0
What form of warfare is characterized as a violent struggle among state and non-state actors for legitimacy and influence over the relevant population?
Wiki User
∙ 9y ago
Irregular warfare
Wiki User
∙ 9y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Three kinds of nonstate groups that influence national politics?
Religious groups, advocacy groups, and the media.
What are three nonstate groups that influence national politics?
Churches, unions, and corporations. Hope this helped(:
To what extent do nonstate actors exert independent influence on international relations?
Nonstate actors, such as multinational corporations, nongovernmental organizations, and terrorist groups, can exert significant independent influence on international relations by shaping agendas, mobilizing resources, and influencing decision-making. Their actions can complement or challenge state-centric interactions, contributing to the complexity and dynamism of the international system. However, the extent of their impact varies depending on factors like their resources, strategies, and relationships with state actors.
Who are the major players in the afghan war 2001-present?
The major players in the Afghan war are sub-divided among four principal actors, being insurgents, local government, outside actors, and the local population.Insurgents:"Those hoping to overthrow the established government or secede from it" (152). This includes "remnants of the Taliban, Gulbaddin Hekmatyar's Hezb-i-Islami, the Haqqani network, Al-Qaeda, foreign fighters, criminal groups, and a host of Afghan and Pakistani tribal militias" (152). Driven by ideology and religion, these actors are fiercely determined in achieving their objectives. Their unswerving demands are neither reasonable nor negotiable.Local Government:"Includes the government security forces, the army and police, as well as key national and local political institutions" (152). Establishing an effective Afghan National Security Force consisting of ANA, ABP, and ANP are viewed as critical to the successful reach and legitimacy of Afghanistan's weak government. Before the insurgency was in full-swing, outside actors, namely the United States and NATO, channeled their focus on developing government security forces. The government is determined to overcome the insurgents, but lack real influence beyond the major population centers and Ring road. The stakes are highest for the local government, as they have everything to gain AND lose.Outside Actors:"External states and other nonstate entities, which might support either side" (152). Jones delineates two opposing sets of external actors. "The United States, NATO forces, and the United Nations support the Afghan government; the international jihadi network and some individuals from neighboring states-such as Pakistan and Iran-support the insurgents" (152-153). Clearly there are a number of external actors that participate in the Afghan war actively, passively, and/or covertly for strategic reasons.Local Population:"The most important group; it is for their hearts and minds that the war is being fought in the first place" (153). Both sides of the insurgency seek popular support, realizing its necessity. The side that controls the populace will likely be the victor. Jones sums this up by stating, "in the end, the exercise of political power depends on the tacit or explicit agreement of the population-or, at worst, on its submissiveness" (153). The stakes are high for the local population, as whoever is in control of the state will determine their quality of life and future direction.Works CitedJones Seth. Into the Graveyard of Empires, W. W. Norton & Company; Reprint edition, April 12, 2010.
Why do terrorists do terrorism?
There are many different types of terrorists, all with different reasons for bringing about their terror. However, if you are referring to the Muslim extremists, they interpret the Quran and do as they think the Quran tells them to.
What were the problems faced by the human right movement?
Human rights are "basic rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled. There is no question that the international human rights movement has done a great deal of good, freeing individuals from great harm, providing an emancipatory vocabulary and institutional machinery for people across the globe, raising the standards by which governments judge one another, and by which they are judged, both by their own people, and by the elites we refer to collectively as the "international community." A career in the human rights movement has provided thousands of professionals, many of them lawyers, with a sense of dignity and confidence that one sometimes can do well while doing good. Narrow in many ways. People have made many different claims about the narrowness of human rights. Here are some: the human rights movement foregrouowers and felt entitlements of private actors. Human rights implicitly legitimates ills and delegitimates remedies in the domain of private law and nonstate action. Insulating the economy. Putting these narrowings together often means defining problems and solutions in ways not likely to change the economy. Human rights foregrounds problems of participation and procedure, at the expense of distribution, implicitly legitimating the existing distributions of wealth, status and power in societies once rights have been legislated, formal participation in government achieved, and institutional remedies for violations provided. However useful saying "that's my right" is in extracting things from the state, it is not good for extracting things from the economy, unless you are a property holder. Indeed, a practice of rights claims against the state may actively weaken the capacity of people to challenge economic arrangements.
