The End of the Cold War and the New Threats to Global Security

1.IntroductionThe oddity of the C nonagenarian cont curio marked a parvenue beginning for the external security department ag block offa, and the demise of the simple bipolarity brought away a revised agenda for human rights, multinational tranquillity and coop durationtion and stability. The end of the Cold struggle triggered the rise of new curses and challenges to international security, and the advance of globalization guide to the redistri thation of power in the international system (Baylis & Smith, 2007 Brown, 2005). In the setting of globalization, the capacity of the state was undermined and as a provide state-to-state relations dramatically changed (Strange, 2002). Classic fights were gradually transformed into modern fights (Kaldor, 1999 Smith, 2006 Shaw, 2005). In this divers(prenominal) policy-making environment, the security challenges were no longer existent on a state-to-state level, because of the maturement importance of sub-state actors.This essa y testament focus on the reorganization of the international system after the end of the Cold War, and willing discuss the new challenges to global security, posed by the demise of the bipolar regime. The essay will support the view that with the end of the Cold War, the macrocosm became a much dangerous place, because of the numerousness of actors on the international scene and the changed perceptions of military machine force, struggle and security. Changing perceptions of military force and warThe end of the Cold War brought forward the change of the perceptions of military force in several different aspects. The impact of these changed perceptions upon the international security agenda has been unchallenged, and will be discussed in detail. For clarity, the author has chosen to focus only on the most master(prenominal) security- link up transformations following the Cold War the new sources of threat such(prenominal)(prenominal) as nuclear weapons and terrorism, and th e changing notions of war in the context of globalization. Their features will be discussed in the context of the changed dynamics of the international system.2.1 New sources of security threatThe end of the Cold War led to new security challenges, because of changing notions of military force and the new sources of security threat (Smith, 2006 Shaw, 2005). The first one is related to the rise of nuclear power. With the demise of the USSR, the simple bipolarity of the Cold War world was replaced by a multipolar world, where the centrality of power was no longer clearly be (Brown, 2005 Jackson & Sorensen, 2003). The rise of the Asian stinting powers, the advance of nuclear and biological weapons in countries such as Iran, Israel and Iraq challenged the stability of the mutual deterrence principle, intimately sustained during the Cold War (Hammes, 2005).Another source of security threat after the Cold War was related to terrorism, and the rise of sub-state actors (Smith, 2006). The War on terror, embedded in the Bush doctrine, was a clear demonstration of the changing nature of war, and the elusive image of the new enemy (Shaw, 2005). After 9/11 it became clear that terrorism was not a war against an enemy, but against tactics (Baylis & Smith, 2007). Its manifestations and capacity to destroy were as much the result of political construction, as of historically embedded perceptions about the East and the West and their habit by mass media and policy-makers. After the end of the Cold War non-state actors such as Al Qaeda and Hamas, became a new source of security threat because of their ability to operate internationally but at the comparable time to exist inside the state (Shaw, 2005). Also, the contr all oversies, around states labelled as rogue and unable to comply with the international standards for peace and democracy such as Afghanistan, Iraq, North Korea, Libya and Syria necessitated new means for meeting the challenges to threat and security. They w ill be discussed in section 3.2.2 Changing notions of war in a global worldHere it is cardinal to mention globalization as a factor, which led to re-examination of the capacity of the state to observe human security and human rights (Strange, 2002). In the context of a borderless world, the international human rights agenda is inevitably revisited, and the principal(prenominal) carriers of legal standards argon no longer represented solely by state actors, but by the global well-mannered society, comprising of International non-governmental organizations (INGOs). Because of these necessary transformations, the very perception of security, threat and war changed in several of import aspects. As Mary Kaldor famously observes, the end of the Cold War byword the rise of the modern wars, which lack time and space, because they are ground on non-quantifiable demands often related to ideology, ethnicity, religion and the social construction of history (1999). The old wars were pushed away by new types of threats and conflicts, such as organized crime, and sacred and civil wars. The early 1990s saw the bloody demise of occasion Yugoslavia, and a series of conflicts in Rwanda, congou, Sudan and Somalia, triggered by the redefinition of political borders, the struggle over economic resources and ethnic and religious factionalism. In the context of globalization, the modern wars are interstate conflicts, executed by sub-state actors. In this sense, it is important to mention that the growing presence of the sub-state actors has posed new challenges to the classic perceptions of security, because of non-tangible variables such as perceptions, as opposed to old-time military ambitions related to territorial invasion and economic gain. Meeting the new security challenges a revised agenda for peaceIn order to meet the new security challenges, identified earlier, the international community had to devise a new agenda in the post-Cold war era.First, humanitarian interv ention became important, and triggered as an effect of the revised agenda, where the security of outside(prenominal) nationals, whose human rights have been violated by their home state became important (Jackson & Sorensen, 2003). Despite the ongoing political debate about the legality and genuineness of humanitarian intervention, a norm of intervention was authorized by the UN warrantor Council in the 1990s, which was followed by operations in the Democratic Republic of Congo in 1996 and Kosovo in 1999 (Baylis & Smith, 2007). Despite the criticisms that humanitarian intervention might terminate the immediate killing of civilians but is not a reliable scheme for long-term piece, it reveals a shifted emphasis from military to human security in the years following the end of the Cold War. In this relation, another curl in caboodleing with conflicts became prominent the imposition of economic sanctions for the purpose of exerting political, earlier than military pressure upon non-compliant states and communities.The post-Cold War agenda for peace also snarled the reorganization of military forces, where the deviation from the Clausewitzian concept of war was obvious in the attempt to ameliorate and contain, rather than destroy or simply catch (Smith, 2006). Examples of such wars of containment are the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.In addition, the share of the global civil society and the growing influence of INGOs as advocates of peace and human rights be a mention. The importance of international non-governmental organizations in global policy-making has been undisputed because of the more complicated security agenda in the post-Cold War era. Also, because of the multiplicity of actors in the international system, and the new security needs, states and intergovernmental organizations are unable to deal with international crises without the development programmes and research, provided by the INGOs. Although their political success remains dispu ted, their role as independent observers and proponents of policy change is growing. ConclusionThis essay has essay to show the changing nature of the international system after the end of the Cold War. Today the international community faces different security threats based on a new perception of military force. Terrorism and the blossom out of nuclear power have shunned classic state-to-state conflicts, and as a result a new security agenda for peace and cooperation has been embraced. In the era of globalization, the transition towards collective security as a model of global governance, remains a challenge but also a obligatory for peace.Bibliography Baylis, J. & Smith, S. (2007) eds, The world(a)ization of World Politics. Oxford Oxford University jamBrown, C., (2005) Understanding International Relations, Palgrave Macmillan, Ch. 6, pp. 106-123Clausewitz, C. (1977) What is War?, On War, Princeton Princeton University PressHammes, T.X (2005) War evolves into the fourth generat ion, Contemporary security system Policy, Vol.26, No.2pp.189221.Jervis, R. (1991/1992) The emerging of World Politics Will It Resemble the Past? International Security 16, no. 3Jackson, R. & Sorensen, G. (2003) Introduction to International Relations, Oxford Oxford University PressKaldor, M. (1999) New and ageing Wars Organized Violence in a Global Era. Cambridge Polity PressShaw, M. (2005) The New Western Way of War Risk Transfer war and its Crisis in Iraq Cambridge Polity PressSmith, R. (2006) The Utility of Force The Art of War in the Modern World London PenguinStrange, S. (2002) The Declining Authority of States, in The Global faults Reader an Introduction to the Globalization Debate, 2nd edition, Held and MacGrew (eds) Cambridge Polity Press, pp.127-134Van Creveld, M. (1991) The Transformation Of War NY Free Press