Christian School

This is an essay example but you can always order custom essay from professional writers at www.essay4you.net

There have passed several years after the tragedy of the 11^th October, but it will be forever considered to be the event that has changed the life of the whole planet. How do the specialists and scientists evaluate the perspectives of this tragedy in the context of international relation theory.

American Political Scientist Dr. Henry Kissinger, who considered to be unofficial political advisor of George W. Bush on the question of Israel and Middle East, including the invasion and occupation of Iraq, in his article “Foreign Policy in the age of terrorism” raised the question that is one of the most burning in the field of foreign policy – co-operation. The problem of co-operation between the United States and the other countries has been always some kind of difficulty. The author insists on the fact that the events of 11 September has become so called new reference point and showed that foreign policy is not only economics and sociology: “For America it was a wake-up call against the background of a period of indolence and self-satisfaction. The illusion was that history was over, that

foreign policy had become a version of economics or sociology, that there were no major political issues left was at an end. The illusion that we have an unlimited range of choice, or that we can choose among our options those which most flatter our preconceptions, has also been severely shaken” (Kissinger, 2001). In his article Kissinger pays lots of attention to the problems of reformation that should be taken in the field of co-operation of the United States with the other countries – he cites an instance the foreign policy between the United States and the United Kingdom of Great Britain as a positive example.

It goes without saying that the tragedy of 11^th September has touched every person in the world, but the same time the author has no clear thoughts about how to react. He says the the mission of the US forces in Afghanistan will yield its results but the same time insists that elimination of number one terrorist bin Laden ca not influence the problem. He mostly concentrate the attention of the reader on the unity between the Western Countries that could influence and bring democracy in the Middle East but the same time he drives attention of the reader to the fact that progressive Islamic Countries such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt do not think that West can bring: “Its

true that in many countries in the Middle East there is a kind of tacit agreement between these ‘cells’ and the government in which the government tolerates these cells so long as they  do not direct their actions against the countries in which they are located. It is also the case that an attempt to bring about in a very brief period of time the evolution that took centuries in the West is more likely to produce chaos than democracy” (Kissinger 2001).

Another American scientist Robert Keohane describes in his articles perspectives for changes in world foreign policy. He looks on the changes from the globalization point of view. He is assured in the fact that foreign policy did not take into account many factors before the 11^th of September. One of them is religion: “The terrorist attacks on New York and Washington force us to rethink our theories of world politics. Globalism should not be equated with economic integration. The agents of globalization are not simply the high-tech creators of the internet, or multinational corporations, but also small bands of fanatics, travelling on jet aircraft and inspired by fundamentalist religion” (Keohane, 2001). He cites as an example US experience in Perl Harbour and Vietnam War noting the fact that the US is coming to changes through very painful experience and there should be undertaken significant changes and actually international relations and world politics has driven significant changes especially in our world of globalization. The whole article is subdivided in some paragraphs where author shows his thoughts and ideas on the situation. In concluding paragraph he gives his final attitude to undergoing perspectives: “The globalization of informal violence indicates how parochial have been some of the disputes among various schools of international relations theory. Analysis of the ramifications of the attacks on the United States must come to grips not only with structures of power, but also with changing subjective ideas and their impact on strategies. It must be concerned with international institutions, and with non-state actors and networks — elements of world politics emphasized by different schools of thought. And it must probe the connections between domestic politics and world politics. We do not face a choice between these perspectives, but rather the task of synthesizing them into a comprehensive, yet coherent, view” (Keohane,2001).

And the third article by Noam Chomsky gives deep historical perspectives in order to learn how appeared the term terrorism and what is actually the situation in the whole world. The author definitely defines what is the war against terrorism: “The war against terrorism has been described in high places as a struggle against a plague, a cancer which is spread by barbarians, by “depraved opponents of civilization itself”” (Chomsky, 2001). He pays great attention to the question of the development of such a term as war against terrorism. The practical analysis shows that this after 11^th September actions are not the first attempt to extirpate terrorism on the Earth. He also devotes attention to the origins of the terroristic action itself and finally comes to the perspectives. The author treats to the whole situation as a historical event and avoids populist announcements about the terrorism extirpation. He just suggests to draw conclusions from the situation happened and start to change it: There is one easy way to do that and therefore it is never discussed. Namely stop participating in it. That would automatically reduce the level of terror enormously. But that you can’t discuss. Well we ought to make it possible to discuss it. So that’s one easy way to reduce the level of terror. Beyond that, we should rethink the kinds of policies, and Afghanistan is not the only one, in which we organize and train terrorist armies. That has effects. We’re seeing some of these effects now. September 11th is one. Rethink it. Rethink the policies that are creating a reservoir of support. Exactly what the bankers, lawyers and so on are saying in places like Saudi Arabia. On the streets it’s much more bitter, as you can imagine. That’s possible. You know, those policies aren’t graven in stone” (Chomsky, 2001).

Despite the articles differ a lot as in the manner of thinking of each author as in the manner of presentation of their opinion. The tree of them come finally to the opinion that the problem of terrorism is rather global than local and it would be better to solve it together. The perspectives’ development of the certain situation under the discussion shows, that there are many different ways to co-operate and try to reduce such situation that happened in the US on 11^th of September 2001. That is not the historic even of US history, that is a historic even of the whole world and the idea of common solving of such a problem as terrorism will be the great leap forward in the development of international policy as it touches every thinking person in every country. It does not concern only Islamic countries, as the world practice shows that nationality and religion in performing the terroristic actions  is not always a decisive factor.