise the effected country for restructuring. Bailing out a country’s financial troubles due to its being a victim of recent trend as an emerging market is a sickness that has to stop. Would pre-qualifying a country for FDI similar to getting a car loan be a novel solution? If they are declined they are off to credit school through an IGA.

8. Privatization
Liberal life support- privatization has been the spark in motivation since day one Everyone knows that states are needed to protect those rights. Let’s switch our focus away from countries who are privatized to ones were economies are floundering, corruption in government is rapid, and privatization has been introduced in the last century. Africa and Russia come to mind, both with communal type societies, then suddenly wrung through revolutions. In these cases privatization should not occur in industries necessary to maintain a sense of communal spirit. Be it the petroleum or housing industry in the Russian Federation, or a communal cattle ranch or farming village structure in Kenya. In
some cases it is too disruptive to institutions of a society. There are expectations in a society about there being a certain level of security, having some industries non-privatized may support that need. Powerful global bankers would call me nuts but there are many different ways to be a human. What is viewed as an institution on the domestic level can be called a nuisance or barrier to an outside investor, I say that’s fine. On the other hand destroying privatizations in societies where it his successful is an extremely regressive and action.

9. Deregulation
Liberalism as government intervention will hinder economic growth. Unfortunately whoever said the market is guided by an invisible hand did not mention the other hand was picking your pocket. Government involvement in business does promote a degree of corruption. Let’s put the amount of one year’s worth of US Government corruption on a scale and the fallout from Enron on the other. I’ll take the lesser of two evils as government corruption is institutionalized enough to be overseen. If a dozen more Enron-esque scandals appear suddenly, what will the fallout from that be? I would prefer a guard awake with one eye open than one asleep. Economic watchdogs are necessary as well as social and environmental safeguards but with a long term outlook as a partnership with business. Preferably I would like white-collar crime to carry heavy penalties than blue-collar violations. My discussion is focusing on the domestic policy of the US and this may not be
enforceable throughout the world. How ever our ability to often lead the world may help create a precedence for increased state regulation in those areas.

10. Secure property Rights
This is a hybrid between Liberal thinking and Realist application. Intellectual property is often abused be disadvantaged peoples causing much political dissatisfaction. Blame is often placed on the states were this occurs and the accusers are often quite hypocritical on the accusations. You may be allowed to buy a pirated CD in Beijing for example but I can tell you after 5 weeks in China no one tried to sell me crack or make one threaten gesture towards me. Typically patents are horded and technologies used for profits for a certain period of time. My suggestion is for tougher enforcement of property rights and an extension of protection lengths. A request for protection length would require a fund that would obtain a small percentage of additional profits made from the extension be used for social development.I am also unaware of any benefit offered to corporations or individuals for relinquishing those property rights for public good.

Overall there needs to be a new understanding and reimplementation of the Washington Consensus. Primarily this top to bottom way of thinking and controlling is failing in the short term. If International Political Economies can be simple described as a push and pull between the state and the market, then we should factor the state into the market. The fundamental rules of the Washington Consensus do make sense and can influence short term economic development. The fundamental institutions however that are implementing these recommendations are failing and no quick solution is in sight. We may be misinterpreting the economic credentials of the top with their ability to effect the credibility at the bottom. Politics needs to be put back in Economics and the emphasis towards regional issues with regional solutions.

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

---

Marxism and U.S. Economics – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

TOPIC: What is the future of Marxism and economics in the United States?

HYPOTHESIS: By analyzing the US economy through Marxism, the tenets of which will be valuable analytical tools, we can describe how the outside pressures of Globalization are eroding the liberal capitalist system.

The theories and predictions of Karl Marx and Frederic Engels were created during the infancy of capitalism. They have historically aligned with the concept of socialism and indeed were active in promoting it but their collective writings were based on the science of economics to analyze history instead of philosophy. To be able to use their viewpoints one must first list and identify them. Their collaborative manuscripts fill almost fifty volumes and the major tenets include materialism, dialectics, industrializations, political economy, cult of science, evolution of man, revolution, and political economy. In essence mankind’s progress is based on what it produces and therefore the struggle that erupts in this evolution is history. Economics in their viewpoint is the key to explaining the history of mankind and with the conflicts developing today in the US economy, the ideas of Marxism may be very relevant analytical tools. If profits are the goal in a world based on materialism then globalization is the road of travel in its pursuit. That road has many obstacles and is currently pressuring the US economy and affecting everything from trade and budget deficits, currency value, politics, social institutions, wealth distribution, domestic and foreign policy, and the dispute over ethical solutions just to name a few.

Profits under the Marxist viewpoint developed from the history of production starting from tribal, to feudal, then an industrialized society. The added value that is created by the efficiency of industrialization is unfairly accumulated by the newly formed bourgeoisie class and with the passage of time would cause all the wealth to be stripped away from the working class. In the 19^th century this was true but what has happened is a new struggle has formed. History was to be a showdown between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat but that dialectic struggle did not materialize. Capitalist profits have in the US economy been accumulated by multi-national corporations and banks and with this acquisition of ownership have taken control away from industry. Industries that previously owned the means of production in the US are without the enormous amounts of capital to reinvest which is now theoretically owned on paper by multi-national corporations and banks. As a nation the US heavy industrial base has eroded and gone overseas to cheaper labor markets and it was the pursuit of profits by the new owners (multi-national corporations and banks) that caused this shift in investment. Industry is no longer a dominant part of the Marxist equation and the effect of wealth accumulation by US multi-national corporations and banks investing overseas keeps profits returning to the US economy. The new US service economy needed to control a globalized capitalist system has been very successful in increasing the standards of living of Americans by both the creation of jobs and the lowering of costs for consumer goods by products produced in cheap labor markets. If industry had remained in control of profits and controlled globalized investments the result would have been Marxian in nature. With full control of profits US heavy industries would first cooperate to monopolize the economic system with the result being able to control wages and prices. Without competition in the system there would be no benefit to consumers. The investment strategy of industry is to monopolize where as multi-national corporations and banks diversify and give credit to areas of an economy that will return profits. A major difference is that industry needs a physical means of production to create profits while multi-national corporations and banks due it on paper which is more effective in accumulating wealth at a higher rate. So the Marxian idea of a struggle between a small bourgeoisie industrial class and impoverished working class is not a correct when analyzing the current US economy rather the new synthesis that formed was because of the battle between multi-national corporations and banks against industry as owners of profits. The harm caused to the US economy by the loss of manufacturing jobs is small in comparison to the benefits of profits that return from overseas investment, lower priced consumer goods, and the creation of new jobs needed to support this system.

Marxian exploitation to impoverish the working class did not define the growth of the US economy. The successful middle class that developed in the United States has been the factor that upsets Marxist predictions. A unique feature to the sustain success in the US economy has been the ability of this middle class to invest as compared to building savings. Most nations have systems that promote savings as a means for building capital for investment and this would be a less risky and promote slower growth due to government safeguards and regulations. The American system of promoting investment has three beneficial effects for multi-national corporations and banks. Funds are raised quicker, control of where the money is invested is in their hands, and risk is pasted on to the investors. This type economic growth is therefore less constrained, riskier yet more adaptable. Marxist theory could only explain economic growth by industries use of imperialist expansion, horizontal and vertical integration to create monopolies, and exploitation of labor. The present day US economic system has developed in unforeseen ways outside the boundaries of Marxist doctrine.

Domestic US politics on the issue of overseas job loss has been controversial and the two opposing factions of industrial capitalists and labor in certain industries have joined forces to promote the fear of globalization. A Marxian analysis would not have these opponents cooperating and in the liberal economic spirit, their inability to compete in the global market means that such industries as well as the associated jobs need to be phased out. This is further evidence to the success of multi-national corporations and banks controlling capitol to further strengthen the US economy by trimming the inefficient. Also the decrease in the standards of living of a million workers is not justification for halting increasing the economic advancement of a billion foreign workers. Where has the Marxist concept of worker solidarity gone? Overseas investment builds gains in both nations not disparity between economic classes. An increase in wealth overseas will only increase demand for technological products and innovations of our new service economy which is a further benefit of multi-national corporations and banks controlling investment. Had US industries been dominate in making investment decisions, overseas markets would still be impoverished and unable to afford American products. This dominance by the multi-national corporations and banking is seeking profits when combined with US technology and American productivity can produce higher levels of profits than the traditional slow expansion of the manufacturing industry.

The new economy that has risen is based on white-collar as blue-collar jobs have been exported. A current issue is that now some white-collar jobs are being exported and alarm bells are once again going off. Is this the start of the decline for the US economy as the middle-class is now being exploited? With no jobs in either blue or white collar category will the Capitalist be able to drive down wages based on a world-wide labor pool? Opponents to off-shoring of white-collar jobs say it will assuredly drive down wages but the US economic strength is based on competition and productivity therefore protectionism in this area will slow growth. The high wages earned in previous decades in certain fields like the IT Industry were more due to a scarcity of labor rather than productivity. The departure of white-collar jobs is most likely due to increased demand as compared to am attempt to lower wages and I would view this as a sign of a growing economy not a form of class exploitation. Capitalist imperialism is supposed to grow into markets where it can conduct the exploitation of labor, here it is faced with a scarcity of a necessary commodity. Another viewpoint is that an American form of employment is spreading outward in a global fashion. How quickly we forget when Japanese industrial techniques, so foreign to American workers, were implemented in our factories to keep us competitive.

The American consumer is currently faced with the burden of fueling the world economy and carrying the debt. During the 19^th Century when Marx and Engels developed their theories products were consumed once money was exchanged. The slow speed of transactions and the direction of money flowing into the hands of industry was the status quo for the steady increase in their wealth. Yet today we have a system where consumption of goods takes place even before the products are paid for. This accelerates the business cycle to exponential proportions further increasing the size production hence reducing costs. So the rapid consumption fueled by consumer credit continually benefits society as a whole through increased economic growth. In the old Marxian viewpoint the exchange benefited the class that owned the means of production who were then the bourgeoisie. Today the suppliers of consumer credit are the banks and with minimal investment in physical material, accumulate profits on paper. Since this increases the quality of life rather than impoverish the American worker, Marxist principles once again do not apply here in there prophecy of growing destitute class drifting towards an eventual revolution. Industries are created by consumer demand and banks issuing credit to them in the end and reap the majority of profits. Industries answering to consumer demand are subject to competition which produces lower consumer prices and lower profits.

Are overseas economies that are pressuring the US economy following the same route? In the European Union the emphasis on bank / industry cooperation is slightly in favor of social issues and the results are average growth and high levels of unemployment. The higher value on the Eurodollar can only be explained through speculation as no system of control is in place. Japan whose banks invest in close coordination with industry in a closed economy remains stagnant. China whose economic boom is creating massive industrial investment in physical means of production is also inducing a massive disparity of wealth between the bourgeoisie and proletariat classes oddly following in the footsteps of Marxist theory. The US, European, and Japanese economies all fall outside of parameters of class struggle headed for revolution. The controllers of wealth accumulation and the further investment of these profits in China are faced with more difficulties than the US banks as they need to control economic activity on the domestic front yet are dependant on overseas markets to sustain this growth. The overall major factor here is that American multi-national corporations are diversified and have the ability to move capital around to maximize profits not heavily subjected to economic downturns. The smaller scale one nation economies are entrenched in areas where they have a comparative advantage and more affected by economic cycles. Viewing the various ways liberal capitalism is applied through out the world was something once again not envisioned by Marx and Engels. Their theories did not account for “value” and in that they had one definition for a Capitalist. With globalization we see different versions of capitalists coming into conflict where Marxism predicted deceptive social cooperation amongst them.

The US Government’s pro-business attitude is also a major factor in the health of the US economy and how would a Marxist view this. They might conclude that governments are influenced by the wealthy classes and by running deficits the tax burden is kept off the backs of capitalist while they continue exploiting the system for profits. So is an easy Marxist explanation this corrupt social behavior towards government officials just a ploy for their own benefit? In this case I would say that it is not though the owners of wealth due have some influence on government policies. Because the dialectic material struggle between industry and workers did not happen in the US but instead became a conflict between banks and industrialists, the US government has a tax code and policies that are antiquated and ineffective in both controlling and taxing the new service economy of the United States. Marxists would have minimal government control as liberal capitalism developed but in US history just the opposite took place. Labor during the industrial revolution was restricted by the US government’s judicial system from striking or organizing because it infringed on the rights of industry. When too much power was monopolized in the hands industry the law ruled against them. Afterwards the formation of large banks took control from industry in directing the economy. Then with the two world wars decimating the global economy American multi-national corporations developed and spread throughout the world. In doing so placed themselves outside jurisdiction of US laws and no longer having the need to influence governmental policy through deceptive and corrupt socializing. The US economy evolved along the lines of a liberal economy from the interpretations of laws more so than corrupt officials. The major economies around the world which compete with the US economy in this era of globalization are mandated by either parliamentary systems or small ruling elite. This gives yet another example of Marxist principle being out of alignment with modern economic conditions.

Continuing on the theme of the US government, the role as the only world super power resembles that of 19the century Great Britain during the era of Marx and Engels. With a liberal economic system, internationally accepted hard currency, a leader in the technology of the times, and a military force to enforce its will, one would expect these are all the ingredients necessary Capitalist Imperialism. One finds the US Governmenmt’s attitude dependent on human rights in trade negotiations where Marxists thinking could never imagine this. An Imperial power of the 19^th century accumulated wealth in the stockpiling of gold reserves yet the US remains strong and its government is financed on paper by massive debt. In areas of technological advance spillover around the globe has produced beneficial results and often technological advances in the military are transferred to consumer goods improving lives. A Marxists would insist that a Capitalist State would horde these resources for market dominance yet the opposite has taken place. US Military bases around the world are protecting competitive trading partners and boosting the local economies where there are located. Our current war and subsequent occupation of Iraq was based on non-compliance with a United Nations Security Council resolution not a trade dispute, demand for resources, or funding by Capitalist to open foreign markets. We see a balance between Western philosophy and liberal economic ideology determining US foreign policy not the fading of national boundaries and the growth of a united global working class.

Marxists predict that the global spread of capitalism eventual leads to the formation of two opposing classes. In the last 50 years has this changed the American social structure? Often a person’s perception of globalization is how it is affecting them. In examining the following chart we can theorize a few trends.¹

QUESTION TEXT:

“Most people say they belong either to the middle class or the working class. Do you ever think of yourself as belonging in one of these classes?”
(IF YES:) “Which one?” /
(IF NO:) “Well, if you had to make a choice, would you call yourself middle class or working class?”
(IF MIDDLE CLASS/WORKING CLASS:) “Would you say that you are about average middle/working class or that you are in the upper part of the middle/working class?”

Respondent’s Social Class, Self-Identification 1956-2000

(numbers represent percentages of total surveyed)

	’56	’66	’76	’80	’82	’84	’88	’90	’92	’94	’00
Average Working	52	47	43	41	42	42	42	45	42	42	39
Upper Working	9	10	9	10	10	9	9	8	8	8	8
Average Middle	30	30	34	37	36	38	35	36	36	37	38
Upper Middle	7	8	11	10	9	10	11	9	10	12	13

The Average Middle Class view shows 26% increase while the Average Working Class individual self-perception dropped around 20%. Can Marxist theory account for the spread of capitalism and jobs leaving the US economy heading overseas increasing people’s perception of their lives? The decline in blue-collar jobs is evident in this chart and also the new service economy has created wealth in shifting upwards of individuals in a higher class. How about the doubling of the Upper Middle class? Globalization appears not to have dire consequences after all and the great split in society has not taken place. Is how a person considers his socio-economic status a better indicator than monthly consumer confidence reports? Yes, I believe it is based more on ones overall condition as compared to factors such as current events in the American media having sway over ones emotional state. My opinion is that once again the Marxist angle on globalization is outdated. Some of the original marks of early capitalist imperialism spread were not only economic but in diseases. If the world is becoming smaller and under the Marxist microscope the US population suffering what explains the 60% drop in both syphilis and gonorrhea in this country since 1984.² Two things could factor into the reduction, education and health, both signs of prosperity and not class division. The consumption of goods is what drives capitalism making the consumer a high priority in the system rather than a tool for exploitation. Since the end of World War II, the amount of consumer credit has increased by a factor of over 370.³ Continuing down this path one can restate the call for workers of the world to unite to consumers of the world go into debt as it is an easier path to prosperity than revolution. All this emphasis on materialism as an economic factor is also understood by Marxists to be the scientific basis for mankind’s history with philosophies becoming irrelevant in the future. As global contact increases we see additional friction between political, social, and economic systems based on different philosophies. The philosophies developed during the European Enlightenment are still influential today in the world’s largest economy.

The great awakening of the working class as a transnational movement failed to develop in the United States. We have seen rather the development of transnational institutions based on environmental, equal rights, and trade issues which confront the problems of globalization. Ask the average American to define Green Peace then the International Workers Party and compare awareness. An aspect of globalization on the US economy has been increased sensitivity not solidarity. “Free Willie!” is a quote that is known amongst every American worker but Leon Trotsky words, “Life is beautiful. Let future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full.”, though poetic could not find its way it the minds of America. The complexity and diversity are the United States’ greatest strengths and are employed to economic benefits. The different values in individual strengths and morals are not accounted for in Marxist thinking as the view society in black and white with two opposing sides formed by mutual economic interests. There seems rarely any occasion that Marxist analysis of the United States economic system has a whole can be clearly explained.

When Marxist ideology is layered over the present day US economy we find that the pattern is not suited for the material. In 19^th century world it may have been different but with the accumulation of capital out of the hands of industry and liberal domestic economy open investment and advancement as well, Marx and Engels only use are for lesser developed countries to shake their fists with. The game has changed but no the players. In this switching of arenas the only player disadvantaged would be the US Government whom is still restricted under rules and operating in the last century. The Marxist ideology of a dialectic materialism that placed capitalist and workers in a face off did not evolve. The new thesis versus anti0thesis is the multi-national corporations against the US Government. When we look at the German and Japanese economies which involve close synchronization between government, industry, and financial institutions we may wonder is this the route the US Government will follow. Or is it possible that so much of the government’s function and responsibilities are sub-contracted and handed over to multi-national corporations that government as the state ceases to exist. It is more likely that the struggle between a state and multi-national corporation will define the future with labor on the sidelines in the course of history. Looking at the simplicity of Marxist ideology I conclude it is not a relevant theory to analyze the complexity of the US economy.

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Politcal Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

Notes: Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

¹ The National Election Studies NES Guide to Public Opinion and Electoral Behavior. This question is variable VCF0148A in the NES Cumulative Data File dataset. Consult the Cumulative Data File codebook for complete question text and annotation.

²Department of Health and Human Services enters for Disease Control and Prevention

Epidemiology Program Office ivision of Public Health Surveillance and Informatics.

³Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

Bibliography: Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

Franklin, John Hope. George Washington Williams:  A Biography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985.

Carver, Terrell. Engels. New York : Hill and Wang, 1981.

Gilpin, Robert. Global Political Economy. Princeton :Princeton University Press, 2001.

Hilferding, Rudolph Finance capital : a study of the latest phase of capitalist development. London : Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1981.

Hobson, C. K.. The Export of Capital.London : Constable and Company, ltd., 1914.

Marx, Karl. Early Political Writings. Cambridge ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 1994.

McLellan, David. Frederich Engels. New York : Viking Press, 1978, c1977.

Internet:

Marxists.org Internet Archives http://www.marxists.org (12 April 2005)

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

---

Kant, Mitrany, and the Marxists – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

There are similarities between Kant and Mitrany on one side and the Marxists on the other. Discuss the similarities in terms of : Limitation of the “current” governments.

The similar limitations derive from the fact that the current governments are not capable solving current socio­economic problems facing humanity and favor a Realist worldview. Additionally, their basic interests in international relations are not based on the overall desires of
their citizenry. With sovereign states as the main actors, the global environment is geared towards conflict thus placing the survival of the state as priority number one. Kant criticizes the lack of constitutionally based republics wherein despotic governments exist in “an unceasing threat of
war.” Mitrany places economic competition as the number one cause of war. Finally, the Marxian view establishes the accumulation of capital and the competition for limited resources as the eventual spark for conflict. In all three cases, the reliance on military power and control of
territories over cooperation to obtain national interests, are a defining issues that focus the national interests. War is an easy avenue to obtain goals when the conditions for a monopoly on power and a narrow band of self­interests is reflected in current governments in the view of each
respected author. The imposing of each states Realist view of international relationships in which all states have the same goal in a zero sum game, is a major longterm impendement. Not reflecting the true desires of their population for peace and security, as the masses are
the ones who face death in war, is one half of the coin. When analyzing the capabilities of meeting these needs in the international relations arena, all authors agree states are lacking. With no formal power above the states to control behavior, this is in reality, is a common limiting
characteristic. No venues exists to resolve issues and advance the needs of humanity over the self­ interests of current governments.
Kant describes governments agreeing to peace under conditions of “tacit reservations” while still maintaining standing armies. The implementation deceptive practices, spies and assassins, using debt as leverage, and interfering with another state’s internal affairs through a
variety of methods, undermine cooperation. Unless a federation of free republican states is established removing the distrust that exists, states will be limited to war to resolve differences. He also equates the current international system to the natural lawless state of man. Though man
gave up this lawless condition to form sovereign states, there is no requirement for states to do the same. Being limitless in decision making is in fact a limit on options as current governments base decisions on their respective standing international system.

Mitrany also sees the limits on current governments from the association of protecting national self­interest with military power. In his viewpoint it is the government’s inability to function outside its constitution on the international level as main impediment to peace. The restrictions on constitutionally based republics does not allow them to adapt and efficiently correct issues outside their jurisdiction. Even though this is counter to Kant’s concept that these free republics are needed as a prerequisite, Mitrany states that the very nature of a sovereign state is limited in international action by internal characteristics. While a constitution places a limits on despotic rule domestically, without universal application it is ineffective. Marxist ideology also defines the limits of current governments based on a narrow choice of goals and its predetermined methods of obtaining them. Placing survival of the ruling class based on accumulating and controlling economic factors, this long evolution of the concentration of wealth and power intensifies competition. The overwhelming influence of capitalism on current governments directs all of them to a single battleground with the domination of the world’s limited resource as the only victor’s prize. This tunnel vision in international relations limits governments actions as they are only geared towards serving an elite class. Choosing to invest in only profit oriented ventures and military power to obtain and protect resources is in Marxian terms a naturally limits its vision. In summary, the current governments are not equipped by design to function in cooperative international framework. Knowing only how to define and defend its interests using its own viewpoint, gives them a natural propensity towards conflict. The changing and uneven distribution of of real power and each sovereign state’s foreign policy based on self­interests points to mutual eventual destruction (MED). The predictions of Kant’s “vast burial ground of the human race”, Mitrany’s limits on constitutional based governments abilities to act on issues outside their borders, and Marxist eventual working class revolt, all point to the self­defeating nature of current governments. Equating survival on self­perceived terms and assuming the other states have equivalent national interests is a common limitation of all three theories. The interest of the majority of the population versus “current”governments. Kant, Mitrany, and Marx views of the majority of the population all coincide. Peace and security being the main interest but the underlining definitions have variants. All three authors believe an eventual uniting of humanity in obtaining these goals. These long term interests will be the dissolving of sovereign states and the concept of borders separating people (and their interests).

Kant looks at the formation of republics and how they meet the needs of citizens as the best form of government. Not only are the interests, specifically, republican governance, of the majority universal, but such a system will eventually spread to all governments. Kant states that
the underlining principle of forming the majority interest is this . Mitrany views the interests of the majority as resolving socio­economic problems regardless of border issues. Additionally, these interests relate to the governments as they should assume responsibility for meeting these needs. Commonalty of interests in the majority extend beyond current frontiers.

Finally, Marx defines the interests of the people in egalitarian terms and the distribution of wealth along these lines eliminating competition will obtain peace. He takes Idealist’s theories on how man should govern and applies them to the daily politics of economics. Additionally, it is not only the eliminations of borders that is in the majorities interests but also extinction of the need for any form of government. Kant and Mitrany see men desire to live by higher ideals mixing into a common interest but in Marx places men’s needs under one universal ideal.
Interests of the the current governments align with Realist theories of international relations. Kant describes despotic governments, not only continually existing in a state of perpetual war, but never relinquishing interests in influencing and conquering other states. With sovereignty as a basis for power, any other sovereign state is a threat. Therefore the current governments’ interests are natural in conflict with each other in the quest for security via power, be it militarily, economically, or subversively. Mitrany sees each states interests in terms of inequality, those benefiting from the current system behaving in ways to maintain it and those under­privileged states competing against them. The rebuilding of old arrangements is used as a yardstick for defining interests, basically maintaining the frontiers. Commonalty of interest between states is based on maintaining power distribution. Marxian dialog does not state a difference in the ultimate goal of both parties, control over the means of production, but rather interests of the majority as a organic group over many individuals’ choices as the common good.

Effects of the true majority on the process of IR, in the long term/run and International relations similarly will evolve to reflect the majority interests as define above. Kantian views sees human nature leaning towards good governance in a small number of states. As this process spreads universally, the commonality of interests of peace and security will create a federation of states. As other states examine the benefits to such a form of governance, they will also desire to replicate it. Eventually with one common form of government, the federation will evolve into a world government with universal application because all interests will be the same.

Socio­economic issues being at the forefront of majority interests, in Mitrany’s theory, will increase the demand for the forming of functional institutions whose authority is not based on sovereignty. The effectiveness of such organizations and membership based on needs, abilities, and responsibilities will supersede the effectiveness of the current international system. The major longterm effect will be the weakening of states. Never having the ability to quickly meet the interests of the majority, nor having the ability due to constitutional restraints, will erode the leadership role of states. The true majority will begin to evolve into a more than just a federation of peaceful republics but a uni­governmental world system. A major factor will be the erosion of frontiers that separate group with common socio­economic issues in their attempts to resolve these issues.

Under Marx’s theory, the interests of the major majority, the worldwide working classes, will reach a boiling point due to economic inequality. The effects which gather steam over a long period will unite the working world to revolt. However, until that time is reached, the accumulation of wealth and power will be spread out over a long period with the majority having little or no ability to oppose it. Once this final stage is reached, the oppressed working classes will seize power and apply an equitable system without the use of governments. Possibility of transforming the international system in the long term/run.

The shifting of a Realist to Idealist international system is the common thread between Kant, Mitrany, and Marx. All three contend the weaknesses of the current governments due to their basis on Realist principals of power politics, limited economic resources, and survival of the
state above all other interests in a chaotic world, will lead to their decline. But it is not a two step process, the where one ends and the other begins. Rather an evolution of international relations into a stateless system. When one considers the time line of this process it is not measures on a scale of units. Instead it is an eventual process which humanity will arrive at.

Kant espouses rationality as the driving force. The choice between MED or accepting republican government on a universal level, since it men had the the ability to form it on a state level, placed an idealist vision as the obvious selection. Choosing between extinction or Kant’s vision of what the world should be as an alternative if one believes man behaves rationally. Mitrany envisions functionalism as the hope for mankind in a world overwhelmed with socio­ economic problems. His certainty is based on the failures of the current system in resolving the post World War I period and how functional organization were naturally developing during World War II. Although with a similar long term end with the interests of the majority as a final destination. Marx leaned more towards the inevitability of capitalism rise and demise as giving way to a change in the international relations system. The Leninist approach envisioned a catalyst with a dictatorship of the proletariat guiding the masses towards true communism. Additionally, the wars Marx predicted between the capitalist states would shuffle the process along in favor of the eventual takeover by the a majority working class. Marx made his claims on the study of economic history and the natural evolution of competition being eliminated until a monopolistic state was reached.

One could rate the systems rate of change based from the authors’ writings in this order:
Mitrany, Kant, and Marx. Mitrany being the fastest step towards a future based on majority influence due t factors such as modern inventions of communication and warfare, many modern democracies, eminent dissolution of the colonial system, and the 20th century’s slaughter among
states. Kant’s era and system of governments was developed over a longer time period and though rational cooperation seemed eventual, institutions were still entrenched on a wide scale to slow the process. If the Marxian time line was based on the division of the world into two classes of have and have not, the process world churn through history until a the correct class, the oppressed proletariat was in a majority. As man stumbles into the 21st century and still have a tendency for war as solution, it seems mankind has not beaten itself up enough to determine what rationality is.

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

---

Why States Conflict – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

Constructing a theory of international relations on why nations conflict needs a baseline on the natural state of man. This condition will be defined as a state of progressive cooperation. The paradigm in how man views the world is filtered through evolutionary characteristics and artificial systems used in cooperation. Man perceives the changing environment as a threat to survival, hence the need to add progressive in describing cooperation. There have been three important factors in this development, genetic evolutionary adaptations into societal morals, and the use of tools into reliance on technology, and the fear of death by natural being replaced by the fear of being outside society. From a tribal group to modern state, a society survived by developing a system to work together not internal competition. This cooperation influenced by morals, technology, and common fears established states which are the main actors in international relations. States are the highest functioning level of acceptable cooperation and the number one preference of a society. This preference is entirely wired into the human subconscious mind whereas one looks for a maximum cooperation in in those genetically similar. After centuries of specialized development mankind’s preferences are set. Therefore a world system of cooperation that eliminates states is not possible as it against human capabilities. Upon understanding the three contributed factors of this development, the cause of conflict will be defined as deviation from accepted norms of cooperation.

Slight differences that exist in a state’s unique system of cooperation are a product of its environment and the results are cultures. It is not natural resources or population size that defines success. Nor is geographic location that ensures its survival. The cultural aspects of a society are the determining factors in its form of internal cooperation. Differences do exist in religious, economic, and social structures but it is the high level of development cooperation, not the unique of physical characteristics of a state. For example, Islam as a ruling religious entity does not contain traits that make it a successful system rather the function of the system as a whole regardless of its qualitative factor. Compare Islam to Christianity in the 8th century. The relative superiority at that time was due to cooperation in unified area, not specific characteristics of being a better form of religion. One can conclude that societies are sub-actors in the state system because the describe the type of internal cooperation.

The individual does not qualify as a sub-actor as it is to reliant on society for its definition. Neither does the leadership of a state qualify as a sub-actor. What is called government, are only the preferences of a society as a whole. Leadership is a natural condition for cooperation to exist. Man’s life cycle is totally developed for interdependency. This subconscious drive in daily decisions to adhere to group cooperation rules out individuals as a qualifying sub-actor. If leadership could could be define as a sub-actor, would interchanging them have any effect. Placing Richard Nixon in Beijing and Mao Zedong in Washington DC in 1970 would not have changed international relations as they would have been rejected by their respective new societies. Leaders are an extension of the aggregate preferences of a society.

Societies, which evolved into modern states, were described with three main stages which enabled cooperation. Physical traits evolved biased towards cooperation within a group, the use of tools a reliance on technology, and fear of death developing into fear of inclusion in society. It is import to understand deviation by a state from these normative stages causes conflict which shall be described later. History is strewn with societies which have disappeared not adhering to the three factors. Morals are not those judged on the actual values promoted. Rather, the morals developed based on their value in supporting cooperation to a higher stage of development qualifies their importance. The ancient cultures of the Americas used human sacrifice to appease the natural environment. To them it was a morally correct pattern of behavior, but when viewed with other societies that promoted such values, they have been destroyed by cultures who deemed this a deviation from the norms of cooperation.

Our genetic evolution developed on the need for cooperation to survive. If the natural state of man is war, then our daily speech patterns would be quite different. Are our daily conversations started with greetings or warnings? Does man convey knowledge with complex speech patterns or sound out warning calls like a carnivorous four legged mammal? Homosapien species would have no need to pass on knowledge if it was every individual only concerned for themselves. If our state in nature was violent then man would have evolved differently with multiple births after a short pregnancy and quick maturation. Instead natural evolution gives humanity a unique method of procreation which also enables the passing of knowledge, especially of techniques of cooperation.

Societies that have gone from simple tools to high technology are also dominant globally. Empires, societies, and states have come and gone that focused on developing tools for conquering. The strongest states today emerged from agricultural societies. And without this industrialization could not have formed. The history of this shows cooperation within the boundaries of state as not only optimal but preferred. And it was through the use of technology in a cooperating method rather than just purely for conflict that gave man this preference. The victors in the Second World War were not the states using technology solely for conflict as was Nazi Germany. Rather, the Allied Nations by the use of technology applied to economic factors such as the means of mass production and distribution. This high level of cooperation gives a facade that the morally better side was victorious. However, it was the side applied norms regardless of qualitative properties.

Unfortunately, the use from tools supporting group survival has become a reliance on technology. It is an abnormal step in human evolution as it is deteriorating the need for group dynamics. The dependency on technology not only affects natural forms of communications but is a source of potential conflict. Group mentality now equates societal survival with scientific advances and the potential loss as a source for conflict. Technology is becoming an evolutionary dead end as it is becoming a standard on which to a level of a society on the quantitative not the qualitative terms. This is also detrimentally influencing the third factor in man’s development in the goal of cooperation, the replacing of the fear of death with the fear of exclusion from society. International relations bases cooperation on face to face meetings and one should fear the day when technology replaces this.

Thomas Hobbes’ idea the fear of death that caused man to surrender to a higher authority may have been valid when cowering in a cave. Primitive man need a group to survive but today the group is a standard for identity. Rational judgment is no longer based on the essential but rather societal values. Man functions day to day almost unaware of this condition. Reactions to those going outside a society’s norms are not frowned upon because the threaten group survival. Instead, individual decisions are influenced by group standards and the fear of rejected. The more advanced a society the greater this fear. In early societies exclusion was certain death but today examples abound on the effects of these pressures. The first items the poor in developing nations obtain when escaping an extreme level of poverty are mobile telephones and televisions. Are these tools for survivals? Are they purchasing a television based on what will be shown or rather just possessing one? And to whom will they call to help them escape the fear of death? This stage of development in cooperation within a society has again become another evolutionary dead end. In developed nations, are credit cards traditionally at their maximum limits due to purchasing survival needs or satisfying the need to be materially equal to the cultural standards?

These three stages define states are today but how can they explain why states conflict? The answer again lies in the paradigm of our existence. Man views the world through preferences predetermined by genetic modifications geared towards cooperation. However, the physical characteristics play a major role in this. The mind will sense cooperation is possible with like types. A foreign characteristics triggers a subconscious warnings that the brain processes as not so much a threat but a detriment to cooperation. Than how does one account for multi-racial populations in states? Over time different races in a state do began to co-exist in a societal evolution. A small ratio of a different ethnic group can in 2 or 3 generations become accepted in the mode of cooperation. A large number will isolate itself into a state of isolation within the state. The larger the number or the higher the degree of difference in culture, the more this isolation exists. This of course causes friction. Increase the severity of different traits, both genetic and societal (religious or economic system), to a point were it is a deviation from what a state has come to prefer as as norm, then conflict will occur.Many aspects of cooperation are however transferable between states. This due to commonalities in advanced societies. Attempting to transfer methods of cooperation to unequal states can result in conflict. Unequal can be defined as advanced technology or accepted standards of moral behavior. The era of early European colonization is an example. Less advanced societies coming.

Technology in international relations is used as a tool for inter-state cooperation and is considered normative behavior. A states will share that which it considers an essential component of cooperation from its point of view. When a state sees another with a similar form of cooperation, democracy to democracy or fascist to fascist state, it is more likely to share technology. However, when a state decides to deviate from this norm and use technology as in a non-cooperative form such as military capabilities, the potential for conflict increases. There is a fine line as military technologies will be shared as not to threaten the donating state. Hitler and Mussolini had similar systems in their respective states but Italy still used Italian designed tanks and airplanes even though the armaments were inferior. Transfers of threatening technology in today’s world such as nuclear devices causes alarm and potential conflicts. A nuclear power plant is viewed it on a different fashion, as long as the nations have similar ideas on preferred ideologies on cooperation. When flirting with the Kremlin, the idea of India obtaining nuclear technology from the United States was improbable. Having opened up its economy to Western standards of economic trade, completely changed the scenario making it possible.

The shift from a fear of death to a fear of exclusion permeates the international state system. The League of Nations disbanded as it was a mechanism to stop conflict from occurring. Not all states participated and if they did so were not totally committed to binding its fate to other nations. When states started being wiped off the map and the death of a state became a reality, the United Nations was created and became a system for cooperation. Today the 192 member states can not imagine being excluded from the United Nations. And even if a nation was wiped off the map in a conflict, it would not loose its seat in the assembly. In the last century, states have gone from cowering in a cave in a world of military inequalities to attending a world organization with the status of equality. The most powerful tools used in international relations is no longer military alliances. In addition to the United Nations, other organizations such as the World Band and World Trade Organization have developed through state cooperation that can punish deviate behavior by exclusion from group cooperation.

The condition when the international state system is in balance of power, is just a stagnation point in competing forms of cooperation throughout the system. When a society develops a more advanced system of cooperation there are two possible results. The other states accept it as viable and the state becomes a hegemon. Or such a changes are viewed as a threat. Differences only cause friction and are the normal condition. Conflict is abnormal and is caused by a major deviation in morals, technology, and/or fears of one of the state viewing another.
Different stages in morals, technology, and changing fears have been described by many political scientist as points in history where man’s paradigms have changed. Would a specialization of of the paradigm be better definition? Mankind is trapped in the current paradigm due to the similarity of all systems of cooperation involved. The state is the largest form of a society in which groups can coexist with minimal genetic and societal differences. This system will never be replaced by a world system of cooperation without borders. The century upon century of cultural development and politically development can not be undone. technology, and decision making based on fears as lead to the creation of the state. Now that these stages have reached their limit in development so has man’s ability to cooperate is limited by the boundaries of the state. The current international systems of states should survive thousands of more years.

If man has such a highly developed state of natural and artificial cooperation, why does conflict exist? Essentially the modern state system is a dead end. Man’s capability to cooperate is at its limits. Borders are not geographic barriers but limits of normative preferences of culture in its attempts to cooperate. These preferences have spread worldwide due to their ability to optimize cooperation internally by a dominant culture. Without the Han, China would break off into different states. And viewing the former Czechoslovakia, with no dominant form of cooperation, two states were formed. Essentially, the system will remain the same with minor adjustments to accepted norms.

Whatever historical stage of cooperation is the accepted standard in defining a state, variation from this by a state will cause conflict with other states. The appearance of a Republican France, acceptable today, at its inception was considered an abnormality by the other European states and resulted in conflict. Following the Great War of the 20th Century, the Versailles Treaty set norms for cooperation based the self-determination of peoples. Further to the east, the Russian Revolution was a form of self-determination but unaccepted. This set up the following decades of the Cold War, but was the fear of states Russia’s military might? One could believe it was the fear of communism as it was considered a deviation from the norms of cooperation. On paper, communist ideals are very efficient in ensuring survival of a state and maximizing cooperation. Its qualitative properties are completely disregarded as they counter our evolutionary patterns of cooperation.
Accepted levels in reliance on technology greatly effects international relations. Dependency on oil as a source for energy, causes states to conflict. Iran’s conversion to an Islamic State has the United States nearing a conflict stage. Cultural differences between states causes friction but when internally a state deviates from behavioral standards of cooperation, that becomes threatening. A state will view the personality of such state as demonic if it behaves in a manner to disrupt this preference for technology. A state would rather fight than lower its level of technology use. It is even more unlikely to change its internal behavior from other states actions. Could the United States thirty years ago cooperated to relive this reliance on accepted technologies? The answer is obvious in the current stage of affairs. This is a prime example of the evolutionary dead end man’s ability cooperate has reached. If a the concept of a state has reached its maximum level of development, how can evolve into a world system?

Morality in international affairs and is an important factor on why states conflict. Though many states internally behave outside standards of behavior, they are often ignored and conflict between states does not occur. However, since the characteristic of moral standards is a trait of all states, the concept of correct behavior in relations is therefore extended. Once certain levels have been reached throughout the system they can not reversed. When a state has a civil war or slaughtering a minority group, the boundaries of the state are still respected by other states. If however, enters into another state’s area of internal cooperation then conflict can occur. This interference does not have to be physical in nature. Wars have occurred on just the demands of one state imposing its method of preferred cooperation on a another. Nazi Germany did proposition Poland to align with it before eventually invading. In World War II, economic actions buy the the United States had a major influence on Japan’s decision to start a conflict. World War I traces its beginning to a list of demands before a shot was fired state against state. Oddly, the misuse of one of mankind’s greatest evolutionary traits, speech, when used abnormally from its intended design of cooperation, has and will cause conflict amongst states. Understanding the importance of man’s development gives a reference point on why states conflict. If a state acts abnormally in regards to the the paradigm of human cooperation, then one state will be at odds with the other. The more severe the deviation from the norm, the greater the chance of conflict.

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

---

Why did the Vietnam invade Cambodia in 1978? – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

The 1978 invasion of Cambodia by Vietnam, two socialist states, defied traditional Marxist-Leninist theory on the causes of war, revolutionary vis-a-vis reactionary forces. The socialist Indochinese Democratic Front had been collaborating on elimination of imperialist powers from Southeast Asian soil since 1936. Yet the socialist fabric of international brotherhood shredded revealing long tempered social and political differences between the Cambodia and Vietnam. But were long term issues or recent developments the cause of the conflict? Could outside intervention from other more powerful states have coerced the Vietnam into invading Cambodia ? The identifying of the all possible causes of the Vietnamese invasion is the goal of this case study.

1- Vietnamese desires to satisfy economic needs.
Vietnam’s high population density and limited arable land caused a historic sense of envy for the fertile Cambodian plains. The Khmer nation has been well aware of this fact. Cambodia’s fertile plains and water system filled with immense stocks of fish have been coveted by Vietnam since the 19th century.

2- Contested borders unresolved since decolonization.
The internecine desires were frozen during the imperial French occupation. The boundaries demarcated by the French, which in reality saved Cambodia from extinction, did not take into account post-colonial interests. . The lack of an agreed upon post-colonial border satisfying Cambodia’s and Vietnam’s interests, rather than the French decision.
3- War as a diversion from domestic problems.
Vietnam was economically in shambles after a long and bloody civil war. The only viable functioning aspect was the military. Without any alternatives, a militaristic policy was kept in place to distract from domestic issues.

4- Military capability to launch an invasion.
Vietnam was dependent on Red China and the Soviet Bloc as weapons suppliers during the Vietnam War. The military aid lacked heavy offense weapons as the donor nations wanted to avoid escalating the conflict but preferred bleeding the United States. When the United States pulled out of South Vietnam, Moscow then allowed heavy offensive weapons, tanks and artillery, be sent to Hanoi. Once used to capture Saigon, these new capability was then turned Cambodia.

5- Assured victory of an invasion.
Hanoi’s spy network knew the poor economic conditions and the weak military status of Cambodia. Combined with the Khmer Rouge’s continued purging of it’s leadership ranks assured Hanoi of an overwhelming victory.

6- Conflict was inevitable.
Cambodia mobilized its army placed the bulk of its forces along the border in preparation for an invasion. A first strike by Vietnam was a rational decision.

7- Rhetoric From Phnom Penh.
Pol Pot began a open propaganda campaign for the destruction of the Vietnamese ethnic population in Cambodia and the entire nation of Vietnam. Additionally, he promoted the idea of Cambodian ethnic population living in the southern portion of Vietnam (Kampuchea Krom) rising up again to rise up in revolt.

8- Lack of will by a hegemon to prevent an invasion.
Vietnam was considered a showcase nation for the Marxist cause. With this at hand, Hanoi knew it had an unbreakable relationship with its patrons in Moscow. The United States withdrawing from the region left Vietnam the without any deterrent. The United nations also refused to place a peace keeping force on along the border and requested the two countries use diplomacy.

9-No economic penalties for conducting an invasion.
Vietnam received three million dollars a day from the Soviet Union in economic support that it would not loose if it invaded Cambodia. It had no trade partnerships to be lost by aggressive behavior.

10- Cambodia continually violated Vietnamese territory.
Khmer Rouge forces were regularly attacking over the border destroying Vietnamese villages. Before retreating they would also move the markers demarcating the border.

11- Failure of diplomacy.
The relationship between the two communists states was based on Marxist revolutionary principals joining to expel colonial occupying forces. After the goal was obtained, no organizational mechanism existed for diplomatic dialog. The Vietnamese-Cambodian relationship was that of Hanoi acting superior to Phnom Penh. This lack of sovereign equality escalated into violence as a resolution.

12- Balance of power in the region going to be unstable in the future.
Cambodia’s decade long policy of neutrality ended with the Khmer Rouge takeover. As Phnom Penh and Beijing strengthened their alliance, the balance of power in the region would tilt against the Vietnamese. To stabilize the region an invasion was a solution.

13- To end the genocide taking place.
Hanoi was well aware of the atrocities taking place in Cambodia due to its extensive spy network and defecting Khmer Rouge leadership. The invasion was implemented on humanitarian reasons to stop the genocide. Additionally, many being killed were purges because of possible links to Vietnam, either by ethnicity, family relations, or having been trained in Vietnam.

14- International Proxy Battleground.
The political influence from the Kremlin pressured Hanoi into the invasion. As the Beijing’s relationships between Moscow and Hanoi continued to decline. The Kremlin used Vietnam as a pawn its worldwide ambitions of being the leading communist state. The potential to eliminate Cambodia as an ally of Red China fit into Moscow’s foreign policy goals.

Weighing in the possible causes and deciding the reason needs to include the timing of the event. The conditions had never been more favorable for this action to occur. Combining this with and Hanoi making a rational decision to invade would point to a combination of causes. The idea that humanitarian or ideological reasons seems illogical. It would not matter which form of political system was in Phnom Penh or how abnormal Cambodia acted. The fact was as a stronger power in relative military and economic strength, Vietnam’s invasion would accomplish foreign policy goals. With the possibility of increased economic security, secure borders, and removal of a threat, Hanoi’s decision was ultra-rational. The choice was as easy as swatting a mosquito, a natural reaction to a nuisance.

Applying the Case Study in the Constructed Theory of Why Nations Conflict
If the theory has been constructed on evolved and developed normative behavior, then irrational action in international relations are judged so in reference to the standards of the time period. Both nations during the time tensions were escalating were member of the UN and considered sovereign states. The world was divided into to main spheres of cooperation, Marxists and Democratic, with the remainder being lured by both sides. Vietnam and Kampuchea fell into the Marxists camp yet had a long history of social and economic similarities. Additionally, both states suffered from the ravages of the respective wars of national liberation. The differences were few, their needs similar, so what could have caused the conflict?

The need to place the theory in a category is the next priority. Comparing similarities and differences with the main ideologies of political science should give the ability to label the theory. First the application of scientific method against Kuhn and Simon will be attempted. The theory states the goal as maintaining state sovereignty, inline with Kuhn’s idea of the way things out to be and it defines the interface as cooperation. Society is a sub-actor creating values and determines leadership for the state as the preferred goals are determined by an aggregate of the state’s. The study of what Kuhn call “architecture of complexity” will describe the the characteristics of the state. The theory departs from Kuhn’s idea of paradigm shifts. The theory’s paradigm is set and has evolved due to environmental factors and basically painted itself into a corner. No major shifts occur just gradual development into a system of sovereign states.

Simon’s “all you need to know is the goals and the environment “ theory has some similarities. The idea of cooperation within a state determines its qualities: adhering to domestic preferences effect foreign policy, people act rationally, economic power is ignored, leaders are not interchangeable, and man’s needs change change and so do his artifacts. With society as a sub-actor its preferences would be an aggregate, therefore the concept of satisficing is applicable.

Realism’s promoters, Machiavelli, Hobbes, and Morgenthau would have a field day dismantling the constructed theory. Machiavelli would question the lack of advice for leadership as it determines the survival of the state. Interpersonal relationships are completely ignored as ell is any form of discipline necessary to operate a state. Hobbes would not see any reasoning in the man’s state of nature being cooperation. No higher power exists surrender to in order to survive, and the fear of death has been overcome. The theory implies laws and leadership have always existed in the history of man’s society, whereas Hobbes states that this did not exist. Hobbes focuses power from the top and the theory presented from the bottom. Morgenthau believes the international politic landscape places power as the main interest. This counters the theory’s concept that accepted norms of cooperation drives a state’s behavior. With a foundational principle that a state’s behavior can not be judged for certain, Morgenthau would dismiss the theory’s concept of a unified characteristics of all states having the same motives. Morals, though acknowledged by theories of Realism, take a backseat. The theory proposed states that this is a primary motivation in state’s decision making in international relations. A realist would act based on relative power within the system, the theory states a deviation from a norm must occur before states will react.

The Idealism of Mitrany, Cobden, and Kant will next to discussed in defining the theory’s label. Mitrany desires that functional organizations will overtake the world and replace states as the main actors. The constructed theory places limits on the capabilities of a state due to their characteristics and functional organizations will not replace their importance. Common interest between is the main binding factor of his theory counter to common interest is only a binding factor within a state. Both do contain the concept of a universal experience for mankind, Mitrany’s being Euro-centric, and the theory a universal development of norms of cooperation. He also argues states cannot meet the demands of the modern world but the theory disagrees. With the aggregate of a culture determining the leadership, a state will be content with its leadership or if preferences change, will change the leadership. What may seem good for the planet as a whole or region will not supersede the entrenched concept of a state. States will be self-regulating without functional organizations. This is because functional organizations are a recent development in relations to the state system. It may take a few more centuries before it becomes a norm of cooperation but it still will not replace the state.

Cobden looks at economic issues determining state behavior, but oddly so does the theory. He identifies capitalism as the solution to war, but that the current system that has been accepted worldwide? Middle class interest in his view will run the government, but in a state that prefers cooperation, a middle class is the result. Cobden rationalize economic decisions because they benefit the whole of a society and ensure a healthy sovereign state. It is a preference for cooperation within the state that he claims is desirable for all states to end conflict. In a roundabout way, the theory is a generalization of this without the economic factors. Criticism of Cobden could be used against what has been proposed, all states have the same interests in economics, rationality is based on the human experience, and conflict is created when other states act counter to accepted norms.
Kant prescribes the way things should be by defining the necessary common qualities for states and as the peace is the desired outcome. The theory generally relates to this but again is less detailed. The theory states cooperation is the natural state of man, Kant has it as a goal but by means of a republican constitutions throughout all states. He regards the the natural state of man as the threat of war counter to the theory it is cooperation. He further desires an eventual world government on common values. Counter to this, the theory disregards world governance and as long as all states share a common form of cooperation within a relative range of diversity due to cultural characteristics, peace will be maintained. Kant has people as actors, but the theory claims that people are just a product of the cultural environment and are not decision makers. The concept relating no peace if a despotic governments rule. The theory would counter this that if all governments hared the same method, regardless of qualitative factors, peace would be maintained. Kant wants the removal of standing armies, elimination of secret treaties, and no interference in other states affairs. Counter to that, if it is a norm, than it is acceptable and peace will be maintained. Agreement is met on the concept of equal sovereignty, but state behavioral norms are relative to the times not to set concepts by a ideal theorist.
Marxists would agree with the framework of history but not the end result. The theory places no right or wrong on how the state system evolved into a functioning unit. Marxists would dislike the lack of economic factors and no reference to class structure. The use of a dictatorship of the proletariat would be fine under the theory, but since it was rejected by the state system as a whole, it did not become a norm. Marxism becoming a worldwide system of cooperation would not be acceptable, unless it devolved into socialism in one country application and tailored itself to cultural realities. At its prime, Marxism was counter to the normative behavior accepted as realistic by the majority of mankind. It differences caused friction but did not deviate enough to create conflict between states.

Behavioralism supporters, Holsti, Deutsch, and Huxley may at least nod in agreement of some portions of the theory. Holsti presumes states act like people act , therefore the study of people will explain state behavior. This parallels the theory to some degree. His division between elites and masses goes into more details, wherein the theory unifies leadership with the masses. Furthermore, Holsti assumes shared interests of all human beings, the theory claims that since man’s existence had evolved around cooperation, interests are predetermined by evolutionary development and not something that can be preferred. Deutsch describes a society as a group of people that have learned to work together. This contains some basic components of the theory and relates to the basis for constructing a cultural aspect in the develop of a state. Deutsch factors in membership to a group as key element which would be in agreement. The theory lacks description on the internal strata of a state making more amoeba like and Deutsch details the strata of relationship in a state. Huxley associates group preferences as predetermined in order to maintain cohesion within a state, the theory runs similar but rather than determined by a higher authority, its goals come from the aggregate of preferences over time. Huxley has violence eliminated a foreign policy tool and instead uses it as a training device to set expectations of behavior. The theory has expectations preordained and violence used to punish actions outside the norm.

The Neorealists, Bull and Waltz, are the next consideration in attempting to label this theory. Bull’s description of sovereign states is inequality in regards to vulnerability in which the more powerful states can influences other without resorting to war, which the theory does not consider. He goes on to describe the rights and duties of a sovereign state in the anarchical international system, and how they provide what is necessary for their people, so there is no need for a world government to do what is already accomplished. For Bull, war is a necessary function and used as a tool, but the theory considers violence as a punitive measure in resolving deviation from the status quo. Waltz qualifies states on the level of power they have and goals are to maximize power. He feels this is rational behavior in the the anarchy of international relations. His theory suggest goals are set by power distribution in the system but rather by the theory stating each state functioning in harmony within itself is goal enough. Where his theory has similarity to micro-economics, the constructed theory now seems more anthropological rather than political. Waltz’s also considers multi-polar power distribution as a factor in balancing power, where the theory does not have states comparing their relative status based on power at all. He also assumes perfect competition and dominant characters of a state as does the created theory.

Neoidealist Keohane has some coincidental application to the theory. He defines cooperation in a system as self-interest automatically assists together to achieve their goals. Discord in his view, is the imposition one state on another. Therein ends, as the theory presented only has conflict to enforce a state to return its behavior to that of the majority’s belief in normal behavioral patterns. In Keohane’s ideas, cooperation to resolve difference is possible, the theory does not address this issue at all. Keohane labels errant behavior in international affairs as illegitimate, where in the theory, the term deviation is used by seems to be applied towards internal action of a state that seem threatening to other states. Actors value cooperation and are linked by common values, are principles of his and the theory. A world system’s view such as Wallerstein’s is the finally application. He specifies the characteristics of states by relative power identified by economic factors such as labor and production. The theory does not consider anything like this. Both theories ignore state characteristics. Overall his theory talks about the cyclical nature of a world system where decisions are determined by position in the system. The theory looks at a linear time line in which preferences unify on maximizing cooperation. There are economic actors in his theory which operate outside control of sovereign states, which again was ignored in developing the theory.

The quick lashing by political theorists’ whips have the theory confessing to be a somewhat of a Behavioralist but with a few commonalities with Idealist and Realists. The case study of Vietnam’s invasion of Cambodia favored Realist behavior. Applying the case study will flush out not only the weakness of the theory but which theory’s label it represents. The primary causes for or Vietnam’s invasion of Cambodia in 1978 were its ability to do so successfully due to its greater military power, the timing was right, and it was a longterm aspiration to acquire Cambodian lands. Comparing the case study and all its causes for the conflict against a theory that favors deviation from cooperation should show how extremely flawed it is.

1- Vietnamese desires to satisfy economic needs.
(Determined in the case study not to be a cause.)

No where does the theory specifically state anything about economics. As it was not a valid cause, there is nothing here for or against the theory.

2- Contested borders unresolved since decolonization.
(Determined in the case study not to be a cause.)

The norm for cooperation would be to have accepted the previously agreed upon border. Cambodia was disregarding it and such behavior ignoring demarcated borders would be a cause by the theory but not in the case study. So again, nothing validates the theory here.

3- War as a diversion from domestic problems.
(Determined in the case study not to be a cause.)

Cambodia was acting very abnormally in its aggressive stance towards Vietnam and had an economy that was on the verge of collapse. But its Marxists economic system was similar to Vietnam’s.

4- Military capability to launch an invasion.
(Determined as a cause of the conflict.)

The theory states that as long as something is a norm, than it would not cause a conflict in the system. Vietnam, Cambodia, Red China, USA and the other states had capabilities to launch invasion, so that seems normal for the time period. However, the theory disregards military power so there is no relation and yet another flaw.

5- Assured victory of an invasion.
(Determined as a cause of the conflict.)

This is definitely not related to the theory and yet another coffin nail.

6- Conflict was inevitable.
(Determined in the case study not to be a cause.)

The theory looks at man progressing positively into the future through commonalities. Is there any relationship to a conflict being inevitable? Hardly, so the theory did not examine long term differences in cultures but rather considered differences a cause of friction not conflict.

7- Rhetoric From Phnom Penh.
(Determined in the case study not to be a cause.)

Not a normal procedure in diplomatic relations in the 20th century and quite a deviation from acceptable procedures. May have started a conflict but not in this case.

8- Lack of will by a hegemon to prevent an invasion.
(Determined in the case study not to be a cause.)

After defining states as the most important actor and not considering a hegemon to influence states into controlling behavior, no support for the theory. A majority of states would have been needed to suppress the escalation but no method was put worth.

9-No economic penalties for conducting an invasion.
(Determined in the case study not to be a cause.)

The theory ignores economics in all aspects, especially in influencing state behavior. Once again, no relative concepts between the theory and case study.

10- Cambodia continually violated Vietnamese territory.
(Determined in the case study not to be a cause.)

Cambodia’s probes into Vietnam were easily pushed back. If this was a cause, and it was abnormal behavior, than it may have supported the theory. However, Vietnam seized Cambodia not just destroying the forces continually violating their sovereignty.

11- Failure of diplomacy.
(Determined in the case study not to be a cause.)

Such importance the theory develops on norms of cooperation, but either way, Vietnam as determined by the case study, did not invade for this reason. The theory would have liked the fact Cambodia cut off negotiations.

12- Balance of power in the region going to be unstable in the future.
(Determined in the case study not to be a cause.)

As all states behaved normally internally peace would have been maintained and said nothing about a balance of power or shifts in the system. The theory does not consider looking into the future.

13- To end the genocide taking place.
(Determined in the case study not to be a cause.)

Both Cambodia and Vietnam were mistreating portions of their populations. There are laws against such abuses of humanity and it is considered deviation form normal behavior. But it has not caused one state to conflict with another. If this was the cause then the theory may have been supported.

14- International Proxy Battleground.
(Determined in the case study not to be a cause.)

The theory avoids states the use of projecting power and would consider it abnormal and reason for other states to conflict with the aggressor. Many states were using the region and it was normal international politics. It seems that the theory is complete garbage and the case study most likely done incorrectly. The idea that a state’s behavior is determined by norms of internal cultural forms of cooperation. A state conflicts with another state due to deviant behavior does not seem to have any value. If so much emphasis is put on states being the main actors and the limit of man’s capability to organize, more ideas should have been considered for interstate relations. Man might be wired for cooperation as a survival mechanism but the ideas presented start so far off base from concepts of international relations, it has no possibility of redemption or valuable application.

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

---

Economic Statecraft: USA / Iraq – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

The tools of economic statecraft that the USA could have used to be successful before theinvasion of Iraq (2003) revolved around the primary goal of peace and security in the region.Instead a veil of propaganda promoting the exportation of democratic ideals (via military statecraft) superseded the original goal. Viewing the path to peace and security using economicstatecraft requires separating the targets, using well thought out alternative techniques, and assessing individual costs and benefits. A larger variety and targets used in alternatives requires assessing the effects on secondary targets and when judging costs need to be balanced on application towards the primary goal. One large application of economic statecraft is doomed to fail without a multitude of supporting policies. The other option, military statecraft focuses on one target and echo uncertain effects throughout a range of goals. In putting forward these alternative policies of economic statecraft, the discussion will first center on Iraq and expand outward in geographic regional rings. The consideration of whether Saddam Hussein should remain in power or not would be of lesser value relative to the goal of peace and security in the Middle East. Either containment or regime change shall not be chosen as a goal, but both are acceptable outcomes. Isolating and reducing the threat of Iraq’s actions disrupting the region takes priority. Additional goals concerning terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, human rights, poverty, security of oil supplies, and keeping the region in the USA sphere of influence will be considered. There were alternatives to the negative economic sanctions placed on the Iraqi people. The citizens of a nation were placed on international death row or at least by the stubbornness of a dictator. Such economic sanctions, either positive or negative, instead needed to target the Iraqi government. The United Nations attempt at negative sanctions on Iraq, resembled the League of Nations, followed the route of decide, declare, and disintegrate. Keeping dual purpose materials out Saddam’s hands and food from Iraqi stomachs it divided states into two blocks, diplomatic doves favoring time in order to work and impatient hawks calling for action. The military statecraft option chosen through US leadership, holding the hand of the willing, could have alternatively used that leadership position in an effort to adjust the sanctions. For example, the oil for food program did not achieve its desired effect and was doomed from the start. The scandals and kickbacks from the program and damaging effects on the Iraqi standard of living were predictable. Therefore, the implementation of the program could have been better directed and supervised. Involving states with less to loose financially if trouble escalated in Iraq would have been a wise decision. And where did the tons of food supplies come from? Surely not those poorer states with agricultural products to trade for crude oil. They would have been perfect candidates. Imported food stuffs were items that stockpiled under Iraqi government control and became a tool. An alternative would have substituted storable goods with the millions of tons of fresh fruit, vegetable, and dairy products destroyed for price stabilization on the world market. If your isolated and hungry, the last thing to do is let the prisoner determine the menu. Just how could the Iraqi government use food to control a hungry population had they tons of fresh fruit sitting in a warehouse with an impending loss of value situation? Modifying the content of food for oil program seems logical. Additional problems arise in having not made these changes. Pull North Korea into the equation, would they trade nuclear weapons for warehouses full of wheat? Could this food be traded for hard currency to support the Hussein regime during sanctions? Perishable goods to Iraq would have limit trading capabilities, instead the UN worried in detail over dual purpose material and machines while children died needlessly. It seems like a simple business decision that a rational person would make, dictating terms of an agreement while in a position of relative power. Oversight to the program could have been delegated to more neutral nations of respectable character such as Canada, Japan, Switzerland and the Scandinavian states. The countries that had investments (and previous connections) in Iraq, France, Russia, China, and Germany, for example, remained involved and were obviously too liable to corruption. Isolation through sanctions would need to focus on both sides of the coin. These modifications of positive sanctions (oil for food) would have reduced the damaging effects on the Iraqi people, prevented the negative world opinion on the harm of economic sanctions, and keep the UN partners hands cleaner. The Clinton Administration just agreeing to a policy is not enough. Economic statecraft needs to be analyzed in detail on the level of military operations. The sanctions isolating Iraq damaged economic ties of a few states without enough consideration for the consequences. For example the Chinese, French, and Germans had major investments in Iraqi telecommunications infrastructure. To influence these states to abide by the negative sanctions and agree to alternative positive sanctions suggested by the USA, there needed to be benefits offered for sacrifices made, either guaranteeing a percentage of any loss incurred, paying a subsidy to any firms loosing money under the sanctions, or even buying contracts or products destined for Iraq. It is straightforward approach but the sanctions would have been better supported and lasted longer under different conditions that calculated its ripple effects amongst participants. Other alternatives to reducing the Iraqi people’s suffering during the sanctions needed to be implemented. There could have been the channeling of funds for medical supplies and staff through acceptable institutions. The long ignored US Muslim population that is not in the extremist camp may have been a good candidate. International funding combined with US Muslim charities could work with legitimate Islamic charities (the Red Crescent) to distribute assistance. This long isolated segment of the US population would gain respect and acceptance stateside and display the benefits of multiculturalism to the world as a benefit. Costs could be minimal and the technique is feasible as proven by extremist groups have been using this for years. The UN economic sanctions, like the Iraq invasion (2003), were based on actions that existed at one point in time and was not a functioning policy after that. A goal is not obtained by one action and waiting for a response, a real policy would have built in contingency plans to adapt. Additionally aid directed for the Iraqi people could have been channeled through the surrounding states. A enemy handing an apple to you when you are hungry looks different face to face than through a gun sight. The traditional rivals of Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabia, have concerns over more than just peace in the region, sections of the the Iraqi population are related by the the Sunni and Shi’a Muslim sects of Saudi Arabia and Iran. Persuading Saudi capital to invest into Iraqi oil infrastructure as an offer to Saddam for compliance with UN mandates was never offered. It would have required Saddam to adjust his behavior but aid from a neighboring Muslim nation would have a better chance of acceptance than from a state outside the region . Of course this would have to be offered after the sanctions had further deteriorated the Iraqi economy and infrastructure. US­Iran relations have suffered terribly over the past decades. Displaying concerns for the Shi’a population and opening dialog with the Iranians to assist in the problem would have been an opening door to better diplomatic relations. If correspondence was accomplished in the Iran­Contra scandal, why not use another third party state again? Iran would be resistant to publicity of cooperation but any dialog, even if secretive, could lead to further cooperation. What other opportunities exist for US­Iran relations to start? This was an excellent opportunity. A significant problem for developing nations is the exodus of intellectuals. The USA has been a traditional destination for of these individuals. After the September 11th attacks there has been a significant reduction of skilled and educated labor choosing the USA as a destination. This loss along with the decrease in foreign students, could have been substituted by a brain drain targeted at Iraqi society. Offering benefits to defectors and the chance for a better life utilizing his or respective field of expertise would have not only weakened Saddam’s regime. Interviewing an academic scholar to determine his or her claimed skill or educational level would be much easier than determining if a student or tourist is part of a terrorist cell. Costs of such a plan would have to weighed against the cost of educating the US citizen to the same level and experience. If the negative sanctions did not diminish Saddam’s control over the Iraqi nation, an alternative was to complicate his long term ability to do so by manpower reduction. Iran stands as a main rival to Iraq. Iran also suffers from major deterioration of its oil industry infrastructure. If Saddam did not fear US led invasion, a strengthened Iran and possible future war, would be an additional threat to his regime. It may be 19th century European political attitude in nature to have a balance of power, but does stabilization have t be built on democracy or can it be accomplished by a balance of power? Additionally, if comparing Germany’s 20th century fears of a two front war, Saddam’s Iraq was in a much weaker state to deal with such a possibility. If the USA announced economic aid to help boost Iran’s oil industry, either direct or through a third party state, the weight of the statement would have its desired. Such aid could be slated for a future date, trickled, or delayed after the announcement to target Iran into complying with additional agreements. The announcing to possibly releasing spare parts for Iran’s aging US built fighter aircraft could also be included. Another possible war with Iran, this time without US military aid, could be the straw that breaks the camel’s back, either by internal military coup against Saddam or non­support of such a war by the populace. Potential costs of a stronger Iran in the region would be only to the degree of aid given, and could be terminated. It may seem extreme but the USA has let the these states to battle before, even the possibility of such could be used to US advantage. The costs may reduce US international prestige and outrage domestic forces in changing its hardline course towards Iran but this would only be temporary. Benefits ofa softer line on Iraq would also assist in Afghanistan reducing the threat Iran experiences by US presence through commencing any form of diplomatic relations. The European Union could also be swayed into supporting US policy for alternative economic statecraft. As previously suggested, the covering European losses in Iraq would be a start. A rather bold move would to be by meddling in Europe’s backyard. The goal would be to test the European Union resolve into accepted US hegemony or stepping up to the plate and becoming a major world actor. Europe went from one extreme to the other, imperialists to diplomats. The USA should pressure the EU to either become a partner or get out of their way. If the USA targeted economic aid into the Balkan and Eastern European states it may reduce the prestige of European leadership. Europe has for the past decades been unwilling to extend it political power into world affairs. The inability and lack of will to resolve the recent conflict in the former Yugoslavia is proof. The USA encroaching into the European Union’s sphere of influence would be an attempt to test its political will and become a stronger influence in world affairs or bow to US hegemony. Saddam was aware of the differences in US and EU attitudes and policies. By the USA forcing the EU to make a move and take a stance, it could release itself from the divide Saddam’s could manipulate. Is it feasible? Consider the Coalition of the Willing that allied to invade Iraq in 2003, a move was made to confirm support or resistance in regards to the use of military statecraft. Such a move should be done to test the alliances in economic statecraft as well. One can not assume cooperation from autonomous states that are not in direct threat of attack from a rogue nation. Turkey, the political Achilles heal of NATO and a problem the European Union vacillates on, could also be a target of US economic aid. A stronger US­ Turkish alliance raising cooperation above NATO’s common defense policy, would seal the ring around Hussein’s expansionist tendencies. Economic statecraft could be used to separate support or opposition to US foreign policy. One of the rallying cries to the Muslim for Saddam’s anti­US stance was the Israeli­ Palestine question. The Marshall Plan using a massive economic aid to assist recovery was able to unite a centuries war torn European continent into a cooperative political entity. Economic prosperity is a reality the Palestinians are along way from obtaining. Positive action towards Palestine would pull the race card from the poker hand of Saddam. Israel, could also be offered a major package with stringent conditions to further assure the policy of peace with Palestine would be successful. Just a percentage of what is spent on a overseas modern conflict would be effective. Economic statecraft can, like military statecraft, erode the strengths of a targeted opponent. China as a nation with a developing appetite for petroleum could have been involved with negotiating positive sanctions and aid in the region. China is searching for a greater position in world affairs. Its expansion policy into neighboring countries and military buildup seem the only methods available to achieving increase stature. The cash reserves and Chinese craft at using time as an asset would be a beneficial partner. They have relations with nations in the region and could have been an active player reducing the burden on the USA. Additionally, involving China would continue the policy of splitting Sino­Russo relations and help counter Russia’s influence in the region. Major cost would be acceptance of China as a viable world power and US realization that as the Soviet Union dissolved as a superpower, so did some of the status the US held. A perplexing problem in Iraq was the shadow cast by the former Soviet Union. Russia’s vast resources, traditional authoritarian ways, and historic interest in the region would be a challenge to any policy based on economic statecraft. Offering the Russians a warm water port or asking them to stop arms sales in the region would be a difficult prospect. The Russian will always choose their own way and either stance to isolate them or share some influence could be chosen. How involve in obtaining the goal of peace and security in the Middle East region centered on Iraq through economic statecraft may prove to be extremely challenging. A major stumbling block in US foreign policy would also have to consider the domestic political costs and ability for the government to gather public support. Typically US foreign policy is aimed at the Middle East to obtain secure oil supplies and sustain the US economy. Our domestic energy policy (or lack of) is geared towards the US as the center of the economic universe. The attitude is that of a world driver of the global economy with a firm hand grip on the wheel. If the US is going to steer, it should at least head in a direction minimally acceptable by the passengers. Could a combined domestic based policy and internationally focused target be such an alternative? Action taken on a domestic front could have a targeted goal on the international level. The do as I say, not as I do phrase could be eliminated and transformed in positive based economic statecraft. If USA domestic actions benefited the world, it would easier to secure long term coalition opposing Saddam’s regime. States defecting from cooperation in economic sanctions are more detrimental in the long run that sanctions that fail in unified attempts. A loose disgruntled coalition would be apprehensive to continued attempts as long term economic planning. Then how could US domestic policy strengthen support for economic or military statecraft amongst a multitude of autonomous states? Modern military specialists speak of the psychological effects of shock and awe. When the Bush Administration speaks of reducing oil dependency, it is more like talk and ignore. Rather than implementing domestic policy requiring slight changes in social behavior, US society continues on its self­centered path. The US implementing various domestic policies toreduce energy consumption with a publicly stated objective of benefiting its allies would definitely be labeled shock and awe. If the US reduce petroleum consumption, the resultant increased supplies would lower world oil prices. These benefits could be directed towards allies and potential ones. For example, Europe facing reduced energy costs in a time of high unemployment would benefit might loosen its stance to US leadership. One is more apt to follow a leader who sets a good example. Two previous US Presidents convinced a generations to cross an ocean and die to free Europe, couldn’t one at least try and get a generation not to run to the mall or joyride to save fuel? There is not mush press on any congressional leader riding a bicycle to work. Also, where did all the talk of hydrogen fueled automobiles go from Bush’s state of the union address a few years back? It left as fast as a Tomahawk cruise missile on its way to Baghdad. The US homeland offers an excellent opportunity to increase support for US economic statecraft. Finally, lower petroleum prices equates to less capital flowing into the hands of decision makers not concerned with US foreign policy goals. The prospect of the USA approaching the coalition of nations implementing all types of economic sanctions needed better foresight and diversity in its application. The leadership role needed the USA to accept more costs if it was to expect others to do the same. The obvious “ obey the sanctions or else” attitude towards Iraq was about as comprehensive and well thought as the current quagmire the USA is in now. If the poor man always pays more in the long run holds true, then the USA is truly a poor man. If half of the estimated 400 billion dollars spent on the war were directed on positive economic statecraft, either towards Iraq or the Middle East region, the USA may have regained its pre­Cold War stature as a genuine benevolent state. If the goal of sanctions was to damage Saddam Hussein, two outcomes were possible, either his compliance with regards to United Nations demands or regime change by popular uprising or military coup. The negative sanctions were relatively ineffective in either case. The addition of positive economic actions may have given the Iraqis something long forgotten, hope. If the Iraqi people looked at neighboring Islamic nations conditions as measure of US policy in the region, keeping Saddam may have been a lesser of two evils. A situation that is bad yet familiar is a rational choice to uncertainty of future conditions. The US and European Muslim population are not known praising the treatment received as immigrants. In either economic or military statecraft, some change is needed by governmental action. President Bush had two options in regards to calling upon his Christian faith as a leader. The first option was the sword to backup economic sanctions against Iraq. Let us not forget the use of the word crusade in one of his public statements. The second option is the long forgotten Christian principal of charity, let alone forgiveness. Commonalties in the two religions were not applied to the policy of economic statecraft. Christian based nations chose to create poverty rather than alleviate it. The longstanding alienation of the Muslim world has reached a new level and at the crossroads, the USA took a shortcut. By not adjusting economic statecraft to obtain goals, the US gambled with military statecraft without regard for real negative side effects. Foreign policy towards Muslim extremists, like the economic statecraft polices towards Iraq, passed on from the Clinton to Bush Administration clearly failed. The policy of economic sanctions again will be filed under the failed, labeling all forms of economic statecraft as ineffective. If the resolve is found to attempt economic statecraft in the future, it should be conducted on multiple levels and targets using a complete arsenal of techniques in innovative and even unorthodox ways.

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

---

The World’s Economic Systems – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

The world’s economic systems are best understood by basic comparison using the following six criteria: Allocation Mechanisms, Forms of Ownership, Role of Planning, Types of Incentives, Income Redistribution and Social Safety Nets, and the Role of Politics and Ideology. All six criteria intertwine in producing a description of how an economy operates however using the Allocation Mechanism and Forms of Ownership will define an overall classification for a system between traditional, capitalist, and socialist. If these three systems were points on a triangle, none would match theoretical criteria that would place them on these extreme points. The structure of an economy in reality is a mixture of alternatives within these criteria. Why economies align differently is greatly influenced by historical background and using these criteria we can connect their structures on a stable model for further evaluation. Economics is the science of allocative mechanisms. The custom allocative mechanism is not related to scientific thinking at all but is based upon how a society has operated in the past and will continue to operate. Social and/or religious mores are the dominant factor is in allocating resources. The second and most widespread choice is allocation by market forces in an open economy. A system of decentralized decision making for resource allocation between buyers and producers determined by prices. In it purest theoretical form is the basis for capitalism.

The last and most recent form is command wherein allocation is from a top-down perspective. Authority in various forms has become the decision maker disregarding prices. This is often associated with socialism and is a basis for Marxist-Leninism. Forms of ownership divide along to camps referring to the means of production, private ownership (individual) and state (government), the former associated with capitalism and the latter with socialism. Hybrids of these systems have developed market socialism and command capitalism responding to various economic situations with partial state ownership of an aspect of capital (land in a feudal society) or entire industries (steel manufacturing). Using these first two criteria typically can label to which area an economy falls between traditional, capitalist, and socialist. Depending on in what direction and economy is geared defines the Role of Planning. Consumer based system align towards no central planning and is associated with capitalism. Centrally planned economies operate on the planners’ preference be it military or reinvesting in capital. Highly inefficient, central planning is a key element in a socialist economy. Here again we find a type of hybrid in the form of indicative planning where government suggest a direction economy through policy action and central planning in the infrastructure coordination to keep an economy operating efficiently.

Incentives have three basic grouping, material (the driving force in capitalism), ideological (socialism), and religious (traditional). The separation of ideology and religious incentives is based on where the incentive is obtained, this life or the next. Often economies are again a mixture with material incentive the dominate influence even in the other choices. Incentives can also be classified as negative when the use of force or punishment are used as an alternative. Income Redistribution and Social Safety Nets are the most diverse in relation to various choices. Traditional systems have basic based on the family as a supporting unit, loyalty and obligation in feudal or religion based societies. Income redistribution has its extreme edges firmly planted in the capitalist side based on efficient individual productivity versus socialist concept of equal distribution. Systems with the most opportunity to obtain wealth in an open market have the least amount of income redistribution. Socialism tends to redistribute wealth through taxation. Both system however are greatly influenced by their historical experiences in regards to social safety nets. Private and public sectors supply various Social Safety Nets ranging from housing, public education and works, social security, health and child care, minimum standards and wages, and lifetime employment. The Role of Politics and Ideology is the last criteria and the defining phrase for the 20 Century. Liberal democracy (individualism) linked to capitalism pushes for open markets and a minimalistic role in government intervention (laissez-faire) in markets. Economic growth is the basic philosophy but often has deviated in Imperialism and Fascist Corporatism. The competing alternative Socialism (class-based) proclaims the state control is best for society. It also has evolved into negative forms involving dictatorships. A third middle way between the two system labeled, social democracy where the political banner of democracy is flown safely based in a equitable social system in an open market system.

The late 20 century Cold War era displays a slight variation in forms of ownership and significantly different efforts in income redistribution and social safety nets (I.R.&S.S.N.) between the U.S., Japan, Germany (East and West), France, and Sweden. Two major coompeting economic ideologies competed for superiority, capitalist with private ownership of the means of production and socialist with state ownership of capital in East Germany. In between we find a mixed ownership that can be sub-divided in to two categories. West Germany and Japan use some state ownership between government ministry, banking, and private sector with a goal of state ownership withdrawing leaving private ownership in major industrial sectors locked into the banking sector. Japan goes one step further interlocking ownerships of the means of productions between companies. France and Sweden, both a mixture of private and state ownership, have used state ownership to protect crucial industries
inheir growth periods and also to support them in their decay. Countries (France and th Sweden) that have relied on on state ownership in the late 20 Century have suffered the largest economic downturns with increased pressure of marker globalization and increased competition.
The was also a great divergence in I.R.&S.S.N. between these nations. The U.S. turned towards “The Great Society” in the 1960’s with a remarkable increase in taxes governmental safety nets. Then reversed its course reducing these policies during periods of slow growth
(1980’s). Japan utilized a system of equal wages and economic security supplied tied to the loyalty of workers removing government from the equation. On the opposite end we find East Germany and the entire economic ideology was based on fairness in income redistribution
and a gigantic bureaucratic social safety net, supplying neither in a sustainable efficient form. The social democratic West Germany, France, and Sweden over that period dramatically increased I.R.&S.S.N. benefits with their rapidly growing economies becoming some of the
most generous in the world. However increased global competition and externalities (oil shocks) have many to believe the need to shift away from heavy social subsidies to promote growth in their economies.

The macroeconomic performance of the U.S., Germany, Japan, France, and Sweden can be divided in three major cycles. The initial post war period where the intact efficient economies of the U.S. and Sweden were ready for increased economic globalization and the
decimated economies of German, France, and Japan that needed rapid growth to reach a state of normalcy. The second being where technological limits, oil shocks, social pressures, etc. in a changing world of the late 1960’s and 1970’s resulted in stagflation. The final period was the technology boom and increased global competition that rattled these economies. Economic growth has Sweden leading with above average consistent growth in the first half followed by Germany, Japan, and France. The U.S. has on average slower growth rate but is more
consistent and a larger economy with double digit growth very difficult. The U.S . leads in labor productivity followed by Sweden, Japan, Germany, and France due to the nature of its more competitive system. Some decline in labor productivity is in the European nations is due
the attempts at equality in the the workforce. Inflation seemed to be highest in post- war France, unstable in the U.S. until tackled by the Federal Reserve in the 1980’s, ran its course in Sweden as the government promoted exports growth, hitting Japan mostly in times of energy crises, and well managed by Germany as it is main target of the Bundesbank. Income redistribution was most equal in Japan, followed by Sweden, France, Germany, and the U.S.. Income growth throughout this period was consistently upward in all but showed a major drop in income (and a -3% growth rate) in Sweden around 1990/91 with a global recession, their joining the E.U., and uncertainty with a new government in power. Oddly the German economy had a 13% growth rate spike in 1991. This 60 year period shows a slow increase in unemployment in Europe with the U.S. staying below half their average. This is an indicator of different Central Bank monetary policies and displays the openness of the U.S. to adapt to changing labor markets. Japan seems to be facing a growth in unemployment at the end of the century. The complete picture is that these economies performed well macro-economically using various techniques to handle their domestic economies. However these methods are coming under pressure to adapt with increased globalization of the world economy.

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Politcal Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

---

China’s Decline – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

In 1978, the Chinese government began gradually opening itself to the outside world using a doctrine on centralized planning. This exposed China’s billion plus population to the potentially greatest market known to capitalism. Foreign corporations (FC), armed with Western business techniques and capital, entered with high expectations in domestic consumer sales and the abundant labor market for cheap production costs. FCs’ started out with the motto that ‘they cannot be left out’ of this opportunity, realizing all is not as it seems in China. They discovered China is ruled by man rather than law. The major difficulties can be isolated into various categories-political, cultural, geographic and economic.

The private sector is often at a disadvantage when competing against State Owned Enterprises (SOE). Receiving preferential treatment in obtaining licenses, bank loans, stock market listings and access to capital, the SOE are still inefficient. This centralized bureaucratic tradition of control is at China’s core and creates an unstable business environment according to Western standards. Recently, world opinion has also been criticizing economic data coming from Beijing as being inaccurate and used as a lure to foreign investors painting a rosy picture of China’s economy. It might be viewed as Beijing becoming addicted and wasteful with foreign investment.

Once established, FCs in China face a multitude of logistical obstacles, culture differences and externalities. The initial excitement of FCs’ expectations has been tempered by low efficiency as it takes $4 USD invested to produce $10 USD of growth. The input of capital investment for modernizing to improve this has often led to a few companies getting caught in a “value trap.” When they keep sinking money into a project believing that it will solve the problem, they only loose more. Another misconception that attracts FCs into China, is the belief that small margins in such an enormous consumer market will produce profit. Unfortunately, the Chinese average income is decades away from reaching the $5,000 USD level necessary for Western style discretionary spending on consumer goods. Much of these potential consumers are scattered over a wide area and serviced by a haphazard distribution system. Domestic competition is extremely fierce as the Chinese based businesses are often willing to operate on lower profit margins than FCs.

The most annoying issue facing FCs would be the distinct cultural differences. In a system where emotions take precedent over business logic, outsiders have difficulty understanding the personal politics in Chinese business relations. Face matters above all; appearance over substance. Offending this could lead to FCs without Chinese partners and compounded by a spotty legal system, leading to disaster. Examining the following graph may provide evidence. The amount of foreign investment in China may not have decreased due to difficulties there but, there has been a shift in the ratio from where the money is coming from. The business environment may be improving due to the increase in total investment among Asian investors. However, non-Asian investors are growing more culturally and geographically cautious to investing in China.

Externalities may also come to play in economic problems for FCs. Becoming tied into the world may affect China’s stability in an economic global slowdown or a shock such as an oil crisis. China is being pressured on human rights and environmental issues and in an effort to keep up appearances may make choices to please FCs to keep steady flow of capital arriving while further undermining the economy. One issue not raised in the research materials is that the problems faced by FCs would be the pressure from their domestic population and government as jobs and capital flow to a nation with less than a perfect reputation. Most issues faced by FCs can not be solved by them and are dependent upon how things play out in China’s path of economic growth

In reading the articles of The Economist, the idea that China’s economy is due for a decline in growth is suggestive. Many factors have lead to China’s massive growth. However, the long-term affects of these factors may in fact cause the economy to fall. Over investment, the breaking up of key monopolies and unemployment levels may all lead to the decline of China’s economy.

Throughout China, the notion of private enterprise is becoming accepted. The ‘inglorious rich’ are investing more and more; maybe too much for the sake of China’s economy. In a period with no consumer-spending binge, the economy obviously can not continue growing as much as it has. China’s society feels the need to horde their money away or place it in private investments. In 2004, China had 46% of its GDP invested one way or another. Due to a lack of provided health care, many feel the great need to start saving for their future and/or retirement. The economy as a whole needs the circulation of money that is being withheld in life savings.

The Economist believes the economy needs to slow down when it comes to investing. China’s government has come up with many ways to make investment look less appealing. For example, tighter controls have been placed on investment projects. Small banks are temporarily frozen to new lending and there is an increased encouragement in the use of China’s own capital in the construction field. In doing the above, investors are encouraged to do otherwise with their funds.

Along with the over investment trend, key monopolies in China are being broken up or faced with extreme competition. One of China’s largest monopolies is the cell phone industry. “Almost 70% of Chinese who can afford a mobile phone have one (The Economist: “Disconnected” Aug.26, 2004).” With two wireless operators: China Mobile and China Unicom and two fixed-line giants: China Telecom and China Netcom, this monopoly is obvious. Profit margins for these companies exceeded 50% in 2003. This is a huge increase and development. However, it is in only one sector of the economy; a sector being threatened for that matter. Management within the telecom sector is falling. Government appointed managers have taken the places of excellent, retired managers that were members of the Ministry of Information Industries(MII). These managers found the new “personal handy-phone system” (PHS) from Japan as a threat to fixed-line providers. Now firms are cutting prices and raising capital spending to win new customers. Government appointed managers have been enforcing the investment of “shoddy home-grown three generation (3G) mobile standards.” Japan’s PHS may be moving in on China, but the system is illegal according to the MII because it is such a huge threat to breaking up this monopoly. If any of these threats fully succeed, one of China’s main investment areas will be broken up. With such a massive, fast growing trend, the economy needs the industry to stay stable to keep itself stable.

Through over investment and attempts at breaking up key monopolies, China could indeed be in for a decline in growth. China has retreated itself from agriculture, industry and commerce, which created around 15 million unemployed within the cities and ten times that in the countryside. In 2003, this resulted in an overall rate of 20% unemployed. Unfortunately, numbers for unemployment rates are quite difficult to find and are often severely underestimated. With such larger numbers of unemployed persons, the economy is sure to decline. There is a gap between the ‘inglorious rich’ with private investments and those with nothing. This has led to the decline in consumer spending where not as much is going back into the economy as needed to keep it booming.

Urban Unemployment in China 2001-2004 – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

Many difficulties are facing China. With the decline in growth over the past few years, China will be looking at a crisis soon. The pollution and disease spread could create a disaster for the population. With some insight from The Economist, we believe that China will have to have severe policy reform and sustained change to effectively bring about higher health standards.

Pollution is a huge issue facing China right now. There are 16 of the world’s 20 most polluted cities located in China. Mao Zedong’s drive for industrialization has created environmental catastrophes all over the country. The swift acceleration of economic growth in the past has only led to more pollution and worsened the problem. China spends as much as $170 billion annually for degradation trying to fix this problem. Pollution still exists though. In some cases there are streets filled with raw sewage. There are severe effects to China’s health when sewage is right outside their front door.

China is facing this predicament also because of the spread of disease occurring in the country. Diseases such as tuberculosis and measles, which were thought to have been restrained, are making a return into China. With the healthcare system that has collapsed, basic health standards to prevent disease and spread have been put aside. According to the World Health Organization, China is the only country in the western Pacific region that relies on patients to finance childhood immunizations. Due to this lack of funding, not surprisingly, many peasants avoid treatment. The spread of disease cannot be tamed if the citizens are not receiving basic and necessary immunizations. A severe potential health threat would be another severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak. There are now 4280 probable cases and 206 deaths. China now accounts for 65% of the world’s total cumulative number of probable SARS cases and 44% of all reported deaths. If SARS where to take hold in a rural community where facilities are scarce, the disease spread would be almost impossible to stop. Another neglected health problem in China that has potential for creating a crisis is HIV. Currently China has around 1 million HIV carriers. The World Health Organization estimates that in 2010 this number could rise to 10 million. China accounts for about 840000 HIV infections, which is almost two-thirds of the western pacific region. In parts of China, rates of HIV prevalence in injecting drug users range from 20% in Guangdong to 89% in Xinjiang. This type of epidemic could create severe crisis. These issues need to be taken care of or China will be in a crisis.

In conclusion, we feel The Economist gives supporting information and examples to a possible decline in China’s economic growth. Hopefully, with the 5 Year Plan of 2006-2010, China can maintain or improve its growth rather than causing it to decline.

Brief Summary of Highlights CCP Central Committee 11^th Five Year Plan – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

• Maintaining high-speed economic growth, of at least 7-8 %
• Creates new jobs to absorb the 10-15million workers that enter the labor marker each year
• Green GDP to ensure that growth does not continue at the expense of environmental destruction.
• HIV/AIDS prevention and control: key public health issue
• Increased social services, for a “harmonious society” developed on scientific concepts.
• Integrate with the world economy.

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Politcal Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

---

The Road to Empire or Perdition; did imperialism diminish the democratic heritage?

Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

The journey through the last century certainly diminished our original democratic heritage. The system based on White Anglo Saxon Protestant ideology faced its greatest challenge when it embarked into supreme rule. The friction induced by Empire stripped away the white-tint of the American Melting Pot, exposing the argument for a mosaic society. The resulting reexamination strengthened our democratic heritage preparing it for the struggles of the 20th Century. The inevitable spark that burned away the white-skin hypocritical democracy was the United States foray into Imperialism in the Spanish-American War. My view is that the voices of argument concerned for and against the Empire and the survival of opposing viewpoints from this era secured the true soul of democracy. This controversial era prepared the United States for the next century of domestic struggle and international temptations of world-wide imperialism

The hypocratic nature of democratic Imperialism was in itself its greatest foe. After America’s initial rallying around the flag and going to war in the name of freedom, the quagmire of colonialism exposed the two sides of the issue. The religious righteousness of imperialism was it’s proud banner. This ideal so proudly waved over the freeing of savages in the Philippines and dark-skinned Christians in Cuba. Our great democracy was now firmly planted in other homelands denying them self-rule and causing controversy at home. The male dominant whiteface of 75 million Americans that had supreme rule over newly acquired territories had not bothered to look in the mirror to see itself. Consisting of 20 million Germans and Irish respectively, along with millions of Spaniards, French, Poles, Italians, and Russians.

This odd controversy of imperialism had the benevolent affect on our democratic society. Business, religion, and government all reacted differently in there arguments. The religious point of view for a WASP dominated Democracy gave support to a war against a Catholic Spain but was not our government set up to be separate from religion? Were Catholic immigrants loyal Americans and able to fight another country with it’s heart in Rome? Did Jews and Protestants now have a common enemy? Different religious groups came into commonalities and differences during this era erasing the old traditional lines of opposition. WASP Empire now brought religious groups more in the American political arena than ever before. Were we fighting ancient religious enemies or using the face of religion to promote freedom as we saw it through Anglican eyes? What of the freed savages? The export of democracy through empire signaled the impending decline of the white man’s congregation.

As society’s hidden ills of the Golden Age gave way to the pragmatic Era of Progressivism, the dawn’s light of imperialism shined even more awareness of the problems faced domestically. It seems the exposing of inequalities in our application of democracy provided the momentum that created Big Government. More new democratic voices were not only challenging imperialism but poverty, education, health, and racism. A government traditionally based on white male chauvinism now had to defend its actions.

Corporate views always opposed a strong federal government. The Spanish-American War added to the influence of government in American lives. The presidential role was redefined establishing strength to the office. Dominating industries had set the tone for American life but now government started playing a major role in the country’s direction. More government meant more strength and fast became a natural enemy to free running capitalism in the decades to come. How does this apply to imperialism diminishing our original democratic heritage? My opinion is that the growing strength Federal Governmental and influence in our society tore at the fabric of a male dominated hypocritical democracy. America was becoming re-democratized. The founding ideals and principals of democracy were not diminished by imperialism but rather exposed what needed to be shed in order to flourish. Proof can be seen the 20th Century Constitutional Amendments and their enforcement.

The debate over Cuban and Filipino annexation sorely revealed the problems of our domestic democratic issues. How could we respect the rights of savages to expel us though they weren’t ready for our democracy and at the same time deny African-Americans suffrage under the shadow of the Constitution? The Filipinos weren’t ready for Democracy and needed our guidance, were not all Americans ready for this? If we had not seen the results of our own imperialism abroad, would we still be blinded by WASP-based Democracy? I believe it would be so. Was our democratic heritage a slice of meat sandwiched between freed domestic sub-humans and not ready to be freed foreign sub-humans?

Additional domestic voices for democracy, though not of Anglican blood, were the many recent immigrant groups. The hierocracy of Empire raised great debate and influence amongst three immigrant groups I examined, The Irish, Poles, and Jews. Each group reacted similarly, the Irish being exiled, Poles pilgrims, and the Jew centuries-long wanderers, having been victims of Empire themselves. With substantial historical differences, the Spanish-American War brought these groups together in the quest for there own free homelands. First by embracing American democracy, they used their support initially for the Spanish-American War as a future vehicle towards freeing their respective homelands. Secondly they wanted to prove their loyalty to America. A sub-class of whites in a WASP-based democratic society, these immigrants soon turned to some of the same hypocrisy towards the newly free sub-humans of the Philippines and Cuba. Every argument seems interchangeable from no matter what side you are on in an Imperialistic struggle. Immigrant voices were at this time period brought into American politics much stronger through my research into the situation. Oddly enough they seemed to loose direction as much as Anglican democracy did following a splendid little war. Immigrant leadership, journalism, and theatre all seemed to change after a successful bought of American Imperialism. Pre-war immigrant nationalism seemed toned down once no one was standing on their heads and they got a taste of another class of people under their feet to judge as they had been. Many immigrant journalists did call foul against American oppression over seas recalling their recent pasts but immigrant nationalism never gained the momentum it had believed the Spanish-American War would create. Had not America fulfilled it’s call to imperial destiny, would these immigrant groups faired as well in today’s society? It seems that America’s Empirical destiny also lost purpose and direction after the Spanish-American War. The period of controversy and self-examination of its behavior may be the saving grace of democracy.

The exportation of democracy through imperialism seems evil from the humanitarian point of view. Other subtle imperialistic actions were often taken using a combination of economic controls and military superiority in the Caribbean and Central America. Those cases of Imperialism-lite seem harmless to our society’s viewpoint, as there is not much domestic opposition to our government’s actions overseas until American blood is lost. Were there any other instances of Imperialism in the 20th Century? Soviet, Nazi, and Imperial Japan’s expansion though arguable from opposing sides as just as hideous as our own, did not have a democratic voice. Would a democracy have flourish had one superior race dominate the world? If America had not expanded at the end of the 19th century, would a fascist or socialist regime now run her? The hypothetical argument is only to expose a major difference in various attempts at worldly Imperialism. Though the motto is always that the victor is righteous, the government of the United States is the only one to truly survive it’s bought into Imperialism. The other imperialistic governments, thankfully in hindsight, are written into the pages of our history books.

The United States jump into imperialism came at a crucial time in its history. What would have been the results of isolation? A free society on paper but a class-based society in reality? Would a weak government have led us into a society dominated by business? Would the workers in society revolt towards socialism? Probably a world that we could never truly imagine would exist. Would the escape from the Depression be a solution similar too Hitler’s? Would we be surrounded by European Colonial Empire? It was truly a time for America to gain knowledge about itself and the world. Unfortunately Imperialism did not awaken us immediately and it has taken another century of continuous domestic struggle to reform democracy.

So has the experience of Empire diminished our democratic heritage? From the viewpoint of the writers of the Constitution it may well have. Imagine if this essay was written by Colonial politician, transported to our time period, after he had worked at the voting polls in New York City or Selma, Alabama during our last major election in. The step into the role of Empire was America’s first real performance on the world stage. The critics, though applauding after the performance, criticized her role but amazing enough, the performance still goes on. The policy of us once carrying a big stick to spread the American Way has recently been picked up and smacked us in the back of our head on 11th of September 2001. I see similarities in the last two turns of centuries for our democracy. Following the Spanish-American War we struggled domestically for a hundred years, it looks like we are about to struggle internationally for this century. Will the gains we made in civil rights be eroded by the need for Homeland Security? The romanticism of the Golden Age that blinded America just before the 20th century and all its struggles may be repeated in a similar fashion to our bubble bursting stock market hayride dot.com 90’s. American democracy now, as it was 100 years ago at the doorstep of Imperialism, may have an entirely different face by the end of this century.

Heritage is defined in two ways: 1. Property that can or is inherited. 2. tradition, etc., handed down from one’s ancestors or the past. Did imperialism diminish the democratic heritage? The answer may be in restating the question: the Road to the Future or Anathema; is democracy inheritable?

References researched:

Video: 23 hours from the following series:
American Visions, History of the 20th Century, Biography of America, The Century

Special Sorrows- The Diasporic Imagination of Irish, Polish, and Jewish Immigrants in the US
by Mathew Frye Jacobson

---

My efforts are towards writing reviews poliyical science for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique website by a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

General Agreement on Tariffs & Trade – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

By the very nature of its title, General Agreement on Tariffs & Trade, leaves it open for evolutionary adjustment and future debate. The creation of which US hegemonic influence was crucial yet has it become a controllable tool or unpredictable hindrance in respect to international cooperation. Initially created as a short term economic method of securing long range global peace and security, GATT evolved into a permanent regime tool used by the United States as the largest economic power to extend its interests over other nations. Keohane, Snidal, and Strange, use varied analyses for its creation, maintenance, and decline.

Keohane methodology is based cooperation between industrialized states in need of an international regime. The post war era contained a single actor (US) dominating control of resources and sources of capital and industrial production. Keohane insists that the path of least resistance (current lowest cost as to future conflict) is the rational choice. Realist would tend to argue against Keohane’s analysis of behavior as theory for cooperation into the GATT regime. However perceivable benefits are not only for those participating but those witnessing the regime’s function. If avoidance of future disputes is not enough incentive for regime membership than either relatively low costs of entering after its creation or satisfising impulses in a complex international setting. The rules imposed by GATT are of a cooperative nature and not threatening to sovereignty of nations. Keohane takes a look at the actual decision making environment for creating the regime and the hegemon’s ability to create fertile ground for cooperation. In his work with Nye they discuss that a hegemonic power would have the ability to maintain essential rules governing interstate commerce. This is can be viewed a major incentive for the willingness to create GATT.
The politic environment in the post war period reflected an awareness that military power had failed in maintaining peace and security and economic power would need to replace it as an influence. The previous world hegemon, Great Britain, used trade within its sphere of interest and not with its political rivals and military allies. The United States created GATT as basic regime to instigate long term commitments with both its allies and defeated rivals. Keohane also states the creation of GATT regime did not guarantee cooperation but did create an environment in which actors behaving rationally could see it was not based on zero sum game. Regime creation was based on the ability to obtain mutually beneficial results where otherwise they would be difficult to obtain.

Snidal views the creation of GATT in terms of gains and costs rather , what is at stake is the motivating factor. The hegemon creates a regime based on self-interest and is willing to bear the cost of providing the public good (free trade). Even though the actors are being abused by the hegemon they will join in its creation due to the gains out weigh the costs of alternatives. The hegemon paying the costs of the creation of a regime is the initial step. The ability for privileges to be bestowed or withheld in joining GATT is Snidal’s analysis its formation. Snidall does challenge the theory that a hegemon creates a region on cooperation and mutually benefits by pointing out it is self-interest and centralized control over other states as a reason to be. The US then is an enforcer of GATT and besotowes privileges and abuses the system to its advantage. The creation of a self serving controlled trade regime is possible due to the lack of states ability to challenge it. Overall the hypothesis is based on empirical attributes rather than theories of rational behavior.

Strange looks at America’s economic might as the main measure in insuring cooperation in the formation of GATT. In a world were economic strength took precedent over military power, the United State’s ability to create a regime structured to support its domestic agenda. All the hegemonic criteria for Strange’s structural power list: security and control, production, credit and financing, and technology and knowledge were in place. GATT’s basis for creation was a banner of liberal economics tailored to meet America’s needs. The overall domination in both economics and military strength created a regime based on doctrine of applying liberal economics and GATT was a convenient solution to address issues confronting short term goals. Strange views regime creation based on a duality of utility to meet the needs of domestic and foreign policy. With irredentism fading as a political goal, GATT began as a realization that liberal economics was the future to and controlling of trade was the desired outcome. Therefore the creation of a trade structure based on an American model was the logical choice.
The continuation of the regime under Keohane’s follows a similar pattern of forward looking incentives. At GATT’s creation the avoidance of problems has now been replaced with easier obtainment of future agreements, lower transaction costs, quality information, previously unreachable economic goals becoming a reality for states. The momentum of GATT is sustained by the rational of future benefits rather by its creator manipulating the controls. Rationality rewards itself and the US only needs to stay involved rather than continuous maintain the system of free trade to produce benefits. If a high level of cooperative equilibrium can be sustained with continuous cooperation, it can easily overcome occasional crises caused by irresponsible actors.

Snidal retorts that it is the weighing of the negative side effects of the system collapsing that induces sustaining of a regime. As more actors benefited from international trade and open markets in the last half of 20th century, an increase in their relative economic sizes (and risks) in the global economy increased. Snidal states that the complexities of various actors interests outdated a simple rational view maintaining the regime. Cooperation in GATT will increase as the system sways under the US decline. Repairs will be made in areas that are examined by empirical analysis of relative power distribution within the regime. Those who have relative gains in the system will help maintain it will bear the costs of it maintenance even in the hegemon’s decline.

Actors within the regime, though they face with taxation by the hegemon to its maintenance, do have potential alternatives. Though some states will submit to the rules as long as the costs of overthrowing the hegemon exceed the benefits, blocks of states have created trading regimes outside the Untied States control. Oddly enough the resemble the original environment of GATT, small number of actors with common inrustries and /or regions. Additionally discontent with centralized rule has challenged the theory of a hegemon being necessary as witnessed by trade increases among poorer states. Further damage to the system includes free riders enjoying the benefits of trade without paying the costs. Snidal’s analysis goes beyond a generalized theory of cooperation for mutual benefits using data analysis that GATT is a dynamic model with constant deterioration, repair, and shifting of relative power. The trade regime maintenance has become more of a trap for the largest animal due to its complexity.

Strange lessens the impact of the players in GATT and emphasizes the actions of the United States are the cause of the systems peaks and disruptions. As the controlling state and creator of GATT the actions of the US will reflect the health of the system. Attention needs to based on the relative position of the US within the system to understand the the dynamics. Leadership in system maintenance in Strange’s opinion is based on internal domestic policies and actions of the hegemon. GATT is maintained to control trade guided by the domestic influences of the United States. World trade is maintained not by a benevolent or coehersive actions of a hegemon but by the sheer fact the United States has a grip in how it structurally functions. The United States is the largest partner in gap and being the most influential player in a model it created gives it the ability to control the output. System maintenance is eased as by creating the game it can adjust rules based on its needs. As trade rounds over the past decades continued, the issues on the table and most of the agreements were biased towards the United States. The only damage to the system has been actors with the ability to focus on long term goals rather than direct short term confrontation to the trade system. Though other states have made relative gains in international trade, they have been subject to costs as United States occasionally became reluctant due to domestic polices concerns to pay the full cost of the system. Although Keohane’s rational behavior analysis is an essential tool for the study of states’ behavior in creation and within a regime, and Snidal’s argument looks to empirical facts to chisel away at hegemon as the regime evolves, Strange’s viewpoint demonstrates the effectiveness of the structure it created to withstand changes in domestic polic and foreign doctrine. There is more strength in flexibilty than rigidness and Strange basing a theory on the function of the structural mechanism rather than behavior of the actors appears a better definition.

GATT thorigh each round of trade talks, though heavily biased by the 10% rule of participation in an issue, may have favored domestic concerns but as the world economy shifted in relative power and types of industries and services the structure remained. The Kennedy Rounds with its reduction in tariffs on manufactured goods benefited the industrial nations, in face of the conflict with the growing power of the Soviet Union, did little to address the concerns of multitude of new nations in the world political arena yet the regime remained. When we look at the topics from the Tokyo round, problems within the US from the economic growth of Japan are addressed: reduction in tariffs on manufactured goods, non-tariff barriers, intent of domestic legislation, subsidies and countervailing duties, dumping codes/ tariff as retaliation, government procurement codes, custom rules, and determining manufactured country of origin. In a world where many nations suffered due to the successive oil crises, the US took a short term look at problems. At this time we developments in the world for control outside the US sphere of domination in the forming of trade blocks and willingness of the European Community for example to deal with problems throughout the world in the signing of the Lome Trade Accords for example. Through these decades of changes neither international difficulties, alternative actions, or US self-interest dissolved GATT.

Advancing to the Uruguay Rounds, the trade regime addressed other nations concerns yet the US was able to control the outcome. The fact that 123 nations attended even after decades of previous dominace by US attest to the structural integraty of the established trade system. Even when the WTO established, the US has the power to allows nations to join that do not comply fully, China for example due to US interest there. We also witness a loss of US influence as no US veto is possible possible in international court trade decisions. yet the system is built with the US having an internal check mechanism, its constitution, to allow loosing control of the system. Controlling the output of negoiatitions includes not only getting what you want but stopping what you do not want.

I side with Strange in that the US can adjust its behavior and play a dominant role in the world by showing increased reciprocity, leadership, and denial in trade talks while still taking into concern its domestic agenda. Strange’s description of how short term polices of the US based on domestic concerns can cripple its effectiveness as a world leader but it does not dimish its ability to repair and influence global trade. The Doha Rounds failed any major improvements yet the active participants are not at war with each other.

Keohane’s placing emphasis on the creation and need of a benevolent hegemon and Snidal’s places focus on challenges to its ability to control the system do not explain the true evolutionary success of a temporary regime and it subsequent longevity. When we look at the numbers of states that have joined GATT and participate in the rounds, we have evidence of increased compliance. The upgrade to the WTO further extends the dominance of a system that is truly an American structure. If the Asian Tiger export based model or Western European model of social-economic concerned trade policies had become the dominant, Strange’s argument of US structural power would not hold weight. As the the trade round fail or succeed on issues that concern American domestic policies, it is the basic structure of the system that allows the US to control outcome of negotiations. The instruments of trade policies controle dby the United States will withstand adjustments. The true threat will be actors that attack the trade system by not adhering to fundamental rules of liberal economics. If these actors gain from the system by manipulating the structure they are playing a zero sum game contrary to the goal of international peace and security. Any upcoming challenger lacking transparency, not adressing trade imbalances, strict currency control, protective regulations, weak naking regulation, failure to cooperate with regime maintenance, and ignoring basic modern macro-economic principles in order to gain from world in a zero sum game, would have false sense of control. GATT benefits and success has been mutually beneficial to world trade regardless of the fluctuations due to US domesticism. The furtherance of GATT over its original short term intent has made a situation where a new regime’s cost would defy creation. Serious challenges to structural components that have developed would not be tolerant by its members. Taking China’s rise by abuse of the system as an example from above statements as an upcoming challenger, its gaining on US dominant influence on the world trade structure would be a predominant factor in disrupting world peace and security. Strange’s hegemon trade model tolerates abuse and privileges from the US and actors in GATT but any attempt to disrupt the structure of US control of security, production capabilities, credit and financing, and leading technologies will result in a destabilization global economics and security. The most of the world’s states have come to accept and tolerate GATT’s structure but will eventually not tolerant its replacement by another.

---

My efforts are towards writing reviews and political science essays for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Politcal Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique website by a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

Onset of WorldWar 2 – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

he two theatres of conflict both commenced with territorial issues stimulated by uni-party controlled governments looking forward to future economic demands. On both fronts the aggressors were inclined to use power politics and in both instances the opposition was reluctant to respond. The Pacific region witnessed somewhat of an arms race in naval capacity but more intense of an issue would be territory. 1st off Japan’s army wanted expansion into Indo-China and North China where she felt it was her historic right to control. Here the weaker European Powers could not defend the regions effectively. Obtaining these areas and resources were an absolute for the Japanese and not negotiable. The proximity of the US territorial-wise in the Philippines was of concern also. Japan needed expansion, Russia could be dealt with over Manchuria, and Indo-China due to Colonial Power weakness. The only real opposition would come from the US both politically and militarily.

Alliances come into play in that the Brits danced with the Americans to help cover them in the Pacific while they were pressured from the Nazis. On the Japanese side the felt an alliance with Russia would secure China which quickly fell through with Hitler’s invasion. The US did try to negotiate with Japan over territorial issues but neither side would compromise. This escalated in a tit for tat fashion of demands for someone to back down over territory but neither side would. When the US imposed economic sanctions, it was an undeclared thrust to war in the Japanese point of view. The Japanese had no real opposition in the area except for the US navy. Which we know they hit very hard, in a technique learned in the Russo-Japan War of 1905. This type of dispute over territory did not seem based so much on a long standing rivalry or proximity as much as new type of territorial conflict based on modern economics and the projection of power. It did evolve into a Nuevo-rivalry as the two nations’ population were told it was an “us vs. them” struggle. Do not feel this war would have been avoidable due to the nature of the Japanese goals and for an odd occasion the lack of major alliances in region had an reverse effect. Maybe major alliances in the region would have constrained the Japanese more.

In Europe, proximity and territory come into play. The borderlands have been long standing disputed areas for Germany and its people. The basic scenario like that of Japan except the shear desperation for raw materials is replaced by nationalism. Long-term the Nazis needed economic gains but the onset was based on old, old desire to unite all the German peoples. From Alsace-Lorraine and Sudetenland, the power politics probes of Hitler went unchecked. The arms race was only being run intensely by the Germans and the backing down on German territorial advances was not matched by the counter mobilization. Alliances opposing the Nazis finally sprang to life after a beating, quite a contrast to the pre-WW I alliances that lit from a spark.

Two linking factors in the conflicts seem to be most viable. One , Russia, a rival in a classic sense but by aligning her empire with Germany and Japan could neatly carve up the territory between them. Had this sleeping bear been kept in place, the mid-20th century axis of evil would have faired much better. Hitler’s Barbarossa upset this balance bringing the US into the War. The other link I see is the lack of effective world member institutions challenging the tyrannical and empirical probes of dictatorship. The world’s democracies only seemed to focus on their country’s issues instead of democratic issues on a world wide scale. WWII did create 2 super powers and this ability to project power did set up the next few decades of probe-like conflicts.

---

My efforts are towards writing reviews and political science essays for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Politcal Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique website by a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

Netherlands, Belarus, Venezuela, Mozambique – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

Basic Data

The basic data revealed expected demographic characteristics especially in population growth. The Netherlands in an advanced state of development had a leveling off of population growth, developing and politically younger Venezuela and Mozambique had slight increases in population, while battered ex-soviet republic Belarus had a decline in population. The current UN statistic on worldwide population growth is 1.3%. Examining more figures showed the average age of the Northern States was slightly less than double than that of the Southern states and the percentage of population 14- 25 years old was also almost double at close to 20% of the total population. The physical characteristics when analyzed showed one major similarity, average a rainfall of all four nations was approximately the same at around 30 inches per year. This would seem to give them all an equal level of advantage in agricultural production but the Netherlands had the most arable total amount of land as compared to the other States. Here I would predict that the technical advantages and capital availability give the Dutch the advantage in maximizing land usage.

Foreign Policy Information

In regards to the direction of foreign policy for the nations listed, the end of the East-West conflict has slightly redirected their goals. My opinion of the Dutch, I see that their support for an enlarged EU and NATO is two-fold, as traders it brings markets into their sphere and in politics it helops balance their awkward position between Germany and France. Unfortunately with the Soviet threat eliminated, anti-immigrant policies and opinions are developing there similar to those in the remainder of Western Europe. Belarus position of leaning towards Russia for strength surprised me as I would have thought they would play the West off against Moscow for support. Doing this may seal their fate as being a potential gateway to Russia’s massive resources. Most likely the governmental ties and corruption from the pre-Soviet era influenced the swing eastward. Venezuela seems caught up in the typical Latin American one-step forward two-steps back as they try to deal with regional issues but with an oil exporting economy are too heavily tied to the world with one major industry leaving them economically vulnerable. Mozambique seems to be at mercy of whatever support it can muster economically and hopefully stave off political instability being on the edge of the Muslim World and an area of poverty and Cold War proxy skirmish region loaded with small arms.

Levels of Economic Development

All nations were dependent on cereal grain importation and I can not imagine there are but a handful of nations that are self sufficient in that area. I am curious about the Dutch levels as traders, are they using these imports to produce other foods for export or are they using them in livestock for meat or dairy exports. In the other 3 cases I do not believe any assistance from IGOs or NGOs in the next decade can turn their agriclultural systems around. Here American MNC style know-how may be a quicker route to increased production. The trouble their may be the fear of such outside forces on these developing nations. I will hypothesize that education and literacy are tied to having some industrial base and growth. Mozambique’s college students could barley fill a community college’s roster.

Implications of the Arms Race

In this area most countries spent equal percentages on military, education, and health expenditures except for Mozambique. In that instance education was reduced and Military expenditures were increased. It looks like a case of looking at a short range problem as a greater threat than a long range one. The other three countries with longer histories of self-governing showed a more balanced approach. An additional reason my be that they also have neighboring countries that are more stable and rely on collective security and alliances.

Conclusion

Overall these countries can be ranked correctly as 1^st through 4^th world countries. One would make a grave mistake in using solutions from the top down to try and build the lesser developed countries up. The attitudes of successful western countries may just blind them to what theses other nations truly need to develop but after spending time on websites of these IGO and NGO web sites I can see that an endless wave of bureaucracy is just as detrimental. It may not also be wise to look at problems faced by these countries as internal but regional. Using Mozambique’s troubled region as an example and their high arms to education ratio of expenditures. Any outside aid may have to address the region as turmoil does not seem to respect borders. Also the length of independence seems to correlate with the level of success in this limited survey of states.

---

My efforts are towards writing reviews and political science essays for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Politcal Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique website by a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

Problems facing modern India – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

The complex and long history of India culminating into a modern state has created a mosaic of problems. Categorizing the problems into separate social, economic, and political ones, then simply examining them will not do. Each problem contains components of the other that are continually aggravated by modernization. India has as many different ideas on where its future lies as is does languages. Efforts to resolve problems in one are have generally aggravated another. In a push down here, pop up over there situation, India is struggling modernization.

Independence sparked a level of violence and fear of uncertainty amongst various religious. sects, especially the Hindus and Muslims The needless slaughter of migrating population in and out of India to this day carries a stain of animosity. It has affected foreign policy by creating a level of distrust with its neighbors and unsolvable irredentist claims for land as in the example Jammu and Kashmir. The inability to solve this problems is intensified as both India and Pakistan link this issue as a condition to other issues. Additionally, the troubles there are a worsened by the war on terrorism in militant groups losing the safe haven in Afghanistan and then becoming a useful tool for the subversive actions supported by Pakistan in Kashmir. Losing this area may give the signal for other domestic groups to demand autonomy. At other border areas, the situation is similar in that demarcation has divided language groups in half, is in the Bengali inhabited region.

Another problems is the multitude of ethnic groups and the societal caste system dilutes the sense of being an Indian citizen. Efforts to solve problems by creating a standardized language for example, faces stern opposition. If India had one major ethnic group that could lead and be tolerant of minorities, a more secular working government could be created. The parliamentary democratic system in use along with the world’s largest constitution (though weak in the area of judicial review), allows to much political maneuvering by states. The federal government in New Delhi needs the cooperation at state levels to implement its programs but is often tied to demands in obtaining support. Too many political influences have caused swings in government policies and the lack of a large middle class to anchor the politics in the center is a major stumbling block. The elites are concerned with staying in power while answering to the moods of the potentially rebellious masses, not at cooperation for problem resolution.

The political maturity of India is not only crippled by the self interests of states but compounded by “baksheesh (labeled black money that is used in bribes). From the bottom up, citizens need to “grease the wheels” of civil service officials to get things done, while money coming from top down from government programs evaporates and finds itself in the pockets of officials. The classic example being a school built but lacking teachers or books to fill them. The common people, where democracy is supposed to gather strength, is often dominated by village leadership and pressures from within a one’s jati. The caste system places one’s duty (dharma) not to the nation but ones spiritual position in the universe. One wonders if any citizen has ever cast a vote in the best interest of the nation as one cannot define what being Indian is.

India has made great advances in technology and a growing middle class. But it is just a drop in the ocean of poverty. The economy is crippled by labor laws, lack of education, and low productivity. In ability to produce efficiently has affected its trade balance as it can not produce enough to meet domestic demands resulting in needed imports. The historic constitutional milestone, the “Reservation Policy (affirmative action), and non-seasonal adjustment of labor stops influences of supply and demand from controlling the job market. Job security does not equate to work initiative or creativity in solving problems. With two-thirds of the population of working in agricultural (which produces inly 25% of the GDP), the labor pool for middle class jobs (center aligned politics) is limited. Low productivity may be due to a low education level among the masses, but the isolation of the Indian economy by protectionist policies created a system not adapt to global competition. Additionally. this isolation confronts foreign investors attempting to penetrate the Indian market. The immense pressures caused by domestic politic forces can overwhelm foreign investment as in the case of General Electrics recent attempt to build energy plants in India. The idea of making a profit did not sit well on the Indian government which had been subsidizing energy costs to accommodate public concerns over market forces.

The arms race with Pakistan is also a double edged issue. Keeping pace with Islamabad in nuclear weapons and military forces drains the economic resources and talent from other problems. Additionally, it aggravates relations with the international community with its refusal to sign the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. India’s stance as a longtime non-aligned nation does not make a good ally in a defense treaty pact and is attempts to please both the 1^st and 3^rd world. Even if India desire to closely align with an ally for a stronger defensive position against Pakistan, domestic protest would surely develop due to the resentment of foreign intervention, as was in the case with British Raj. Finally, India may deserve a seat on the UN Security Council with its population of one billion but it has not shown the leadership necessary to fill that position.

The religious diversity in a once historically tolerant nation, has evolved into a political tool for nationalist tendencies. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) use of Hinduism caused a backlash of violence while doing nothing to move the country forward. Reversely, outside nations support religious minorities, the Islamic communities by Pakistan, in disrupting New Deli’s rule. Almost all religious groups have felt threatened not only domination, but also the strengthening of secularized government has resulted in terrorist acts and assassinations. The enduring history of various religions have also compounded tensions due to disputes over sacred grounds as in the 1992 Rama temple riots. These internal problems of protecting religious minorities have to have some affect in international relations when approaching Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia or Iran, on which India is oil dependent sorely dependent.

The energy and infrastructure barriers compound modern problems. Originally set up as an export colony, the infrastructure is not designed to satisfy domestic needs and internal trade. What backwater roads do exist are not always seasonably usable. The masses of humanity that are moved on existing rail lines have also been a traditional target of ethnic violence and terrorist acts. As India does grow and expands its transportation network, demand for imported energy will only inflate costs making it inaccessible to the impoverished masses. Even the solution of the micro-car Tata could not make it through the web of domestic politics. Turning to energy, India’s dependency on foreign oil makes it foreign policy moves complicated. Closer relations with Iran for example to supply needed energy, has disturbed the U.S. a source for nuclear energy technology. Not having a military to project its power to defend or control the world’s energy sources forces India’s behavior to the pressures of those that can. The lack of a modern merchant fleet, as compared to Red China for example, leaves it again dependent of outside actors decisions and less competitive in the global market.

An overall fear of change amongst poor and religious groups in this period of modernization has created extremes. From Marxists groups to assassination as a traditional tool of political protest, India has amazing held together. Although an immensely diverse in geographic conditions, this is aggravated by its global position making it susceptible to destructive monsoons and unpredictable droughts. Combined with the fact India’s neighborhood is filled with troubled states, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Pakistan for example, has the effect of consistently irritating India’s domestic and international politics. The concept of being a leader of the world’s non-aligned nations, after examining its current problems, places more like a paralyzed deer in the headlights. It is not a question of how India will advance, it is a in which direction the world’s largest democracy will be steered under the influence of forces that it cannot control always control.

---

My efforts are towards writing reviews and political science essays for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique website by a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

Idealist versus Marxian Theory World Systems – Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz

A. How is a world system a modernization of Marxian theory?

The similarities between the two theories are the best method to describe how Wallerstein’s world system is a modernization of Marxian theory. From this one will be able to see how the changes in the state system, though unpredictable in the 19th century, take Marxism to an unforeseen stage. There are common factors between Wallerstein and Marxism in regards to the historic capital versus labor argument, status of actors dependent on economic class, mobility of capital, and the political relationship between states on economic factors. However, the effects of the market for the global economy and the divisions within labor, are new insights. States role as sub-actors also have a modification.

The mobility of capital in Marxism is used to maximize profit by finding cheaper labor costs, Wallerstein proposes economic down cycles as the factor when and where capital was shifted. As capital seeks maximized profits and does so by increased efficiency it reduces the demand for labor. This in turn reduces demand for products in the market with increased unemployment.

The types of labor are further influence these shifts. Wallerstein describes demand in types of labor are reflected by market demands. The world system’s economic cycles also shift the demands for types of labor due to market conditions wherein Marxism profits were the only motive for capital flows.

Wallerstein also has state behavior modified. Marxism has the role of states’ following capitalist demands. The modernization theory has worldwide economic conditions influencing state decisions. The handful of stages in politic-economic development of man places a straight line role of states, Wallerstein has close to one hundred economic cycles used to describe the changing role of states in the system. Marxism proposes a clash between core capitalist states warring over resources as the last stage of capitalism. Wallerstein’s adaptation places conflicts with regards to periphery states and the denial of consumption being as the final step in an injustice world system. Socialist opinions on means to an end could have two sides. To a Marxian, controlling the means of production drives the system, in Wallerstein’s world system the demand for equitable distribution.

B. How is a world system theory similar to idealist theory?

Various idealist authors have similarities with Wallerstein on economics as a measure of power of states and define the limitations of the state as a main issue. Mitrany and Wallerstein both view man’s problems as crossing borders due to unequal distribution of resources between states. Both agree the current state system needs to be replaced by a world system. The determining factor in a state’s status in the system is it level of function within the whole system. Therefore a a state’s power is relative and its ability to act is limited. States are declining actors and rising actors in the system are based on economic commonalities.

Cobden, like Wallerstein, also correlates power distribution and competition in economic terms as a main characteristic for actors in the system. This is also a common cause for war for the two schools. States in both theories will decline in importance and economic classes and their respective behavior based demands for products drive the system. Kant, though favoring peace through man’s common goal of peace, is similar only in what it ignores in common. Keohane’s ideas also places economic power relative to the system as determining status and behavior. In both, this power is shifts and cooperation will be based on shared economic interests of states. Overall both place welfare as yardstick for security and rational behavior in international relations focuses on this as its main goal.

C. How is world system theory similar to realist theory?

Actors in both are states and compete with each other in an anarchic system. The status in the system is based on economic power in relationship to others, though in Realism this economic power is transformed in military might. Politics, or actual international relations based on strictly moral interests or functional issues, are not a preferences. Unless, of course that add to the power of a state. A state’s population, culture, and leadership, have little importance in both theories as state behavior follows its interests in relationship to the rest of the system. Preferences are therefore shared amongst states in decision making in international relations.

Rationality is based on self-interest and states will try to influence each in a zero sum game. In both theories, participation is not optional, and power distribution is dynamic. This also means in the two schools a balance of power is desirable. Sovereignty is also used as a defensive shield to insulate an economy to protect a state’s self-interest. A similarity is also found in the function of a systems laws and codes as they are based and adhere to the need of the dominant actors.

Finally, what criticism(s) could Behavioralists level at the world system theory?

Behavior of states is not a characteristic that is universal in preferences in a set structure. Obtaining goals in the international system may focus on a sovereign state as an actor but its behavior is not totally inorganic. Populations and their respective leaders have preferences, though based on their position in a world system, and can act on principals on a higher level than just maintaining sovereignty. These preferences can be determined by internal characteristics of the states, such as culture, and not just on maximizing of economic power. How can we account for the current states, like Norway for example, not the most powerful in the system, yet donates a high percentage of it income (power in a world system) to humanitarian causes.

The existence of functional organizations to combat the problems of shifting economic power in Wallerstein’s world system. A majority of the world’s volunteer forces and organizations are drawn from semi-periphery states used in UN peace keeping forces and NGOs around the world. Often the core states act in the interests of periphery states through financial and technical assistance. So if each state in his world system fit into the three classes, core, semi-periphery, and periphery, than shouldn’t they behave differently. Communist states are using liberal economic policies to develop industries and democracies develop socialist programs to protect them, regardless of where they are classified in Wallerstein’s labels. Wouldn’t all core states behave internally and externally the same, if they are all had the same preferences.

International relations, if based on his three tiered system, would have to rearrange the UN into three sections to represent the pre-classified preferences. Instead state’s interests are based on commonalities that transcend borders regardless of their economic status in the system. Belief systems and developing norms form international law, not the influence economic theories of supply and demand for products and labor intended to keep interests of capital. In a world system of Wallerstein’s elections would not be needed to determine the leadership of states. Leading economists and capitalists would control behavior of all a state’s organs.

---

My efforts are towards writing reviews and political science essays for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Political Science Academic Research – Anthony Mrugacz webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique website by a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

About Anthony Mrugacz and Political Science Academic Research webpage wants you to know the following about links to Amazon products on this website

• As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
• Als Amazon-Partner verdiene ich an qualifizierten Käufen.
• En tant qu’associé Amazon, je gagne des revenus sur les achats éligibles.
• In qualità di Associato Amazon, guadagno dagli acquisti idonei.
• Como asociado de Amazon, gano con las compras que califican.
• アマゾンアソシエイトとして、私は対象となる購入から稼ぎます。