www.ignou-ac.

in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

N
1
www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in1

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

ASSIGNMENT SOLUTIONS GUIDE (2014-2015)

M.P.S.E.-6
Peace and Conflict Studies
Disclaimer/Special Note: These are just the sample of the Answers/Solutions to some of the Questions given in the
Assignments. These Sample Answers/Solutions are prepared by Private Teacher/Tutors/Auhtors for the help and Guidance
of the student to get an idea of how he/she can answer the Questions of the Assignments. We do not claim 100% Accuracy
of these sample Answers as these are based on the knowledge and cabability of Private Teacher/Tutor. Sample answers
may be seen as the Guide/Help Book for the reference to prepare the answers of the Question given in the assignment. As
these solutions and answers are prepared by the private teacher/tutor so the chances of error or mistake cannot be denied.
Any Omission or Error is highly regretted though every care has been taken while preparing these Sample Answers/
Solutions. Please consult your own Teacher/Tutor before you prepare a Particular Answer & for uptodate and exact
information, data and solution. Student should must read and refer the official study material provided by the university.
SECTION I
Q. 2. Describe the main methods of peaceful settlement of international disputes giving suitable examples.
Ans. Modes of Peaceful Settlement of Disputes: On the international platform, disputes can be settled primarily in
two ways. One is direct communications between the parties involved in the conflict and secondly when there is requirement of a third party intervention for settling disputes.
Negotiation
Negotiation means dialogue between two or more parties in order to reach an understanding or resolve Depending on
the number of parties involved on the issues, negotiations can be bilateral or multilateral. Conferences are called as and
when there are issues that require multilateral negotiations.
Other Modes
Whenever the negotiations are terminated and no steps are taken to break ice between parties for settle disputes,
generally a third party taken over and try to revive the dialogue between the conflicting parties to reach a settlement. This
is called third party intervention; given below are some ways in which the third party help the settle disputes and reach a
settlement:
(a) Lending Good Offices
By lending good offices we mean encouraging and influencing the conflicting parties to resume the dialogue and try
and reach a settlement.
(b) Mediation
In this method, the third party acts as a medium to initiate communication between the conflicting parties. All the
signatory of the Hague Peace Conference of 1899 were authorized to offer their help/mediationin terms of encouraging or
influencing the conflicting parties in resolving disputes even if the dispute is violent.
(c) Conciliation
In conciliation, the intermediary plays an active role in settlement of conflict by suggesting terms of settlement to the
parties. In international treaties, conciliation resembles the procedures of judicial settlement of disputes. The parties in
conflict put up their case in writing in front of the conciliator(s) and make oral presentations of the disputes. The conciliator(s)
after hearing the presentation of both sides recommend the terms of settlement. It is then up to the conflicting parties to
accept or reject the recommendations of the conciliator(s). The intermediaries have some power over the parties in conflict.
It can choose what needs to be communicated to the parties and what needs to be avoided. The time and language in
which the recommendations are communicated are also dependent on the choice of the intermediaries. But impartiality
is not guaranteed, the recommendations may be given by keeping their own vested interests in mind. It is due to this
reason that parties in conflict may choose not to go by the recommendations made.
All three modes, i.e., lending good office, mediation and conciliation, are not possible till such time the parties in
conflict give their consent to accept them.
To be a successful conciliator, parties should possess some qualities:

N
2

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in2

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

He should present himself as an impartial and genuine party interested in settling the dispute.

He should lay various methods/suggestions for settlement of dispute and let the parties in conflict decide what suits

them the most.

Also, a resourceful conciliator with good intention and can offer a deal for which one of the parties can lighten its
stand on the conflict thereby paving way for settlement of the conflict; e.g. the World Bank solved the conflict between
India and Pakistan on issue of water sharing of the Indus river by offering huge amounts of loan towards setting up of
irrigation projects.
(d) Enquiry
This method of dispute settlement was devised as an alternative to the method of arbitration. According to this
method, the parties in conflict agree for an investigation conducted by the third party over the issues of dispute.It is up to
the parties to decide whether they would try and settle the dispute in the light of the findings by the third party or reject the
findings. Its procedure was successful in settling some disputes.
(e) Arbitration
Arbitration as a tool of dispute resolution is a voluntary process in which a neutral third party(s) gives a decision after
properly listening to the views of all conflicting parties with regard to the issues in disputes. The decision given is final
and binding on all the parties.
The origin of this method of dispute settlement can be traced back to ancient time in the Greek States. In modern era
this method developed from the mid of 19th century. The Hague Convention I and II of 1899 and 1907 provided detailed
rules for international arbitration.
During the time of the League of Nations, the League Assembly recommended the members to adopt The General
Act (Pacific Settlement of International Disputes) in 1928. The Act provided the rules for arbitration. Later in 1949, The
UN General Assembly revised the General Act for Pacific Settlement of International Disputes. This act covers the states
that have consented to the Act.
The main features of arbitration are:
(a) Arbitration is consensual in the sense that it can take place if all the parties to conflict agree for it. Consent for
arbitration may be under special agreement for a particular case or it may also be under a treaty provision in which it is
mention that the arbitration is open only for certain specific kind of disputes.
(b) Selection of members of arbitration tribunal is done by the parties in conflict.
(c) Jurisdiction of the arbitration tribunal is only on the cases of conflict which have been referred to it by an agreement.
The tribunal has been given the power to interpret the agreement and decide whether the case is under its jurisdiction or
not.
(d) An agreement is made by the conflicting parties with regard to the rules and procedure to be followed by the
tribunal in a particular case. In case of absence of such a document, international rules and regulation are adopted by the
arbitral tribunal.
(e) The decision of the tribunal is binding on all the concerned parties. But there is a provision for the losing party to
set up plea claiming the decision of the tribunal as void. In this condition the winning party may have to negotiate for
settlement or it can even adopt compulsive measures to for compliance of the decision.
The grounds on raising a plea can be :
The agreement to submit to arbitration is invalid.
The conflict was out of the jurisdiction of the tribunal.
The decision does not have a valid reasoning.
The decision of the tribunal is marred by corruption or fraud on part of the tribunal.
An error or mistake made by the tribunal in terms of applying a law according to the agreement/treaty.
(f) Judicial Settlement
Any of the parties to conflict have the freedom to approach the judicial tribunal which has been entrusted the power
to decide the dispute and has authority to call the other party. Like a judiciary the judicial tribunal also hears the dispute
applies the laws and give judgment. Decision given by the judicial tribunal is obligatory to the parties concerned.
Q. 3. What is war? What strategies were adopted by the superpowers to fight of deter an nuclear war?
Ans. The war has grown from the military area to the political, economic and psychological warfare. According to
the traditional definition of Hoffman Niclerson the encyclopedia of Britannica sayswar is the use of organized force
between two human groups pursuing contradictory policies, each group seeking to impose its policies upon the other. The
other definition by Malinowski defines war isarmed conflict between two independent political units, by means of
organized military force, in pursuit of a tribal or national policy.

N
3

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in3

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

According to Karl Clausewitz, war is a part of political association and so it cannot be an independent affair, war is a
continuous process of political and other means. This sets a broader meaning to war. According to Quincy Wright, the war
coordinates all diplomatic, economic and propaganda fronts with the use of military forces to achieve victory, but a
narrow sense will only include the military aspect. This includes the organization, discipline and the maintenance of the
morale of military forces which means development and procurement of the weapons, movement and provisioning of the
forces, battle strategy and many related aspects. In almost all over the world the military policy is in the territory of
international politics.
Strategies
Strategies used to fight or deter a nuclear war are:
Minimum deterrence
Credible first strike, and
Assured destruction
By minimum deterrence we mean the creation of a small strategic nuclear force used to attack the opponents civilian
bases. The idea behind this strategy is to convince the enemy that if there is a first strike from their end, it would be met
with a retaliatory strike. The condition which is necessary for this strategy is that the country must be in a position to
strike back after experiencing the first strike. The nation would be strong enough to absorb the first strike and also would
stand up to retaliate with equal strength. This retaliatory capability is necessary for the strategy of minimum deterrence.
The course of action of the war is dependent on the first strike. The first strike on the opponent should be such which
would inflict maximum damage to the enemy side. It is a potential way of conveying a message across the enemy that any
action or provocation from their side would lead to destruction of their strategic forces.
The strategy of assured destruction means that the strike on the enemy should be such that would cause massive
damage to the enemy. A nation may be strong enough to absorb the first attack and in retaliation one would inflict
unimaginable damage to the enemy thereby paralyzing its military strategy.
The U.S. considered its strategy of threat to use nuclear weapons as the reason for the end of Korean War and China
being willing for negotiations. President Eisenhower used deterrence as the strategy for the security of the country. Later
in 1954, John Foster Dulles came up with his strategy of massive retaliation. Also known as massive deterrence is a
military doctrine in which a state retaliates in much greater force in the event of external attack. The aim of this strategy
is to threaten the enemy from initial attack and to make the opponent believe that the state is capable of assured destruction
and would use nuclear weapons on massive scale. This strategy was adopted with a mindset that in case of a proxy war,
the U.S. would retaliate and use nuclear weapons against the Soviet Union or China.
This doctrine was criticized by the Europeans who doubted the credibility of the threat that the U.S. was posing to
Soviet Union. Also, being an ally of U.S. would come out with a nuclear war in case a local conflict breaks in the
European nations. This criticism made U.S. to rethink about their doctrine of massive retaliation and assured destruction.
Robert Mac Namara revised their nuclear strategy from assured destruction to damage limitation and flexible response.
Mac Namara announced that the U.S. would refrain from striking cities as was a plan in massive retaliation. He also said
that there is a need for flexible response during the initial attack. This strategy of flexible response involved the initial
response to the attack with conventional warfare and later step up to nuclear retaliatory strike instead of directly going in
for massive retaliation in case of any aggression. Also, this fact was know to all that both U.S. and Soviets have the
capability of second strike, thus assured destruction as a measure cannot be ruled out. Another reason for U.S. to tone
down its nuclear strategy was that the U.S. was aware of the growing power of the Soviets in the nuclear field. This fact
laid the foundation of discussions on limiting the nuclear weapons which accomplished in the Strategic Arms Limitation
Talks (SALT).
The Soviet Unions nuclear strategy revolves around four components:
(a) Balance between military, political and economic powers in the country and social and psychological characteristics
of society and the people are considered important.
(b) The military strategy of the Soviets has some important points. The Soviets were of the opinion that the war
between US-led NATO forces and Soviet backed Warsaw forces would be the final and decisive war between the socialistic
and imperialistic powers of the world. The Soviets would not indulge in surprise attacks but would support the revolutionary
movements and other war for justified causes. Though capable of deterrence, Soviets do not considered war as inevitable.
Despite Khrushchevs argument that two systems can co-exist in the world peacefully, Soviets continued to work for the
spread of socialism in the world as their major goal.
(c) The Soviets were of the opinion that the war would begin with a surprise attack on the Soviet Union and would not

N
4

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in4

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

be a prolonged conflict. In case of clear threat of NATO strike, the Soviets would go for an all out war. Another option
is to rely on their capability of second strike. The targets for strike would be military and communication bases and not
civilian bases. Under the nuclear threat the Soviets would continue to work in the direction of gaining superiority in terms
of quality and quantity of the nuclear weapons.
(d) On the ground of military strength, Soviets were very clear about gaining superiority over the US in terms of
quality and quantity of military equipments, technology warheads etc.
The basic difference between the US and the Soviets on the perceptions of war was that the Soviets stood for limiting
the damage to them, defeat the US let NATO forces and establish their dominance on the world. Whereas, the US wanted
to establish global balance with clear American superiority. This they want to achieve by following the policy of deterrence:
In the year 1983, President Ronald Regan called for a research programme that would protect the US from the threat
of strategic nuclear weapons. During this time both US and the Soviet Union became the nuclear powers and also
vulnerable of nuclear attacks. The Americans were working on high-tech space based defence capability that would
protect them from possible Soviet missile attack. This program was called the Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI). It was
also known as The Star War Programme.
The new technology aimed to detect, track and destroy the enemy missiles. The detection of the missile would be
done from the point of its takeoff and would be tracked throughout its path. Destruction of the missile could be done
starting from its launching point to the point where it is targetted. The entire mechanism was achieved through the space
based detection system. The weapons used to destroy enemy missiles were non-nuclear. This programme was much
more advanced that the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.
The American defence programme was taken very seriously by the Soviets as they thought that the American are
trying to gain monopoly which they had in 1950s. But the technological advancement claimed by the programme did not
materialized and it was reduced in scope and size.
Q. 4. What is peacekeeping? Assess the peacekeeping role of the United Nations.
Ans. Peacekeeping, Peacemaking And Peace Building: Peacekeeping Characteristics: By peace- keeping, we
mean various activities undertaken by the UN especially with the view to maintain peace in the region. The charter of UN
does not mention peacekeeping operations as one of its responsibilities but it has been evolved over the years and has
become one of the major achievements of the UN in maintaining peace and harmony in the world.
The UN peacekeeping forces are deployed in the regions where the two warring nations have accepted ceasefire. The
prime objective of the peacekeeping mission is to monitor that the ceasefire is honoured. At times, observation groups are
also appointed by the United Nations to ensure that the warring/conflicting parties do not breach the ceasefire; e.g., in
1947, a UN Observation Team was appointed in Indonesia where the Dutch Colonists were trying to maintain their rule
over the Indonesia against the wishes of the Indonesian nationalists. The observation team was to report the happenings
in the region with regard to maintenance of ceasefire and cases where there was a breach. Similarly, in 1949, the UN
Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) was appointed to see whether the ceasefire between India
and Pakistan was being maintained by the conflicting parties. This group still exists.
The observer group comprises of members not exceeding 100 in numbers. The duty of the observer group is to keep
a watch and report if the norms of cease- fire are being flouted. Whereas, the peacekeeping force of the UN comprises of
a couple of thousands of armed soldiers. They are responsible for bringing about peace by providing solutions to settle
the conflict and establishing ceasefire in the region. They also ensure that the forces of the conflicting nations are
retreated back to their positions in their respective territories.
The UN peacekeeping force came into existence in the year 1956-57 when nationalization of the Suez Canal by
Egypt brought about an armed conflict with Britain, France and Israel. Following which the UN General Assembly in an
emergency session called for the ceasefire and instructed the UN Secretary General to deploy the peacekeeping force to
observe the ceasefire.
The peacekeeping force operates on three basic principles:
Consent of the conflicting parties: The conflicting parties should agree to ceasefire and retreat back to their respective
territories. Also, they should have no objection with regard to the presence of the peace keeping force in their respective
territories; e.g., the UN peacekeeping force UNEF-1 was deployed in Egypt with the consent of the then Egyptian president
during the conflict during nationalization of Suez Canal and later when he withdrew the consent, the peacekeeping force
was withdrawn from the area in 1967. It is kept in mind that UN force does not have members of the state or country who
have vested interest in the conflict.
Impartiality and neutrality: These are the basic principles of the peacekeeping forces. The peacekeeping forces
are impartial while they are on the job. A failure in maintain the impartiality will undermine the basic idea of creating

N
5

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in5

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

peace in the said region.

Non-use of force except only in self-defence: The peacekeeping forces are lightly armed and are not capable of an
enforcement action. Since they are supposed to patrol in harsh and unfriendly areas, they are equipped with light armaments
which they are supposed to use only in self-defence.
SECTION II
Q. 6. (a) Doctrine of Just War.
Ans. The Doctrine of Just War: The war survived all the repulsions of it. The religious discourse or the pacifist
orientations could not discourage societies from going on war. The just war is one of the most important development that
has emerged between religious aversion and the states compulsion to resort to wars. The main religion associated with
this doctrine is Christianity along other religions also recognizing just war concept. This doctrine was basically developed
in the west. The church-established law in the middle ages in Europe was introduced as Canon Law. They advocated
pacifism of Christianity in Europe and beyond and the churches were considered important in the secular territory the
organized war was justified and entered the territory of human activities. According to Michael Walzer, just war is state
resisting aggression rather than state initiating aggression. Walzers theory of aggression is explained in six prepositions
consisting the core of just war:
1. The international societys existence is of independent states.
2. The rights of the members are established by the international societyand the rights of territorial integrity and
political sovereignty are of highest importance.
3. The act of using force or imminent threat of force by one state against the other states territorial integrity and
political sovereignty was considered aggression and criminal act.
4. The just actions in war were violent response, self-defense and war of enforcement by the victim or any other
member of the international society.
5. The aggression is the only justification for war.
6. There would be punishment for militarily revolted aggression.
The independent state integrity and its sovereignty in the international society is un-avoidable. In the above mentioned
points aggression is one of the most justified reasons of war. A defensive war is called a just war but it is difficult to assess
as to when war can be regarded as just, ant it is a difficult part. As a rule both parties one who initiates a war and the other
who retaliates the action have their own reasons for justifying their actions. Even the old monarch of ancient India Jatra
Yatra who for expansion of their territory used power against the weaker once and were not considered as unjust. The
oldest writer to discuss the justness of the war is Sun Tzu from China. The Athens considered themselves as the School of
Hellas as teachers when they were at the height of power and glory and committed aggression against tiny state of Melos
which was kind of neutral in the war as part of Sparta. The Athenian leaders could tell and justify to the Melos of their it
was the right of the Athenians to check the innocent Melos due to the existence of the war where the nation with defending
its interests should not consider moral accounts. The Athens put all Melos men to death and the rest women and children
to slavery. The new outlook of Athenians was considered as a way of politics by a Greek historian Thucydides. On the
other hand, a modern historian of Greece referred the Melons action as the principle of force from a realm of its own,
with laws of its own which was different than moral life of individual human conduct. The Christianity brought sense of
right and wrong as the just war doctrine, but these sense of right and wrong could not stay for long as both the European
leaders and the church leaders resorted war against each other. After the middle age there was a new beginning with
thinkers such as Machiaveli who separated the two morality of an individual and the morality of a state which helped the
testing of wars on just war standard.
(b) Composition and functions of the International Court of Justice.
Ans. International Court of Justice is one of the principle organs of United Nations established in June 1945 by the
Charter of United Nations under Articles 92-96. It comprises of 15 judges elected for a term of 9 years. The judges are
elected by the General Assembly and the Security Council. To maintain the continuity of the court, one third of the judges
are elected after every three years. In case of death of a judge or his resignation from the post, special election is held at
the earliest possible to fill the post of the judge for the balance tenure.
The ICJ act in the capacity of the world court. All member states of the UN can be party before the ICJ. Other nonmember states can also be party to ICJ provided they have been authorised by the Security Council. The ICJ has dual
jurisdiction (a) Contentious Jurisdiction and (b) Advisory Jurisdiction. Under contentious cases, the ICJ decides the
disputes of legal nature submitted by the states in accordance with the international law. The international legal disputes
can be in the form of disagreement over question of law or fact, a conflict or clash over legal views or clash of interest of

N
6

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in6

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

the states. Only states are authorised to approach the International Court of Justice. Individuals, Non-Governmental
Organisations and other collective groups are not authorised to approach the court with issues related to disputes over
international laws. The court can only deal with a dispute if the concerned states have recognized its jurisdiction. Thus
the consent of all the states in disputes is mandatory for ICJ to take up the case. The court has compulsory jurisdiction if
parties are bound by a treaty, agreement or conventions wherein they had agreed that the court should have jurisdiction in
specific category of disputes.
The court also has jurisdiction under the optional clause of the article 36 of the Charter. According to this clause, the
states agree to accept the obligation of the court in all legal disputes which involve(a) interpretation of a treaty (b) any
question of the international law (c) the extent of reparation to be made for a breach of international obligation. Not all
countries accept the compulsory jurisdiction of ICJ. The countries who accept the compulsory jurisdiction, they may
accept it on conditional or unconditional basis. E.g. Australia accepts compulsory jurisdiction of ICJ with reservations
whereas Brazil has not accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ.
Under the advisory jurisdiction, ICJ gives advice and opinion to the principal organs of the United Nations and other
specialised agencies which fall under the United Nations whenever sought. The advice and opinion of the ICJ is not
binding on these agencies.
The states make declarations with conditions depending upon the time and the kind of dispute that arises from time to
time. The dispute falls in the jurisdiction of the court if all parties in dispute give declaration to abide by the decision of
the ICJ. The judgement of the court is applicable only on the parties in conflict and for that particular case. Despite the
fact the jurisdiction of the court is limited, it has given some historic decisions on many international disputes and has
successfully avoided many violent conflicts among the nation-states.
Q. 10. (a) Theories of War.
Ans. Theories of Causes of War: There is no consensus on the causes of war even after conducting many studies. As
there is a difference in the immediate and long-term causes of conflict. There are many causes though sometimes only one
cause is considered and focused upon. There are some of the basic causes while some are event specific and work only in
committed countries. Some of the causes are short-term while some may be long-term causes. The main classification of
the cause are political, economic, social and psychological reasons. According to Quincy Wright, the angle to look at the
causes of war could be politico-technological, socio-religious and psycho-economic, but according to Marxist capitalism
and imperialism are the root cause of a war. There is a difference of opinion in the kinds of war such as imperialistic wars,
revolutionary wars, and wars for national liberation. The psychological causes include the stress of the nations of feeling
insecurity. National policy is an instrument for the causes of war as it is for the safeguarding of national objectives and
goals. This may be for the state, territory or the survival of the nation. There are mainly three levels of analysis such as 1.
System level causes, 2. State level causes, 3. Individual level causes.
System-Level Analysis
A top down approach is used in the system level analysis that helps in the study of world politics. The state and non
state participants operate in a global social, cultural, economic, geographic environment which determines the behavior
of the participants. The factors that determine how the system functions are: structural characteristics, power relationships
of members within the system, economic realities that intrude on the system and norms and conventions that might
govern the participants behaviour.
The organizational authority of the system is called the structural factors in the system. There is no vertical system of
authority in the international system which conveniently be called anarchic which means lack of centralized international
authority while the independent state pursue their individual interests. The nations were the central characters in traditional
study of international relations which seems to be changing now with the existence of non-state participants with more
important role to play such as some of the NGOsAmnesty or Green Peace plays a great role in the international relations,
other examples are multinational organizations and even terrorist groups are the new classified non state participants. The
inter-governmental bodies such as WTO and economic and trade blocks APEC, European Union are also non-state participants.
The distribution of power is power relationship, as the European domination which was there in the pre-war period
which is nowhere to be seen now. But today due to strong economic base U.S. is perceived as the dominating power.
These changes in international relationships are seen everywhere in the world.
The economic and industrial development of a country and the natural resources of the country are called the economic
reality. There is a north south divide where the north has developed countries and the south is less developed world.
Although all the countries are economically interdependent even than we have dominant developed countries. The conflicts
normally are about the scarce resources and the control and distribution of the available resources of the world. The most

N
7

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in7

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

economically important resources in these modern times is the oil.

There has been an ongoing debate on the importance of norms and conventions in the governance of the world. Many
think that the nations would not disturb the international relations unless there are compelling situations. The major issues
that are focused as causes of war are as follows:
1. Distribution of powerthe possible causes of war can be power posture, balance in power politics and the alliance
politics etc.
2. A structure where centralized control is missing is also considered as a cause of war. There is a sense of insecurity
amongst the developing nations and that is encouraging them to develop nuclear weapons.
3. The natural resources like oil and natural gas and strategic minerals are a major reason for conflict as all big small
nations are playing politics for the control over these natural resources.
4. There is a very systematic perspective by Samuel Huntington as per his research on the clashes of civilization. The
key cause of which is ethno-religious making them civilisational and not state centric.
State-Level Analysis
The key area of analysis in this level is nation-state and its internal process of the whole worlds politics with a state
centric approach in international relations. The state has greater independence in decision making than it was believed in
the system level analysis. Policies are made using both structural and non-structural determinants. The non-structural
determinants refer to the history and political culture of the state while the structural determinants refer nature of the
government. There is a difference in making policies for the authoritarian and democratic governments and also differ in
times of crisis and peace.
Causes of war in the state level analysis are as follows:
(a) National interest is most important at this level. There are two levels at which national interest operates one is the
survival in case of attack by enemy and the second is security related national interest, Israel is the only country in recent
past who has experienced both, in 1948 war the issue was of survival and later in 1967-73 the expansion of territory for
the security.
(b) There has to be a link between domestic politics and international policies.
(c) The linkage of the type of country and the prospect of it becoming an aggressive one, where it is argued that
authoritarian societies are more likely to become aggressive than the domestic societies.
(b) Resource scarcity and confict.
Ans. In the past two decades the relationship between natural resources and conflict risk has re-emerged as a key
issue in international security. The current debate about the linkage between natural resources and the onset, duration and
termination of conflicts around the globe focuses on three distinct perspectives: economic theories of violence; environmental factors, especially linked to climate change, as risk multipliers for conflict; and resource geopolitics. These approaches highlight the direct and indirect ways that resource issues can cause conflict. For example, both resource scarcity and resource dependence can interact with social and institutional vulnerabilities to create the conditions for conflict.
Key elements of this include informal or illegal trade and violent criminal groups pursuing exploitation of and trade in
natural resources. National over-dependence on natural resource revenues is also closely associated with state weakness,
even failure, producing conditions under which armed groups can emerge. The rise of dynamic and large consumer
markets in Asiaprincipally China and Indiahas also raised the priority of resource issues on the international security
agenda. Record levels of demand and commodity prices have led international organizations, governments, businesses
and civil society to launch various initiatives designed to mitigate the interactions between resource issues and conflict.
Other responses include the creation of conflict monitoring and early warning systems and efforts to incorporate resource
management into peace building agendas. Several high-level initiatives have been established to regulate illegal resource
trade. However, efforts to manage the different aspects of natural resources and their relationship to conflict and securitynotably the effort to regulate trade while still ensuring market accesshave highlighted the complex balance required in such initiatives. Thus, more effective global resource governance frameworks should be part of the international
effort to weaken and eventually break the links between resources and conflict.The links between inequality and violent
conflict are among the oldest concerns in political economy. It is almost a universal assumption that an inequitable
distribution of resources and wealth will provoke violent rebellion. And yet it is just as obvious and historically established that sharply skewed income and wealth distribution does not always or even usually lead to rebellion. Usually, this
is taken to mean that the inequality is legitimized in one way or another; that the inequality comes with a degree of power
and repression that are simply too great to overcome; or that there are various obstacles preventing collective action.

N
8

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in

www.ignou-ac.in8