Globalization, an Increasing Security Risk to the U.S

Posted: January 10th, 2014

Using the references presented, answer the question below in 300 words.
How does religion provoke conflict? Does it affect conflict differently from other “idea-based” or identity-based causes of conflict such as Communism?
References
1- The Eagle Rules?, Chapter 12, Use of Force Dilemmas, pages 268-281
2-The Global Century, Chapters 3, pages 75-107; Chapter 5, pages 127-153; Chapter 13, pages 283-298; Chapter 15, pages 315-334
3-The Clash of Civilizations, Huntington, 1993, pages 1-17
4-The Myth of Moderate Islam, Sookhdeo, 2005, pages 1-4
5-Tribal Alliances, Taylor, 2005, pages 1-17
6- Islamic Rulings on Warfare, Aboul-Enein & Zuhur, 2004, pages 1-43
7-add any new ref. related to the subject.

+++++++
Q2- (65 words ) Read the following comments and write your opinion ( Why you agree with this comments or why not ACCORDING TO the references presented above in the first question. Your comments must be substantive, meaning that you are adding something new and thoughtful to the discussion. It’s not sufficient to say you agree or disagree. Explain why.

Can ethnic conflict be contained by Balkanization?
I think Balkanization is a temporary fix to an ethnic issue, yes separating rivaling groups will make the issue less obvious but it does not completely alleviate the root of the problem. IT really is just a band-aid to a very large wound. In today’s society it is sad to say Balkanization is still a method of colonial power. Balkanization is more than groups just deciding to separate due to differences, it’s much more malicious. The separation of these groups is often done by an outsider usually bidding for power in a colonial sense. The outsider causes just enough friction to separate the groups and victimize them enough so they feel forced to cooperate. So it is really just exploitation and dispossession of people. Take Nigeria for example, people with very different language, cultural and religious ideas were forced together to form one country by British administration. The British then chose a preferred class, by showing preference for the Muslim Northerners; to these people they gave wholesale rights to rule Nigeria in perpetuity without elections. I remember from one of my Political Science classes we watched Hotel Rwanda, an absolutely wonderful historical movie, but very sad as well. IN 1994 between April and June over 800,000african people were killed, not just killed but slaughtered. The scale and the speed of the genocide is breath taking, in less than 100 days that many Tutsis killed. On April 6, 1994 when Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana, a Hutu, plane was shot down above Kigali airport the current Rwandan President, Paul Kagame was blamed. At the time Paul was also a leader of a Tutsi rebel group so he and some of his close associates were pin-pointed for carrying out the rocket attack. While ethnic tension in Rwanda is not something that just happened there has been animosity since the colonial period. While the two groups, Hutus and Tutsis have many things in common, the Tutsis are believed to be originally from Ethiopia and therefore less of people than the Hutus, in the Hutus minds. In the early 1900s when the Belgians owned the colony it was the opposite opinion they considered the Tutsis superior and they reaped the benefits of better jobs and education for the 20 years of occupancy. In 1959 with the Belgians left over 30,000 Tutsis were killed and the Hutus took over, from that point on the Tutsis were to blame for every crisis. In 1994 it seemed history would repeat itself with worse consequences. Within hours of the plane crash recruits were organized all over the country to slaughter Tutsis. Within those 100 days it turned neighbors on each other, Hutus were rewarded for killing Tutsis, even given their homes and land. When fighting finally stopped over 800,000 people were dead and the country was in shambles (Lacey, 2004). The Hutu militias are still found in DR Congo and have led to years of conflict there, causing up to five million deaths. Rwanda’s now Tutsi-led government has twice invaded its much larger neighbor, in attempts to wipe out the Hutu forces. The world’s largest peacekeeping force has been unable to end the fighting. These are people who have common threads and even common languages and interests. What about groups that have nothing in common? How does separation solve their differences? I would even stretch to say that a modern day example of how Balkanization is a complete failure of international relations and policy would be the events that transpired in New Orleans during hurricane Katrina (The Omega Report, 2003). When this event occurred we saw a clear line between classes, color, immigrants and uneducated. If anyone was watching the news during those chaotic months it was the poor and uneducated that got left behind, is this country’s fault NO but it is an issue. Where everything went wrong was that the only people that were left behind were the lower class poor African Americans and when people in the same situation from the same background face problems with government or in absence of government they will take matters into their own hands often in a negative manner. They as a “distinctive” group were excluded or segregated from mainstream society either by choice or circumstance, wanted or unwanted. While this is an extreme example, it still applies and still the issue is not resolved. What it comes down to is that keeping people with issues separate will not make the issue go away it just disguises it better, there are deeper roots in most problems and a little imaginary boundary will not make it right. If anything boundaries just make the differences fester like an infected wound and the infection spreads until it bursts and infects everyone around it.
Works Cited:
Lacey, M. (2004, Feb 26). 10 Years Later in Rwanda, The Dead Are Ever Present. NY Times . The Omega Report. (2003, Feb). Retrieved Jul 28, 2009, from The Decline of the US: Balkanization: http://www.theomegareport.com/mentalpreparation.shtml

++++++++++++++++

Q3- (65 words ) Read the following comments and write your opinion ( Why you agree with this comments or why not ACCORDING TO the references presented above in the first question. Your comments must be substantive, meaning that you are adding something new and thoughtful to the discussion. It’s not sufficient to say you agree or disagree. Explain why.

How does religion provoke conflict? Does it affect conflict differently from other “idea-based” or identity-based causes of conflict such as Communism? ¨Religion is a fundamentally different motivator that other idea-based causes for warfare such as democracy, communism or freedom. Religion is a belief system supported by billions across the globe. Unlike tradition motivators for war such as political oppression, natural resources or economics, religious warfare removes the limitations inherent in traditional conflict. Modern warfare between nations is based on the Geneva Conventions, where combatants respect the rules of warfare and are legally responsible for enemy prisoners. The Big three religions teach that war is wrong and only justified when it is a last resort to settle a conflict, yet many groups such as Islamic extremists use the holy war (jihad) as a reason to promote violence (Religion and War). ¨In ‘Holy War’: the God of a religion is perceived to ask, or command, its followers to make war on those who do not believe in that religion and who pose a threat