Violent Non-State Actors - Dissertation Example

To what extent do violent non actors contribute to and /or detract from security in the contemporary world politics? By Code Class Institution Date Violent non-state actors (VNSAs) have received interest among the policy circles and academic word only recently. The study is considered new; though the understanding of the actors is underdeveloped theoretically. VNSAs study is considered vital to the security in the world. The study question is, to what extend do the violent non state actors contribute to and/or detract from security in the contemporary world of politics? The study aims at explaining the impact of the VNSAs to the security and world politics (Amoore, 2010). Journals and books will be utilized in providing information to answer the study question. National security in the previous years has not yet been defined (Zartman, 2009). The United States however, has played a role in the promotion of national security by targeting the violent non state actors due to its widely publicized war on terror. Structural factors such as resource scarcity, austerity era and technological advancement aimed at empowering the NSAs has registered growth in importance (Anker, 2006). The violent non state actors have continued to be a concern not only to the United States of America but also to the western countries and the world at large. The study will focus on; conditions that produce VNSAs, their relationship with the state, the purpose of using violence and the impact of external forces towards the operation of the actors (Talbott, 2001). Just like al-Qaida after the September eleven attack in the United States soil, the VNSAs have continued to impact on the state of the world security and the world politics (Bartolomei & Casebeer, 2004). Violent non state actors can be defined in various ways; insurgent guerrillas aimed at weakening a ruling government, terrorism groups, paramilitant adjunct and warlord, private military firms or the militia groups (Baker, 2005). All these groups in one way or the other are illegal and are aimed at causing disharmony among the people, causing loss of innocent lives and more properties have been destroyed in such countries that harbor warlords. Most of these terror groups are found mainly in some parts of Africa and the Middle East countries. The various terror groups with different actions have made it difficult to know their major aims. The difficult has been to find out whether they are evil or good (Clarke, 2004). Amongst them there exists a wide variegation. Some support status quo while others opposes it. Some are not driven by ideology unlike others who are ideology driven; some violent non state actors kill indiscriminately while others choose the people to kill (Cornish, 2011).The VNSAs are sometimes considered as being of essence to the state. In failing states for example, the state and the violent non state operators can interact, cooperate, and coexist (Dutka, 2006). In some ways, they may be co-opted to contribute to the state power for example in Sudan pre partition. The violent non state actors may compete with the states which are the sovereign powers (Devore & Stähli, 2014). Most political scientists believe that monopoly is enjoyed by the state or the administration that is in power. However it has become difficult to identify the authority that makes genuine claim in instances of revolution or civil war Evans & Jones, 2008). The fact is supported by the war in Syria and the experience in Libya when the dictator muhamar Gadafi was forcefully evicted out of power and killed by the violent non state actors. In some instances powerful governments in the world have strongly come out and supported some of the actions of the NVSAs (Kappen, 2011). United States for instance supported their actions in Syria and was willing to supply the non violent state actors with guns and other weapon in order to fight the government. Most government that is in power uses extensive forces against the insurgency and in the process violates human rights due to death of civilians that are considered collateral damage (Kassof, 2004). The use of chemical weapons against the violent state actors have been known to cause debates among the powerful countries in the world and international bodies such as the united nation. Violation of human rights is a worldwide concern (Kassof, 2004). Conflicts have emerged among the countries with greater influence in the world politics. Such countries have differed in opinions with some of them supporting the state while others giving support to the insurgency. These were witnessed in Syria with Russia supporting the government as the united state gave support to the VNSAs (Kaye, 2008). The impact of globalization has also played a role in deciding the world politics pertaining to the VNSAs. Media globalization for example has persistently questioned the use of extensive force on the terror group by the states (Khan & Siddiqui, 2014). One of the media with such an action is the Al Jazeera media. The media has continues to focus on the Arab revolutions and the use of force against the Arabs by some countries in the world like the united states in the fight of terror (Zuhur, 2007). In Egypt during Mubarak’s regime for example, strategies were developed by the government with the aim of defeating the militant Islamic groups (Mayer, 2008). Powerful strikes and intelligent collections were directed to the group, their sources of funding were clamped down, hundreds of teachers and other people with radical ideas were actively removed from the government. The government went ahead to monitor the many mosques with an intention of preventing radical preaching (Mickler, 2010). The country prevented the militants from getting outside assistant by ensuring the border is well managed. United States invasion in Iraq may be considered one of the contributors to the development of various violent non state actors (Mulaj, 2010). After the invasion, most of the country ended up being marginalized, uninsured, policed, consuming minimally and repressed. The elites however, became capitalists and benefited from securitization hence became wealthy. The difference that emerged led to conflicts that exist to date (Reed & Raschke, 2010). Violent non state actors have impacted in the security and the politics of the world. The presence of the actors has prompted the United Nations and other world super powers like the United States of America to come up with policies of dealing with their actions (Rich, 2010). US fight on terror is just but one of the examples. Some of these militant groups have also been known to be of important in some way. VNSAs in some states has worked together to bring peace. The militant group in Libya fought against the poor leadership of the dictator Gadafi. They struggled with the state until the leader was evicted from power (Smith & Long, 2008). References Amoore, L. 2010. Vigilant Visualities: The Watchful Politics Of The War On Terror. Security Dialogue, 215-232. Anker, E. 2006. Terror Firma: Political Topographies of the War on Terror. Theory & Event. Baker, C. 2005. Philippine Security in the Age of Terror: National, Regional, and Global Challenges in the Post-9/11 World. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 296-296. Bartolomei, J., & Casebeer, W. 2004. Modeling violent non-state actors: A summary of concepts and methods. Colorado Springs], Colo.: Institute for Information Technology Applications, United States Air Force Academy. Clarke, R. 2004. Against all enemies: Inside Americas war on terror. New York: Free Press. Cornish, P. 2011. Terror And Democratic Governance. The Review of Politics, 166-166. Devore, M., & Stähli, A. 2014. Explaining Hezbollahs Effectiveness: Internal and External Determinants of the Rise of Violent Non-State Actors. Terrorism and Political Violence, 1-27. Dutka, D. 2006. Violent non-state actors in world politicsh[electronic resource]: Their formation, actions, and effects. Evans, T., & Jones, D. 2008. Code of Peace: Ethics and Security in the World of Warlord States. International Affairs Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-, 140-140. Kappen, T. 2011. Governance without a state?: Policies and politics in areas of limited statehood. New York: Columbia University Press. Kassof, A. 2004. The Administered Society: Totalitarianism Without Terror. World Politics, 558-575. Kaye, D. 2008. More freedom, less terror? liberalization and political violence in the Arab world. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Khan, N., & Siddiqui, R. 2014. War on terror cells: Killing the host that harbours ‘superbugs’ is an infection control strategy in our fight against infectious diseases. Pathogens and Global Health, 2047773213Y.000-2047773213Y.000. Mayer, J. 2008. The dark side: The inside story of how the war on terror turned into a war on American ideals. New York: Doubleday. Mickler, D. 2010. Saviors and Survivors: Darfur, Politics, and the War on Terror. Global Responsibility to Protect, 331-333. Mulaj, K. 2010. Violent non-state actors in world politics. New York: Columbia University Press. Reed, J., & Raschke, D. 2010. The ETIM Chinas Islamic militants and the global terrorist threat. Westport, CT: Praeger Security International. Rich, P. 2010. Warlords, state fragmentation and the dilemma of humanitarian intervention. Small Wars & Insurgencies, 78-96. Smith, J., & Long, J. 2008. Strategic culture and violent non-state actors weapons of mass destruction and asymmetrical operations concepts and cases. USAF Academy, Colo.: USAF Institute for National Security Studies. Talbott, S. 2001. The age of terror: America and the world after September 11. New York: Basic Books ;. Zartman, I. 2009. Warlord Politics and African States. Political Science Quarterly, 346-347. Zuhur, S. 2007. Egypt: Security, political, and Islamist challenges. Carlisle, PA: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College. Read More