Chapter 6

Chapter 6

International Security after the Cold War

Introduction: The Changing Nature of Security Studies

Security

The security of a state from external threats to its territorial integrity, political independence and way of life

Biggest challenge is the military threat posed by other states
One side wants to focus on “threats” like environmental degradation, the intrusion of outside cultural influences, modernization, economic integration, migration of peoples
Other side wants to focus on “threats” like ideologies, individuals, groups, socioeconomic conditions existing within or across state boundaries
Securitization Theory

Emphasizing that security is not an objective term but is constructed through social processes (speech, media…)

Cold War had a huge impact on international security
Studying international security

The origins and causes of conflict in the international system
National security and research on potential threats
Group security
Nuclear weapons safety and nuclear weapons proliferation
Chemical and biological weapons terrorism
The spread of conventional weapons
Asymmetric threats
Human security
Regional security studies
Environmental security

Security challenges in today’s world; proliferation of weapons, terrorism, growth of international organized crime

The Nature of War in Global Politics

War is a period of armed hostilities within or between states or other collectivities
War is often described as conflicts where there are 1000 + combat-related deaths
Conflicts that generate less than 1000 may cause immense human suffering and must still be considered wars
Trends in war (over 5 centuries – 16^th to 20^th)

Shifts from major power wars to minor power wars
Shift from wars in Europe to wars in other regions
Shift from wars between states to wars within states
4 times more people died in 20^th century wars than in wars in the past 400 years

Trends in post-World War 2

No wars between great powers – however great powers involved in wars
Magnitude of war on the decline (toll on human life, size of affected area, damage, dislocated populations)

The victims of war have increasingly become civilians
Immediately following the end of the Cold War global military spending declined
Since 1998 military spending has increased
2002 world military spending totaled $784 billion US
The U.S. is responsible for 75% of the increase between 2001 and 2002
Top five countries (U.S., Japan, UK, France, China) account for about 62% of world military spending

Theorizing About the Origins of War

Wars have been started over tangible and intangible issues – how can a generalization about cause of war be made?
Quincy Wright : “A war, in reality, results from a total situation involving ultimately almost everything that has happened to the human race up to the time the war begins.”
To find possible explanations for war use three levels of analysis

War at the individual level – the cause of war in ourselves, in our nature as a species
War at the state or group level – causes that may be found in the social and political characteristics of states or groups
War at the systemic level – finds origins of war in the nature of international politics itself

Interstate Warfare After the Cold War: From Gulf War to Iraq War

August 28, 1990 Iraq invaded Kuwait – Iraq claimed a right to Kuwait as a province of Iraq

Iraq’s desperate economic situation at the end of its war with Iran prompted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein to seize the oil-rich country
Motives seem to be immediate economic gain, long-term control over a significant portion of Middle East oil reserves

UN called for Iraqi withdrawal, imposed economic sanctions, authorized use of force
Coalition of Great Britain, France, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, Canada, and more had amassed 750 000 personnel in the Gulf

Not all public opinion in these countries was behind war, but once the war began public support increased

Iraq took Western civilians in Iraq hostage in attempt to change Islamic opinions about the coalition
Hussein attempted to widen war by involving Israel, hoping to break coalition between Western and Middle Eastern countries
Iraq deployed 400 000+ troops to defend gains in Kuwait – failed
Diplomacy failed: Hussein unwilling to meet coalition demands
Military campaign began on January 17, 1991 with 40-day air campaign against Iraq and Iraqi forces in Kuwait

This caused Iraqi forces to be destroyed, and coalition controlled air

Iraq- launched Scud missiles on Saudi Arabia and Israel – failure
Ended with 100-hour ground offensive into Iraq and Kuwait
Ceasefire called on February 27, 1991
Impacts

Costs of war were high, coalition casualties 240, Iraqi military casualties between 20 000 and 85 000, Iraqi civilian casualties between 2300 and 20 000, displacement of 4 to 5 million people
Kurds in north and Shiite Muslims in south rebelled against Hussein
Northern/southern Iraq – safe haven protected by coalition airpower
Iraq released crude oil into Gulf to foul Saudi Arabian coasts
Iraqi blew up hundreds of Kuwaiti oil wells

The Gulf War achieved stated objective: removal of Iraqi military form Kuwait and restore Kuwaiti government
Gulf War left many issues unresolved

Saddam Hussein remained leader of Iraq, Republican Guard kept regime in power through force and intimidation
UN weapons inspectors encountered effort to hide WMD programs
Increased anti-American sentiment for punishing Iraqi forces when they threaten no-fly zones
UN sanctions that remained crippled Iraq’s economy, caused hardship to civilians

Terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 caused terrorism to be primary security
Terrorism and supporting states were focus of “War on Terrorism”
Bush (then back by public/government opinion and UN Security Council) identified Al-Qaeda
U.S led coalition launched war to overthrow Taliban government in Afghanistan
January 29, 2002 Bush referred to North Korea, Iran, and Iraq as “axis of evil”
Iraq agenda and war “War on Terrorism” began coverage in Washington despite a clear link
By late 1990s Hussein became less cooperative with UN resolution conditions
Since end of Gulf War Iraq defied 10 UN resolutions related to arms inspections, sanctions, safe havens, no-fly zones
Weapons inspection teams withdrawn in 1998
December 1998, U.S. and Britain dropped un-UN-authorized bombs on suspected WMD sites
France withdrew from coalition enforcement of no-fly zones
U.S. received support to go to war from UK and British Prime Minister
Numerous examples of opposition to U.S. efforts

Many thought U.S. motives were to remove Hussein and gain Iraqi oil
Many did not see a connection between Hussein and 911

February 15, 2003 “Day of Action”
June 2002 Bust stated to be ready for preemptive action when necessary
September 2002 document stated efforts to deter and defend against the treat before it is unleashed
October 2002 U.S. Congress authorized Bush to use force against Iraq
The U.S. sought after UN support and wanted a harder line against Iraq – the people would also be more supportive of a war that had UN approval
UN Security Council passed Resolution 1441– weapon inspectors returned to Iraq
Iraqi government did not comply – U.S., Spain, UK drafted resolution authorizing force
February 5, 2003 Secretary of State Colin Powell outlined to UN: suspected WMD programs, circumventions of UN sanctions, connections to Al-Qaeda, and human rights violations by Iraqi government – Proposal withdrawn
March 17, 2003 Bush gave Saddam Hussein 48 hours to leave Iraq
Military campaign began on March 19^th, 2003
Many countries who supported diplomatically did not support with military or financial needs
U.S., Britain, and Australia contributed military; no Middle Eastern or Muslim contribution
U.S. and British forces moved into Iraq from Kuwait on March 20
The U.S. forces reached Baghdad by April 3
By April 9, Hussein had fled and U.S. troops controlled the city
By April 16, the last pockets of resistance towns had collapsed
May 1, Bush declared the war over
Hussein captured on December 13
Questions, Criticisms, Issues with Iraq War

What were the human and monetary costs of the war?

Over U.S.$500 billion in 2004

What was the Bush Administration’s motive for going to war?

Weapons of mass destruction
Opportunity to reorder the Middle East
Control of Iraqi oil
A need to “deal” with Saddam Hussein

Was the Iraq War a “war of necessity”?

May have been, “the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time, against the wrong enemy.”

What happened to the weapons of mass destruction?
Why was the United States so poorly prepared to stabilize and rebuild postwar Iraq?

Bush Administration chose to treat warnings about the challenges of postwar Iraq as antiwar sentiment

The image of the United States in the world

The United States alienated most of its key allies and was deeply unpopular around the world

Bush Administration has chosen a course that emphasized military paths
Sound policies, political commitment, and wise expenditure of resources will be needed for positive possibilities of the situation
Examples of high tension and rivalry between states in the international system that could lead to future wars:

Greece and Turkey
India and Pakistan
China, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, and Philippines
Israel and Syria
North Korea and South Korea
Peru and Ecuador
Ethiopia and Eritrea
Cameroon and Nigeria

The use of coercive diplomacy and military intervention during crisis remains relevant in contemporary international politics
Threatening to use military force to achieve political objectives remains a prominent tool of state diplomacy
Wars between states remain possible even though there a few recent examples
The problem of intrastate war is extremely more relevant
Concern over transnational security threats has risen dramatically

Ethnic, Religious, and Factional Conflict

Decline in interstate conflicts – rise in intrastate conflicts
Many intrastate conflicts may be between religious communities, clans, or political factions

Class relations may be central factors in most of the above

Just over 5% of major armed conflicts between 1990 and 2002 were interstate

The Nature of Communal Groups

Communal groups share a sense of common identity

Causes the group to differentiate from others

This sense of identity give group internal harmony and capacity for collective action
Communal groups can be base on one or more of

Ethnicity (race, custom)
Historical experience or myth
Religious beliefs
Region of residence
Familial ties (clan systems)

Communal has a voluntary element, and are always changing

Explaining Communal Conflict

Communal conflicts may originate in one of more of the following situations:

Grievances

Economic grievances
Political grievances

Autonomy and independence
Social change
Primordialism
Incitement by leaders
State nationalism versus ethnonationalism
The loss of the political centre
Symbolic politics

The Nature of Communal War

Kalevi Holsti “There are no declarations of war, there are no seasons for campaigning, and few end with peace treaties. Decisive battles are few. Attrition, terror, psychology, and actions against civilians highlight ‘combat’. Rather than highly organized armed forces based on a strict command hierarchy, wars are fought by loosely knit groups of regulars, irregular, cells, and not infrequently by locally based warlords under little or no central authority.”
Attacks are done on civilians because they are the source of soldiers, food, and support

Attacked to weaken the military potential of the communal group

Territorial gain is reflected in composition of people living in the territory thus forcing people to leave is a cornerstone of military campaigns (ethnic cleansing)
In communal conflicts, territory is gained once all members of the other ethnic group have been removed and the victor’s ethnic group has replaced them
Fear and terror are important weapons is communal conflicts
Rape – causes AIDS, reduces chances for finding a mate and having children, causes women to leave out of fear, attack on the ability of a communal group to reproduce itself , women gone – communities uprooted
There may also be and economic component to ethnic conflicts

The Case of Yugoslavia: Communal Conflict in a Fragmented State

Created following the disintegration of the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman empires

Serbia and Montenegro (core of new state)
Slovenians and Croatians (joined out of concerns of Italian expansionism

WW2 Yugoslavia conquered by Nazi Germany

Much violence occurred between ethnic groups

Memories of violence surfaced again in 1990s
Federal state composed of 8 republics and provinces
Dictator – Josef Tito (died in 1980)
After Tito’s death Serbia dominated federal structure and army (alienating Slovenia and Croatia – wanted to leave federation and declare independence)
Violence broke out in 1990s between Serbian minority militia and Croatian police
Slovenia and Croatia declared independence in June 1991
Serbian-dominated army used force to try and keep Slovenia and Croatia in the federation – Failed
Serbian army withdrew from Slovenia in 1991 and Croatia in 1992
April 1992 the war spread to Bosnia
Serbian and Croatian regions of Bosnia wanted to join Serbia and Croatian in independence
Success of Bosnian Serbs was reversed by Muslim-Croat alliance, withdrawal of Serbian support (result of UN sanctions), and intervention of NATO
1995 peace was negotiated in Bosnia – lead to Dayton Agreement – 60 000 NATO troops used force to keep peace
NATO troops declining in Bosnia, disruptions in peace may increase, long-term reconciliation looks grim

The Case of Somalia: Clan Conflict in a Failed State

Emerged as independent state out of Africa in July 1960
1969 Major-General Mohammed Siad Barre tried to establish a socialist state
Opposition to his rule grew in 70s and 80s

He had to rely on his own clan to maintain power

January 1991 Barre thrown out by opposition of other clans
Clans began to fight over which clan was to rule
Warfare between rival clans broke out and lasted for 16 months

Destroyed the infrastructure in Somalia

UN and American forces tried to keep the peace – clashes with local warlords
International presence withdrawn in 1995 – clan violence continued

The Case of Chechnya: The Russian State Against an Ethnic Group

Bitter relations between Moscow and the people of the Caucasus region
Chechnya was the most homogenous Muslim republic in the Russian Federation
Soviet Union collapse 1991 – Chechen leaders claimed right of self-government and independence for Chechnya
Russian government maintained Chechnya to be part of Russia

Seemed to be no compromising

Chechens ran more of their own affairs in disobedience of Moscow political authority
1993 Russian government (Boris Yeltsin) used military force to stop Chechen independence

First round of violence lasted two years
Cities and towns devastated including the capital Grozny
100 000 casualties 400 000 refugees

August 1996 ceasefire – postpone status of Chechnya for 5 years and withdrawal of Russian troops
During this Chechnya continued to disobey Moscow, and Russia continued trying to weaken Chechen leaders
1999 war returned to Chechnya, Russian president Vladimir Putin wanted to end conflict
More support in Russia after bombings in Moscow were attributed to Chechens
Chechen people demonized in Russia as criminals or radical Islamists
Russia now controls most of Chechen

Unable to eliminate Chechen resistance
Unable to impose complete authority of entire republic

Many countries sited the right of Russia to maintain order to maintain good relations
March 2003 referendum run by Russian government – that Chechnya was a part of Russia in return for greater local self-government – Agreed upon
Year later Chechnya still faced heritage or both wars

Destroyed civilian infrastructure
Countryside ridden with land mines
Population living in poverty with a fierce hatred of Moscow

It is unlikely Chechnya will get the reconstruction that it needs under the same government that brought it war

Other important conflicts with a communal dimension include:

Israel and the Palestine people
The Kurds
The Sudan
Indonesia

How can these conflicts be avoided and stopped?
There is a huge presence of weapons in both intra and inter state wars

Spread of weapons around the world is a major security concern

The Proliferation of Weapons

§ Vertical proliferation

o Increases in the number of weapons possessed by individual states

§ Horizontal proliferation

o Spread of military capabilities across states

§ The largest concern in the international system is with horizontal spread of WMD, horizontal spread of conventional weapons, and with individual “light” or “small arms” weapons

§ Weapons proliferation is regarded with concern because arms races can increase existing tensions or raise levels of distrust and hostility

§ Large concern about terrorists acquiring chemical and biological weapons

§ Prevention of proliferation is a contribution to preventing war and reducing violence level in future wars

The Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons

One of the greatest concerns is the spread of nuclear weapons capabilities to more states and substate actors
8 countries possess nuclear weapons (with 4 more acquiring then giving them up)
30+ countries have the technological ability to become nuclear weapons states
7 states are declared nuclear (8 with Israel as undeclared)
Some say that nuclear weapons can have a steadying effect on regional stability

Kenneth Waltz “the presence of nuclear weapons makes states exceedingly cautious. Why fight if you can’t win much and might lose everything?” - multilateral nuclear peace

If more decision makers have the option of using nuclear weapons, then they are more likely to be used
Social and environmental costs are huge
Several rationales may motivate state leaders to develop nuclear weapons:

They may want to acquire nuclear weapons for security reasons
State leaders may seek the prestige such a capability would bring: nuclear weapons are equated with modernization and development
The ability to become self-reliant when it comes to nuclear weapons
Isolation or ambition
Influence of domestic politics: nuclear weapons may be acquired to advance the interests of domestic groups, industries, and bureaucracies

Several steps must be taken to become a nuclear weapons state

Political will to develop the weapons
A country must acquire the knowledge base required to build the weapons
A country must build the nuclear, industrial, and manufacturing infrastructure required to build a bomb
The country must acquire fissile material-highly enriched uranium or plutonium-for the bomb
A bomb design must be adopted and a decision made to assemble and deploy the weapons

Profile of the North Korean case has escalated dramatically

Began nuclear weapons program in 1964 and accelerated in 1980s
Suspected of producing plutonium for a nuclear bomb by early 1990s
Refused to permit an inspection of their nuclear facilities

October 1994 Framework Agreement between U.S. and North Korea

North Korea agreed to stop nuclear weapons program
Give international inspector leave to enter
In return they would get assistance in building replacement reactors for civilian use and regular supplies of oil

October 2002 – North Korea admitted having a program to enrich uranium for use in nuclear weapons – violation of Framework Agreement
Trilateral meeting took place (U.S., China, North Korea) where North Korea admitted to having at least one nuclear weapon
Substate and terrorist organizations may produce or acquire nuclear weapons
Concern has increased by the concern of the security of weapons grade materials, technology, and warheads from the former Soviet Union and Russia

A Nuclear South Asia

One of the most significant proliferation of nuclear weapons – May 1998
11-13^th – India conducted five nuclear tests - first tested in 1974
20 and 30^th – Pakistan made six tests – thought to have weapons since 1992
U.S., Japan, Australia, Canada imposed sanctions on India and Pakistan

Neither country renounced its nuclear weapons program

Nuclear deterrence did not stop after the Cold War – alive in South Asia
February 20, 2000 – leaders of India and Pakistan launched first bus service between the two countries in 50 years

This showed desire for peace and avoid a nuclear war

Summer of 2000 – increased tensions, possession of nuclear weapons may not prevent conflict between them
Indian commentator “A country that has nearly half its population living in absolute poverty, that has an illiterate population more than 2.5 times that of Sub-Saharan Africa, that has more than half its children over the age of four living in malnourishment can never be a superpower.”
To all other countries the tests seemed very inappropriate

The Proliferation of Chemical and Biological Weapons

The medium through which the chemical or biological warfare agent reaches a human is the atmosphere, although they can be through water and surface contact
Chemical weapons used extensively in WW1 and in China in WW2
Iran-Iraq War (1980-88) chemical weapons used by Iraq and against Kurdish rebellion in northern Iraq
1995 nerve gas used by terrorists in the Tokyo subway system
Why countries would want to acquire chemical or biological weapons

For the use on the battle field against unprotected opponents
Deterrent purposes
Compared to nuclear weapons, chemical and biological are inexpensive

The Proliferation of Conventional Weapons

Conventional weapons responsible for majority of deaths in world wars since 1945
The problem of the proliferation of conventional weapons

The legal international arms trade
The covert arms trade
The indigenous development and production of weapons

Majority of arms trade is between industrialized countries to developing world
Fall in arms sales after 1991

End of the Cold War and fall of Soviet Union (reduced availability)
Strained budgets in the South
Indigenous weapons production (less reliant on purchasing)

Concern of the quality of weapons purchased – very best weapons for sale
Concern over spread of ballistic missile capabilities – could be used to deliver nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons in various regional settings
Competition – arms companies offering generous offset packages to potential buyers

Some permit permanent transfer of technology to the recipient country
Governments may assist their own arms industries by lifting export restriction on certain armaments
Governments may offer financing or credit to possible buyers to ensure a contract

Weapons can use components and technology from many countries and corporations
Why governments allow, encourage, help weapons manufactures sell abroad

Hard currency
Military hardware is a significant export
Jobs
Maintain manufacturing capability
Encouraging sales abroad may lower the unit cost of the weapon

Covert trade in armaments is estimated at U.S.$2 billion – U.S.$10 billion per year
During war in former Yugoslavia, despite UN arms embargo, U.S.$2 billion + worth of arms was covertly shipped into the country in 1993 alone
Indigenous production of weapons systems has occurred for a number of reasons

Developed technological infrastructure and expertise to manufacture more modern weapons
Manufactured certain weapons or parts under license and acquired production rights over time
Ability to produce modern weapons is indicator of expertise

Worrying implications

Controls over proliferation will be difficult because many countries are producing their own and not buying from abroad
Growth of indigenous production means more countries producing for export increasing the number of producer states

Concern over proliferation has led to creation of international efforts to control global spread of armaments

International Terrorism

Have huge emotional impact
Transnational security concern
Terrorist attacks against U.S. on September 11, 2001

Thrown debates about terrorism and counterterrorism into sharp relief
Raised profile of international terrorism

Terrorism in Canada is very rare

FLQ Crisis
Activities of Direct Action

Terrorism used as weak, employed political instrument used to

Seeks to reject authority
Generate social change
Promote revolution or spread of far

Terrorism has been used all throughout history
No real definition for terrorism – because it is a politically charged work and is often used inappropriately for political purposes
“One person’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter” – relative nature of term
Walter Laqueur defines terrorism as “the substate application of violence or threatened violence intended to sow panic in a society, to weaken or even overthrow the incumbents, and to bring about political change”
Cindy Combs defines terrorism as “a synthesis of war and theatre, a dramatization of the most proscribed kind of violence – that which is perpetrated on innocent victims – played before an audience in the hope of creating a mood of fear, for political purposes.”
Suman Gupta says in cases of international terrorist acts “the motives and/or agencies and/or effects cross the boundaries of nation-states, and are not necessarily conducted at the behest of any nation-state.”
State terrorism used within their own boarders to prevent opposition

Campaigns often involve massive human rights violations
Has deep historical roots

State-sponsored terrorism where government support is given to international terrorist individuals or groups

The Origins and Causes of Terrorism

Studies suggest that terrorism can be explained by the following

Individual Psychology

Ideological Fanaticism

Religious Fanaticism

Grievance and Cycles of Violence

Nationalism and Separatism

Activist Fanaticism

September 11, 2001

Box cutters and verbal threats used to hijack planes
On board was one terrorist who had taken flight lessons in the U.S.
Two of the aircrafts were crashed into the World Trade Center
Third plane was crashed into the Pentagon
Forth (believed to be intended to hit Capitol Building or White House) crashed into a field in Pennsylvania
3000+ were killed
Attacks were the result of years of planning by small group of terrorists associated with Al-Qaeda
The suspicion was laid on Al-Qaeda, they had bombed WTC in 1993, U.S. Embassies in Africa in 1998, and attack on U.S. warship in 2000
Some of the terrorists had entered the U.S. legally on student visas
September 17^th, Osama Bin Laden was officially accused of planning the attacks
Some blame was put on U.S. Intelligence for failure to observe signs of attack
Bush Administration was too focused on Iraq, and failed to take Al-Qaeda seriously
Anti-American sentiment was built on

U.S. support for Israel
U.S. assistance to repressive regimes in the Islamic world
Growing cultural influences of the United States
Reaction against Western modernization and globalization

Recruited young volunteers for a perverse for of jihad or holy war against America and the West
The Taliban had seized power over most of Afghanistan in 1997

Separated from the international community for harsh imposition of Islamic law and its treatment of women

Bush Administration began war against Afghanistan on October 7,2001

Had a lot of support, (e.g. From UN Security Council)
33 countries offered military support, many others offered political support

U.S. successfully overthrew the Taliban in November
At the same time U.S. was waging battle to combat Al-Qaeda
The Pakistan government supported Washington, although it was an unpopular decision in Pakistan (didn’t support until U.S. sanctions on them were lifted)
Patriot Act was passed – increased power of agencies to arrest and detain non-citizens, as well as the ability to use wiretaps and intercept e-mails.
Despite damages to Al-Qaeda, it still survives as a more effective and impenetrable network (they have not lost their capability to act)
These attacks show that Al-Qaeda is still capable of masterminding and executing terrorist attacks, and will be part of the international terrorist landscape for years to come

International Terrorism After September 11

Don’t focus overemphasize on the United States and Al-Qaeda
There is a decreasing trend in the frequency of terrorist attacks in international terrorism per year
Surged in 1980s to a peak of 665 incidents in 1987
2002 there were 199 terrorist incidents recorded
There is some doubt as to whether international terrorism presents a significant threat to national and international security when compared with other security issues
Characteristic of contemporary international terrorism is the growing link between different terrorist individuals and groups
Audrey Kurth Cronin “the current wave of international terrorism, characterized by unpredictable and unprecedented threats from nonstate actors, not only is a reaction to globalization but is facilitated by it”
Others argue “many of the most effective tools for dealing with the terrorist threat are themselves partly the production of globalization”
Objectives of “postmodern terrorism” are not political; they are inspired by religious or cult beliefs or by racial hatred

These groups seem to be focused toward more indiscriminate killing

There is also growing concern that terrorists have increasingly greater access to chemical, biological, or even nuclear weapons.
Since September 11 terrorists have attacked nightclubs, street markets, civilian aircraft, embassy buildings, and train stations
It is also possible that terrorists will turn to “weapons of mass disruption” by using “cyber attacks”

Combating Terrorism: Approaches and Methods

Counter terrorism efforts can be successful

Effort to address root causes
Governments can employ military and/or police force against organizations or the states that sponsor their activities
Efforts can be made to reduce the vulnerability of a country and its people to terrorist attacks
Governments can seek to strengthen international cooperation on counterterrorism
The complex role that media plays in covering terrorist events

International Organized Crime

“transnational organized crime” is now considered a serious global security issue
December 2000 the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime was established
October 2003 the UN Convention against Corruption was established
Transnational crime has been identified as an international security issue for the following reasons

International criminal activity has escalated in terms of monetary scale and international scope
Organized crime has expanded into international banking, investment, finance, and business activity
Criminal organizations have become threats to governments
Criminal organizations can erode the social fabric of a country, undermining political authority and corrupting the economic and political leadership of states and their governments
In some countries, organized crime represents a threat to the conventional economy and the ability of the government to manage it
Worrisome indications exist that organized crime may be involved in the international sale of materials required for the production of WMD which has appeared in small quantities for sale in Europe
The distinction between organized crime and terrorist and revolutionary movements is blurring as terrorist and revolutionary organizations obtain funding from the sale of drugs and as governments funnel money from illegal arms sales to revolutionary militias

Terrorist goals

The weakening of the state and social and political order

Criminal organizations

Had an interest in economic stability so that they could pursue their business activities

The lines between criminal organizations and terrorism are burring
As criminal organizations have become more international, the effort to fight them has involved greater cooperation and coordination of effort between countries
In 2000 the United States committed U.S.$1.3 billion to “Plan Columbia,” an effort to eliminate that country’s coca production

Conclusions

The world is only significantly safer for people living in certain parts of the world
Will more regions become increasingly stable and free of conflict, or will instability and violence spread?

Key Terms: Chapter 6

Self-determination: the claim that people have the right to self-rule

Warlords: authoritarian leaders of substate groups that are isolated from the will of their peoples and lack any checks or controls on their exercise of power

Long cycles: theory that hegemons rise and decline in regular patterns, which in turn influence the international economy and the outbreak of hegemonic wars

Golan Heights: contested territory adjacent to Israel, which has occupied it since the 1967 war

Communal Conflicts: wars that take place between communal groups of all types at the substate level

Ethnic Cleansing: the forced removal of an ethnic group from their area of residence using tactics that include executions, the destruction of homes, and rape to instill fear in the target population. In its ultimate form, genocide.

Weapons of Mass Destruction: nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, biological weapons

Conventional weapons: fixed-wing and rotary aircraft, naval vessels, missiles, armoured vehicles

Light or Small Arms Weapons: assault rifles, rocket propelled grenades, land mines

Proliferation: increase in numbers, grow or produce

Covert Arms Trade: underground arms market

Embargo: The refusal of one country or a group of countries to export goods to another, for punitive reasons. (Ex. American embargo on Cuba)

State Terrorism: the use of state power to terrorize civilians into compliance

State-Sponsored Terrorism: government support for terrorist individuals or groups to be acting abroad

Cruise Missiles: a missile, guided remotely, that can fly low enough to escape radar detection and can deliver conventional or nuclear warheads

Authoritarianism: Political system in which individual freedom is subordinate to the power of the state, concentrated in one leader or group that is not accountable to the people