RESPONSE PAPER

Response Paper



Response Paper

Michael Klare describes what he calls a new “Thirty Years War” that is now developing that has similar outlines of the earlier conflict (1618 - 1648) discussed in class. What are some of the similarities and differences between to two?

The Thirty Years War from 1618 to 1648 was a conflict over the hegemony in Germany and Europe also a religious war. The United States and China, specifically in the field of hydrocarbons are the countries which happen to be the first two geo-economic superpowers on the planet. In this sense, Michael Klare, expressed his controversial thesis on, "The New War 30 Years" on the Common Dreams website, which ranks “winners and losers "of" the great battle to come to power” (Genest, 1997). Recall that the original policy in the 30 Years War of the seventeenth century (1618 to 1648), a genuine European war Christian theological world of quarrels between papists and reformists who pilloried the supremacy of the Vatican-led to the creation of the modern state in Westphalia to settle, and proclaiming the original Nazarene, the separation of state affairs of the metaphysis. The metaphor used is triple Klare intellectual, first, does not appear to be peaceful, and secondly, like the beginning of political modernity on German soil, that is, West-bound off the technology, and third, brings the chronological log of a new earthly order in energy. Respect regardless of past theses Klare, I must confess that his metaphor not touched me. As the next "war of 30 years", this time on energy, it suffers from the absence of a value framework, which lost some semantic paired with the ecology of recent introduction. Therefore, it can be said that though there are similarities in the situation, as it seems to be heading in the same direction, yet the reasons for the 17th century war are different to this one (Genest, 1997).

Do you agree with the maxim that, in international politics, the "strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept"?

In this statement, the strong represents the developed countries and the weak represents the developing or the underdeveloped countries. In recent years, there has been a rapidly increasing gap between the highly developed countries and underdeveloped ones. The society of underdeveloped countries impoverished while the developed countries get rich quickly. The growing gap between high-and low-developed countries has very tricky causes. These include the colonial past, demographic trends, technological advances, and indebtedness. Countries that are underdeveloped are also dependent on the developed countries, as the underdeveloped countries do not have the resources they have to ask the developed countries to provide the resources. This, in turn, means that the underdeveloped countries are dependent on the developed countries to provide them the resources and the required debt to run their country (Genest, 1997). Debt is another reason, due to which it can be said that the strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept ...