Author: Yota

We must understand that in a state the environmental issues are responsible for social, economic, political, and even military conditions. We must stabilize population growth and stop famine because they cause tension, war, and terrorism in the global arena. Some security measurements of global climate change are:

1.Resources scarcity and competition for water, food, and land security. There are some of the biggest challenges that we must compete for land, water, and food; 2. Infrastructure vulnerabilities like sea-level rise and coastal infrastructure. The infrastructure deteriorates when sea levels rise. National Security Implications, like military bases and operations, rising sea levels and extreme weather can threaten military bases and affect defense; 3. Technological and Environmental Security impact on critical infrastructure. Climate change can pose risks to critical infrastructures, including energy grids and communication networks; 4. Economic impacts like disruption of economies. Economic Crisis are causing global setbacks and difficult recoveries; 5. Migration and climate refugees. In the last decade we saw large migrations of people around the world. This will cause future problems; 6. Health and Pandemic. The risk of disease, like the COVID 19 pandemic spread; 7. Extreme weather events like natural disasters affect all areas in the world; and lastly 8. Global Governance Challenges like international cooperation: Addressing the security dimensions of climate change requires global cooperation. Failure to do so can strain diplomatic relations.

The security measurements of global climate change involve a combination of alleviation strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to promote international cooperation to build resilience and prevent conflict.

Individuals that become terrorists are based on trauma, poverty, lack of education, mental illness, ideological commitments, social networks or social bonds like friendships, family, or community connections. Terrorism in our times is a trend towards a level of resources, training, and ingenuity.(1)

In 2014, in response to concerns about ‘foreign terrorist fighters’ returning home, the UN passed the resolution 2178, defining the term and condemning violent extremism, expressing concern about the use of the Internet to incite others to commit terrorist acts and requiring countries to prevent the entry or transit of individuals believed to be traveling for terrorist related purposes. It also requires countries to prevent and suppress the recruiting and financing of foreign fighters.

 The Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said, “we must also tackle the underlying conditions that provide violent extremist groups the opportunity to take root.” Not all these individuals are ignorant. Some are educated and well connected, but for some their ideology drives them to extreme actions.

By using the Internet, the structure of international terrorist groups, is a flat organizational structure made up of many semi-independent cells capable of ascending attacks with little or no direction from or approval by a central leadership. Today Al Qaeda cells are operating in dozens of countries without always having direction from the central leadership. (ii) They do operational control by video messages with little or no direct contact by the organizations’ leader command. This decentralized organizational structure encourages the rise of local leaders and the general rise of the radical Islamic jihadist movement in various parts of the world. Since there is not one pole, the world gets complicated and decentralization makes things to go slower for the fighters of terrorism.

(i)(ii) Banks_Nevers_Wallerstein_2008_Chapter1, “Combating Terrorism.”

@font-face {font-family:”Cambria Math”; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-536870145 1107305727 0 0 415 0;}@font-face {font-family:DengXian; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1; mso-font-alt:等线; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610612033 953122042 22 0 262159 0;}@font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-536859905 -1073732485 9 0 511 0;}@font-face {font-family:”\@DengXian”; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610612033 953122042 22 0 262159 0;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:””; margin:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Calibri”,sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:DengXian; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-font-kerning:1.0pt; mso-ligatures:standardcontextual;}p.MsoFooter, li.MsoFooter, div.MsoFooter {mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-link:”Footer Char”; margin:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; tab-stops:center 3.25in right 6.5in; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Calibri”,sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:DengXian; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-font-kerning:1.0pt; mso-ligatures:standardcontextual;}span.FooterChar {mso-style-name:”Footer Char”; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-locked:yes; mso-style-link:Footer;}.MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; font-family:”Calibri”,sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:DengXian; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;}

UN peacekeepers are assigned to protect civilians, disarm militias, monitor human rights abuses, provide emergency relief, organize elections, train police forces, rebuild court systems, inspect prisons, and promote gender equality. The issues that arise from the UN peacekeepers are much deeper that is shown. The problem in the international arena in matters of peacekeeping, starts with the lack of reforms that international laws provide to the peacekeeper operators. The Security Council must offer agreements and reforms to international laws so that the missions of the UN blue helmets can be covered totally. Reforms are necessary because the world has become more violent and not more peaceful, from the world that we had in 1945 when the UN was established. Militia groups are popping out every year in different parts of the world and the local security will need assistance because some of them are operating internationally and not only locally. Terrorist groups have affiliations from different countries than its nation of origin and this makes the situation more complicated. The local police often don’t have the resources and the training to deal with international criminals. The UN missions help at times, but they can do farther better.

I believe that they should be able to intervene when situations are difficult, but that is going to take resolutions. Without help from the international community, they can’t help totally but only until one point without total motions. We can see from the mission in Cyprus and Turkey that there was a reduction in fighting, but this can hardly be called a triumph.

The UN Secretary General Kofi Annan made some reforms in 1999, with the so called, the Brahimi report, which made UN peacekeeping more effective and produced the “responsibility to protect” doctrine where the international community is morally obligated to help people living in states that are unable to protect their citizens from violations of human rights. From Sudan to Rwanda to Bosnia, to the worst refugee crisis since WWII, the peacekeeping forces need to have strong mandates and ample resources. With a few words we need reforms inside the UN for the role of the peacekeepers. When genocide is occurring in this world, some kind of international force needs to intervene and resolve or better help to resolve the atrocities. The world gets more complicated and more violent with passing time. The post WWII era has ended and a new era with warlords and terrorist groups has arisen.

The UN peacekeeping force needs to get stronger and leave a bigger footprint on the ground. They need more financial assistance, more logistical support, more technical expertise, more military, more people, and more realistic instructions. The UN must solve some of these issues with resolutions, and even doctrines from the Security Council. The sure thing is that the UN peacekeepers need reconstruction and clearer goals so they can be able to help more people in need around the world. The goal is not to eliminate the peacekeeping but to rethink it.

Pakistan will use nuclear weapons in case of a threat when at the same time they are dealing with the nuclear taboo in some cases.  The nuclear taboo was re-established in answer to the existence of the prohibition against nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons use in Pakistan has been delegitimized because of their intolerable nature. That was mainly caused by the export procedures of A.Q. Khan who transferred materials to Iran, N. Korea, and Libya. That doesn’t mean that Pakistan will not use them in case they need them. There is nuclear taboo but not a nuclear deterrence in Pakistan. The military nuclear use is legitimate to the state of Pakistan, and it’s based on the logic of consequences which breaks down the use of the nuclear taboo. The Pakistanis’ military uses the policy of ‘first use,’ which means that the compulsion comes after conventional humiliation. Pakistan supports developing more nuclear weapons and has more military security. The role of religion in the nation, could play a role in developing nuclear constraints in the future.

        There is an important animosity that the state and the public has is towards India. One of the most significant regimes that must institutionalized is, between India and Pakistan concerning the use of nuclear weapons, with the use of Nuclear Confidence-Building Measures (NCBMs.) The NCBM regime between India-Pakistan must be formalized for future security.

        First: it needs to establish necessary resources, communication, and cooperation between agencies so confidence can be built, as per the Lahore Declaration.

       Second: these agencies need standard operational principles and procedures, including protocols for information sharing. Pakistani’s missile research and development program and India’s DRDO would be significant for controlling the escalation of emerging competition of missile technology. An engagement between the Strategic Force Command (SFC) in India and the Strategic Planning Division (SPD) in Pakistan would be crucial for conceptualizing and operationalizing the NCBMs.

Promotion of stability is a necessity between India and Pakistan. A formalized NCBM would help the situation. Such a regime would be a framework for the stability of the area.

        In the latest news, Pakistan, after backing up the Afghan Taliban for decades, turned on the group following the attacks in the county by the Pakistan Taliban. Pakistan gave an ordered that Afghan refugees must leave Pakistan. Around 300,000 Afghans have been removed from the county. The bilateral fight appears on Kabul’s support for extremists. The Taliban denied any accusation that they are behind the rise of terrorism in Pakistan. The Pakistanis are planning to remove around a million more of Afghani refugees from Pakistan.

       Pakistan is a Muslim nation and doesn’t take conventional humiliation very well. The use of nuclear weapons is an option for them, and the actions of Pakistan Taliban in Pakistan are not very well taken.

The Non-Proliferation Treaty of nuclear weapons (NPT) is a landmark international treaty which objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation regime includes the IAEA and its safeguards, the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT), the UN Security Council enforcement powers, the Nuclear Suppliers Group, and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). North Korea was a member for years in the treaty. Its withdrawal was obvious and worrying by the international community.

China and North Korea have trade deals and China is one of the basic importers for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). China hosted the three-party talks between United States, North Korea, and China in 2003. China has made great efforts to try to persuade DPRK to give up its nuclear weapons option, but we can see that China is approaching the matter with discretion and some reserves. On the other side, DPRK leaders may have learned from incidents like the Iraq war and Libyan Civil War, that giving up nuclear weapons could lead to military invasion or regime collapse.

The DPRK supplied Pakistan with missile parts to build a nuclear arsenal, that would be able to reach every strategic site in India. In return, Pakistan provided the DPRK with many designs for gas centrifuges and the machinery it needs to make highly enriched uranium. In 2004, by Abdul Qadeer Khan accepted responsibility for leaking weapons secrets and equipment to North Korea, Iran, and Libya.

The treaty between President Biden with South Korea and Japan is one of the most important actions for the region. The nonproliferation talks should be taking place in high level and with a common movement from the three countries. They must add more missile defense systems like cyber operations, B-1 and B-2 bombers and add shorter range missile defense systems, like the Iron Dome in Israel, on the side of South Korea.

In my opinion another action that may take awareness into the situation is, if a common communication and common vote, with members of the UN Security Council, like Russia and China can bring back North Korea to the agreement of NPT. The United States may achieve this, if they put some economic sanctions to these countries in the case that North Korea doesn’t comply. The pressure should be in different parts and states to get into some agreement. No single state can solve the situation with the North Korean nuclear weapons. A collaboration of the UN Security Council, with Asian states like South Korea, Japan and other states in the area, may bring some resolution, to persuade North Korea to return to the agreement.

We are no longer living in a world, where any single country can shape and shift the world ideologies and influence different countries. Throughout the history the rivals of Israel, remain the same. In the Middle East, Washington avoids the leadership position and leaves Israel in a difficult spot, with other actors like Iran and Palestine to become disruptive activists. Right now, American policy is to focus on the Islamic States, Iran, and Russia. The rise of Islam and jihadism in this region is a result of religious hierarchy and social norms that draw inspiration and instruction from those local religious groups.

    Israel stands between the modernized world and the retrograde world. Hamas is an organization that must be exterminated and/or isolated from this world. The leadership of Israel is in a difficult position because they are pursuing the extermination of Hamas and are trying to weaken the West-Bank based Palestinian Authority, so they can be able to promote progress toward the Palestinian state. Some of the problems that arise is that Hamas gains ground in the area and gets stronger. The state of Israel needs to go back and draw up another plan that covers the basic needs of the Palestinian Authority, too. It is very difficult to balance the situation, with the extermination of all the terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. We don’t want to see anymore terrorist groups in this area and only smart politics and leadership that covers every aspect, can save the state of Israel. Israel has been persecuted by all these groups and doesn’t need anymore pain.

    My suggestion is that the area needs to be balanced by the help of outside forces. The U.S.A and China needs to get seriously involved. The help from Chinese intervention in public relations is necessary with states like Iran.  And, the U.S.A can provide logistics about the terrorist groups. It is a fixable issue if the whole world takes some attention and time. Solutions have to come from the involvement of the whole world.

The fear of the fall of the Persian regime, created factors of division inside Iran, that made the understanding of the policy of the foreign international world, very suspicious and not trusted. This mentality helped in some way to press the state of Iran, in the immutable rule of the Ayatollah and led to wars like the Iran-Iraq War

Through history, Iran has been supporting terrorist groups like, Hezbollah.

Hezbollah has provided training, advice, and logistics to governments, like Syria. Hezbollah based in Lebanon targets the state of ISRAEL, the U.S.A. and they have threaten U.S. forces in Iraq. Hezbollah has operations in Africa, the Americas and Asia. The Iranian state provides most of Hezbollah’s weapons and funding.

Iran is not a fair player in the international arena in matters of security. The state interferes and affiliates with rough actors in the area which made things very difficult and violent in the whole territory. Their Relations, with the state of Israel must be checked from the great powers. The U.S.A shouldn’t be the only main assisted state for Israel. China and S. Arabia must act and give more attention to the issues of Israel because Middle East problems can very easily become far East problems. The state of Israel is suffering right now by the terrorist groups, like Hamas, and checks and balances must be placed.

After the exchanges of fire at October 7th, the U.S. military assets have conveyed warnings to Hezbollah to not get involved in the situation of Israel-Palestinians. The Congress planning humanitarian assistance to the Palestinians, but the Arab gates to Sinai are closed and they can’t have access to the needed territories. President Biden and the Congress of the U.S. gave $14 billion in security assistance for Israel.

Iran must learn to act inside the security international rules and stay away from the violent and brutal terrorist groups that the area provides. The mentality has to change and start creating new conversations with the states in their area. Adaptation of new security rules has to take place for the security of all.

On March 23, 1983, President Reagan promoted his plan, The Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI.) President Reagan explained to the nation that his program, SDI, which later became the Star Wars program, would see the development of anti-ballistic missiles that could shoot down weapons in space. The program proposed by the U.S., the SDI, was for the defense against potential nuclear attacks from space. The SDI scientists would need to create X-ray and chemical lasers. The X-ray lasers were designed to operate by an explosion focused on metal rods surrounding a nuclear warhead. The SDI program became a subject in congress, but with a lot of reservations. President Reagan was sure that it would work. This is an example where Sci-Fi meets threats by biggest leaders of Cold War. President’s Reagan program was a planned program that affected the U.S. and most importantly frightened officials in Red Square.

The SDI was officially halted in 1993 by Bill Clinton’s administration when the creation of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization came alive. President Reagan’s program, SDI, gave the ability to future President Clinton, to create and develop something very important for the Defense of our Nation.  

In 1972, President Richard Nixon opened relations with China as a strategic counterweight to the Soviet Union. Several, self-proclaimed Marxist-Leninist governments were formed in the second half of the 1970, including Afghanistan. In 1979, there was a collapse between Russia-U.S. political relations, with the beginning of the Soviet-Afghan War.

         In 1982, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) elected Hu Yaobang, as a president of the party and the country. In 1982, President Reagan and the Secretary of State George Shultz, opened sincere détente, despite some uncomfortable conversations and bruised egos, the United States of America, Taiwan, and People’s Republic of China (PRC) fulfilled all their core interests. Beijing was uncomfortable with Washingtons flexible communique, but the PRC achieved another decade of U.S.A assistance as it built its economy and military power and its ability to play an independent role in world affairs.

         Washington had the ability to pursue sides like Taiwan to cooperate with China on common Anti-Soviet imperatives, such as intelligence sharing and support of the Afghan insurgency. Taiwan had a chance to negotiate with China. The most anti-Communist and pro-Taiwan President since Nixon had been able to preside a normal relationship with the People’s Republic of China without any crisis.

         President Xi of PRC had forgotten the work of his predecessors and had moved into territories which made the global world to feel uncertain. Mr. Xi has repeatedly called for alignment of the reforms, in the global governance system. The President of China doesn’t collaborate and take actions in matters of Ukraine. Like his predecessor, Mr. Hu did in the Cold War. Mr. Xi wants norms in international institutions to reflect Chinese preferences such elevating the right to development over civil rights and put state controls over the flow of information.

         The CCP needs to find their core values, beliefs, and nobility that they showed with diplomats like Deng Xiaoping so they can move into a more flexible international world. Mr. Xi, during the years, had showed that he can achieve much more than of what he works right now. The United States of America is open for collaborations and dialogues and is ready to help leaders like Mr. Xi. Let’s hope that he has time to take the advantage.