U.S. and the Middle-East Conflict
Amid bouts of political and economic instabilities brought about by unending chaos and internal conflicts in the Middle-East particularly between Israel and Palestine, most political scientists argue that the US is largely to blame. For instance, according to Admin (6), the engagement or intervention of the US in the ongoing Israeli-Palestine war is viewed by many as being skewed towards Israel as a key American Ally since the end of the WWII. Moreover, the “Israel First” approach adopted by President George Bush helped to fuel the chaos due to what were seen by Arab nations as America’s pro-Israel foreign policies (Shlaim, 175)
Furthermore, America’s “global war against terror” has also intensified the instabilities currently being witnessed in the Middle East. According to the US, most of the known terror cells and groups such as Hamas are being harbored by the Middle East countries like Palestine, hence, as long as the US hold such notions in its homeland security interests, the Middle-East conflicts are not likely tom end any sooner. Additionally, it has also been claimed that the US is providing one party to the conflict, Israel, with moral, financial, military and material support against Palestine thus further fueling the conflict (Shlaim 180). The US is also seen as being a major stumbling block in the on-going peace negotiation process between the warring parties given that it holds some parties to the conflict with contempt. However, with Obama’s “even-handed approach” to the political tensions in the Middle East, it is expected that a truce may be reached though the US’s role is currently a hot topic in the US Presidential debate, with most Republican contenders like Trump stating clearly that they will support Israel in the conflict.
Furthermore, the US’s role in the Middle East political instability and ensuing conflicts may be explained from the perspective of special US economic interests in the region according to Spiegel et al. (102). It is claimed by some that given the Middle East’s abundant resources such as oil and other minerals like natural gas, the US would like to extend the conflict or impose its own political systems that would enable it exploit the same.
2. ICC, CEDAW and the Promise of International ‘Self-Help” System
The establishment of the ICC and its coming to force in 2002 and that of the CEDAW in 1981 represented a new era and promise of limits of international law in a self-help international system in a number of significant ways. For one, both institutions and the international instruments that created them contain international obligations on states. Under the two, states are called upon to cooperate in efforts to achieve the respective objectives of the international law instruments. While the ICC represents efforts by the international community to hold individuals responsible for atrocities and bring them to justice, the CEDAW represents a renewed promise under international law to end all forms of discrimination against women, In both of these instruments, discretion is given to states to establish systems to ensure justice to victims of violations of the offences enumerated therein. Further, the ICC and the CEDAW are a reflection of the promise of self-help under international law in that both represent renewed efforts by nations to ensure respect for human rights obligations under international law. Additionally, they are a limit of international law in a self-help system in that both seek to ensure international cooperation between and among state parties in promoting the objectives set out in them. They are based on the complementarity principle of international law.
Impacts of Imperialism/Colonialism on Africa, Asia and Middle East
As a matter of fact, Africa, Asia and Middle East share a lot in common despite being culturally different or diverse. Also, these regions have had their historical courses shaped by a number of almost similar forces but it is colonialism and imperialism that had the greatest toll on the history of these regions (Rourke 167). To begin with Africa, initially regarded by the Western powers as a “dark continent”, is located astride the equator and tropics. Endowed with numerous natural resources-which attracted colonial powers in the first place- Africa also has rich diverse cultures though it is also characterized by political instability, droughts, terrorism, armed conflicts and famine. The period between 1870 and 1900 was a period when Africa was under foreign imperial governments and from there on colonialism continued up to as late as 1990s. Colonialism had significant negative and positive impacts on African societies. Positively, colonialism brought civilization and other benefits like education and religion that came along with it.
However, on a negative note, colonialism brought about destructive negative ethnicity in African countries as a means of “divide and rule” approach by colonialists; led to plunder of Africa’s resources , promoted racial discrimination against Africans and consequently made Africans poor and subservient to the West. Asia lies next to continental Europe and is known for its rich oil and mineral resources that have also seen most Asian nations engraved in endless conflicts for control of these resources and interests from Western countries in the same. Colonialism in this region had political, social and economic consequences as it helped destabilize the region politically and exploited its resources such as mineral oil thus creating discontent and creating conflicts and poverty. The Middle East generally refers to the Arab countries of Syria, Palestine, China, Japan and Iraq. According to Hinnebusch (20), imperialism led to political instabilities in the Middle East which are still on-going due to neocolonial effects. It destroyed certain cultural aspects of the Middle Eastern nations like communism.
Works Cited
Admin, “U.S. role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.“ PBS News. 11 May. 2006. Online. 29 April. 2016. < http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/middle_east-jan-june06-us_05-11/ >
Hinnebusch, Raymond. "Europe and the Middle East: From imperialism to libral peace?" Review of European Studies 4.3 (2012): 18-30. Web. 29 April 2016. < http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/res.v4n3p18>.
Rourke, John. Taking sides: Clashing views in world politics. London: McGraw-Hill Education, 2015. Print.
Shlaim, Avi. "The United States and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict." Ken Booth, Tim Dunne. Worlds in colision: Terror and the future of global order. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002. 172-183. Print.
Spiegel, Steven L, et al. World politics in a new era. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press, 2013. Print.
