Christie Allison
Poli 480 Final Paper Proposal
10/30/13
Ever
since the Terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, unipolarity has been slowly
changing into bipolarity. The United States came to look as the superpower and
many states were given the choice to stand with the United States or against
the United States in the war against terror. It became obvious that it would be
against a nation’s well-being to go against the United States, so many decided
to join the United States in the fight against terror rather than not join.
Many smaller nations felt as though they did not have a choice not to join the
war against terror, considering they have a smaller economy and smaller
military force; one would believe that they would not be able to defend themselves
against something so vast as terrorism. Joining the United States in the fight
would be their best and only option if they did not want to get harmed. Because
of this, the idea of unipolar states starts to diminish and bipolar states
start to emerge: meaning more than one state has power.
After
September 11, 2001 the United States has been looked upon to act for the best
of mankind. The United States has taken the reigns in the war against terror
following the terrorist attacks, and has become the world’s superpower.
Sovereignty is questioned because the United States is putting itself above
international law. The terrorist attacks created an extreme imbalance of
military and political power in regards to rule of law.
I
will be showing in this paper how the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001
have made the United States the main superpower and have given the United
States more power than it ever has before; therefore, questioning sovereignty.
References
1. Jackson,
R. (2007). Sovereignty and its Presuppositions: Before 9/11 and After.
Political Studies, 55(2), 297-317.
2. Mercado,
C. D. (2010). Redefining Legitimate Authority: Just War in the Era of
Terrorism. Journal Of The Indiana Academy Of The Social Sciences, 14117-125.
3. Marrar,
K. M. (2004). Sovereignty and the War on Terrorism. Conference Papers --
American Political Science Association, 1-20.
4. De
Nevers, R. (2004). The Sovereignty Norm and the War on Terror. Conference
Papers -- American Political Science Association, 1-42.
5. Fettweis,
C. J. (2007). Credibility and the War on Terror. Political Science Quarterly,
122(4), 607-633.
I am a little confused by how defined unipolar and bipolar. I would say during the Cold War it would have been a bipolar balance of power with two world super powers. Now with the fall of the Soviet Union the world has entered a unipolar age with the U.S. reigning as the only world super power. I would argue that its power peaked with 9/11, and began to wane, as far as influence goes, during the Iraq War. it is important to note how much power the international organizations like the UN and International Courts have achieved in this era in comparison to any time previously. Also, the President's decision to not go into Syria, shows that the U.S. does not have the same leeway it did with the initial kick off after 9/11. I think these areas will be important to take into account for your paper.
ReplyDeleteYou are unclear in your use of bipolar. Bipolar refers to two powers, for example The US and the Soviet Union during the cold war, multiple power sources is not bipolar. How has US power increased after 9/11, who did the US share power with between the fall of the USSR and 9/11? I also think you need to be more clear about how US hegemony affects sovereignty. Are you referring to US sovereignty or the sovereignty of other nations? It may be interesting to look at the US action in Pakistan in killing Osama. Also think about how terrorism undermines US power and hegemony, not to mention the threat it poses, it also caused great division and marred US reputation abroad for our actions in Iraq and Afghanistan. So what accounts for the lack of international support for the US war on terror?
ReplyDelete