This discussion has been closed.
Posted by U15708662 (U15708662) on Sunday, 28th April 2013
I am really struggling to write/plan the essay - "Examine the effectiveness of international responses to threats to global security."
I know the basic points but I don't know how to expand them into paragraphs.
I am also worrying as the exam is in 11 days, so any help or essay plans etc would be amazing?
Posted by Modern Studies Teacher (U15172411) on Sunday, 28th April 2013
Hi, as ever I would refer you to the SQA Marking Instructions. Obviously some of the examples are out of date, but I'm sure you'll be aware of recent events that you can use; North Korea, Iran, Arab Spring etc. You need to decide what threats you're going to discuss and the response(s) from which organisation(s). Having focussed yourself to particular areas, you need to make a judgement on the effectiveness of this response. Has the problem gone away / been made worse / no change? Look at the general advice on essay writing that has been discussed below - the principles are the same. Post an essay based on the above advice and MI below and I'll let you know how well you're doing...
Study Theme 3F – Global Security
Examine the effectiveness of international responses to threats to global security.
“Pass” and better answers should feature developed, exemplified knowledge and understanding of:
Threats to global security
Sources (candidates may select from UN, NATO, AU, EU, USA and coalition allies) and forms of international responses to threats to global security
Balanced comment on/analysis of the effectiveness of international responses to threats to global security.
Answers may refer to:
• civil conflict
• international disputes
• nuclear proliferation
• post-conflict recovery (peace building)
• unstable regimes
• UN – Democratic Republic of the Congo, Eritrea, Lebanon, Ethiopia, Sudan; response to acquisition of nuclear weapons by North Korea
• NATO – Bosnia, Macedonia, Kosovo, Afghanistan (where in October 2006 it took charge of Afghanistan’s eastern provinces, which had been in control of US forces since Taliban ousted in 2001)
• African Union – Sudan (forces airlifted there by EU and NATO)
• EU – Bosnia, where EUFOR took over control of peacekeeping operations from NATO in February 2005 (80% of the force simply changed badges); diplomatic response to Iran’s nuclear ambitions
• USA (and coalition allies) – Iraq and The War on Terrorism against “the axis of evil”
• 2005 Rand Corporation study of American and UN peacekeeping operations concluded that UN missions were not only cheaper, but had higher success rate and enjoyed greater international legitimacy
• Canadian study attributed the dramatic decline in the number of conflicts in the past decade to the “huge increase” in preventative diplomacy and peacekeeping “for the most part authorised and mounted by the UN”
• for most of the UN’s history the powerful have by-passed the Security Council when they chose to
• UN is hampered by its Charter, veto, and modus operandi: fact finding mission > Security Council approval > need to find peacekeepers
• UN resolutions ignored by members
• sanction breaking
• AU initially turned down offer of UN help in Darfur
• initial refusal of Sudanese government to allow UN intervention in Darfur, accusing the UN of being an agent of the West. However, it agreed to allow in a “hybrid” UN and AU force
• Sudan has the backing of China and Russia who consistently water-down attempts to impose sanctions
• UN resolution 1718 (October 2006) belatedly imposed sanctions on North Korea (China had hitherto blocked) but included no reference to military intervention as USA had proposed
• USA lobby to put an American in charge of all UN peacekeeping operations seen as a move that could offer Washington an exit strategy in Iraq. (USA contributes 0.5% of UN peacekeepers)
• despite its headline failures, the scandalous behaviour of some of corrupt officials and the unacceptable behaviour of some of its peacekeepers, the UN is still regarded as an essential organisation for achieving a better, fairer, more peaceful world
• view that the UN Secretary General (Ban Ki-moon) cannot succeed without Washington’s co-operation and reform of the organisation
• election held in the DR (Democratic Republic) Congo (2006)
• EU unable to agree over either war in Iraq (2001-2003) or Israel’s war in Lebanon
• difficulties facing NATO in defeating the Taliban militarily
• USA-British difficulties in Iraq
• other relevant points and issues.
Posted by U15708662 (U15708662) on Wednesday, 1st May 2013
Thank you for your help!
Could you tell me how is this essay looking? I only have two paragraphs so far and I'm not sure what else to write about...
September 11th 2001 showed a new threat to world peace from international terrorism. In 2001, America and a "coalition of the willing" attacked Afghanistan due to the Taliban refusing to hand over Osama Bin Laden and other Al-Qaeda terrorists. Since 9/11 America has increasingly had the desire to act unilaterally through the "coalition of the willing" and at the time, America ignored UN disapproval of the invasion and also ignored Article 5 of NATO's treaty which stated that an attack on one is an attack on all, emphasising the ineffectiveness of the UN. So although the "coalition of the willing" has had a positive impact on global security, its effectiveness in instilling long term stability is debatable.
In 2011 the UN Security Council passed UNSCR 1973, authorising action to protect civilians in Libya from pro-Gaddafi forces. It allowed for no fly zones and aimed to achieve the safety of Libyan cililians, which eventually led to the topple of Gaddafi. However it took a long time for UNSCR 1973 to be agreed and countless civilians had already been killed as a result of this. This is primarily due to the 5 permanent members having the ability to veto any resolution, and in this case Russia and China were prepared to veto as they take a very limited view of when the UN should intervene in "internal matters." Therefore this shows that the UN has largely been ineffective in response to threats to global security and is deserving of its criticism as a "talking shop."
Posted by Modern Studies Teacher (U15172411) on Thursday, 2nd May 2013
Your examples are good and certainly meet the criteria of conflicts and how the UN has responded to them. Go for an introduction to the UN / conflict - don't dive straight into examples because your essay will look disjointed. Additional detail contained in the answer I gave you that you've not used includes "• for most of the UN’s history the powerful have by-passed the Security Council when they chose to
• UN is hampered by its Charter, veto, and modus operandi: fact finding mission > Security Council approval > need to find peacekeepers • UN resolutions ignored by members • sanction breaking". Look up some recent examples as indicated in my answer. Build your argument by highlighting the UN's weaknesses and strengths then draw them out in your conclusion. Don't use emotive language, "Therefore this shows that the UN has largely been ineffective in response to threats to global security and is deserving of its criticism as a "talking shop." - try to be more measured, on the one hand, (evidence of good points), however overall I believe the evidence (bad points) means that the UN has been shown to be ......
Hope this helps.
Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.