The concept of universal peace cannot exist without the notion of international conflict. As with any other diametrically opposed reference systems—unipolar/multipolar, status-quo/revisionist, identity/alterity, etc.—it is arguably less the phenomeno-hermeneutical study of these two conditions as individual occurrences than the nexus and antithetical relationship which exists between them which ultimately provides the most interesting avenues for scholarly research into their various subcategories. Since the ideal of universal peace is central to this dissertation's underlying historical analysis, a thorough engagement with its natural opposite therefore deserves particular attention.
Two important qualifications, however, are in order: first, international war and conflict as here applied shall refer exclusively to wilful and aggressively pursued manifestations thereof, and thus not to the use of defensive war measures. While the latter designates the legitimate recourse to military force for the purpose of repelling an attack against the territorial integrity, political independence or interests of a political entity, its aggressive equivalent, on the other hand, represents the deliberate attempt of one unit to diminish or outright destroy the aforementioned, highly prized attributes of another. Secondly, it is important to remember that although a universal peace specifically implies the system-wide preponderance of both negative and positive peace elements, its possible termination, meanwhile, does not necessarily require the occurrence of universal war on a global scale—at least not initially. For even though the sudden outbreak of total systemic warfare would undoubtedly shatter world peace all by itself, its fragile composition might already become endangered by developments involving far less devastating and cataclysmic convulsions. History after all is rife with examples where the actual sources of transnational conflict are not just to be found in the eventual military clash of antagonists following a blatant breach of the peace by one of them.
Table of Contents
1. International Conflict and Aggressive War
Objectives & Core Themes
The primary objective of this work is to analyze the complex relationship between international conflict and aggressive war, exploring the structural and normative factors that influence global stability. It seeks to critically evaluate how political dynamics, power distributions, and systemic tensions contribute to the emergence of regional and systemic warfare, while investigating the limitations of current collective security frameworks in preventing such outcomes.
- The nexus between universal peace and international conflict
- Theoretical perspectives on the causes of war (Realism vs. Neo-liberalism)
- The impact of power dynamics and security dilemmas on state behavior
- The function and limitations of collective security mechanisms
- Structural and normative foundations of the international system
Excerpt from the Book
International Conflict and Aggressive War
The concept of universal peace cannot exist without the notion of international conflict. As with any other diametrically opposed reference systems—unipolar/multipolar, status-quo/revisionist, identity/alterity, etc.—it is arguably less the phenomeno-hermeneutical study of these two conditions as individual occurrences than the nexus and antithetical relationship which exists between them which ultimately provides the most interesting avenues for scholarly research into their various subcategories. Since the ideal of universal peace is central to this dissertation's underlying historical analysis, a thorough engagement with its natural opposite therefore deserves particular attention. Two important qualifications, however, are in order: first, international war and conflict as here applied shall refer exclusively to wilful and aggressively pursued manifestations thereof, and thus not to the use of defensive war measures. While the latter designates the legitimate recourse to military force for the purpose of repelling an attack against the territorial integrity, political independence or interests of a political entity, its aggressive equivalent, on the other hand, represents the deliberate attempt of one unit to diminish or outright destroy the aforementioned, highly prized attributes of another.
Summary of Chapters
1. International Conflict and Aggressive War: This chapter introduces the fundamental tension between international conflict and the ideal of universal peace, setting the stage for a historical and structural analysis of aggressive warfare versus defensive measures.
Keywords
International conflict, aggressive war, universal peace, collective security, systemic warfare, power distribution, security dilemma, international relations, neo-realism, neo-liberalism, state sovereignty, global stability, political organization, transnational conflict, conflict prevention.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this research?
The work examines the essential relationship between international conflict and aggressive war, aiming to understand the historical and structural factors that threaten universal peace.
What are the primary themes discussed?
The central themes include the nature of international anarchy, the causes of war within the international system, the role of power dynamics, and the limitations of collective security arrangements.
What is the core research objective?
The main objective is to provide a thorough engagement with the phenomenon of aggressive war to better understand why conflicts arise and why collective security efforts often fail to prevent them.
Which theoretical frameworks are applied?
The analysis utilizes perspectives from both neo-realist and neo-liberal schools of thought to explain state actions and the possibilities of international cooperation.
What does the main body of the work cover?
The main body investigates different levels of analysis regarding war, the impact of revisionist goals, the security dilemma, and the practical challenges of organizing effective collective security.
Which keywords define this work?
Key terms include international conflict, aggressive war, security dilemma, collective security, and systemic warfare.
How does the author define the difference between aggressive and defensive war?
The author distinguishes them by intent: defensive war is a response to repel attacks against territorial or political integrity, whereas aggressive war is the deliberate attempt to destroy those attributes in another entity.
Why is collective security considered problematic in the text?
The text suggests that collective security often fails because states tend to act selectively, prioritizing their own national interests and independence over multilateral obligations unless their vital interests are directly threatened.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Joe Majerus (Autor:in), 2017, International Conflict and Aggressive War, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/432935
