THE NEW ORDER AND THE DYNAMICS OF THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM: RUSSO-

UKRAINE WAR.

BY

ALABA BABAJIDE OLUWASEUN

MATRIC NUMBER: 01201052

A PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT Of INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS,

FACULTY OF ARTS AND HUMANITIES
HARVARDE COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENTE STUDIES ABEOKUTA
 Abstract:

The Russia-Ukraine war has been a significant geopolitical conflict in the international
system, impacting regional stability and global relations. The conflict has its roots in
historical tensions and territorial disputes between the two countries. Russia's annexation
of Crimea in 2014 and its support for separatist movements in eastern Ukraine have
escalated tensions and led to international condemnation.

The conflict has had profound implications for the international system. It has strained
relations between Russia and Western countries, leading to economic sanctions, diplomatic
isolation, and heightened security concerns in Europe. The war has also affected energy
markets, as both Russia and Ukraine are important players in the natural gas supply to
Europe.

Efforts to resolve the conflict have been complex and elusive. Various diplomatic initiatives,
such as the Minsk agreements, have aimed to find a peaceful resolution, but the situation
remains volatile, with sporadic outbreaks of violence.

The war in Ukraine has also had broader implications for the international order. It has
raised questions about the effectiveness of international institutions in resolving such
conflicts and highlighted the challenges of managing regional security issues. The conflict
has further underscored the importance of multilateral cooperation and dialogue in
addressing complex geopolitical challenges.
 CHAPTER ONE

Background to the Study

Introduction

Recently, Ukraine has attracted a lot of international attention. Her recent confrontation with
Russia has not only demonstrated the existence of a geopolitical instability but also a certain type
of dominance that Russia tries to impose at any means in the former soviet region. The conflict
in the East of Ukraine shows how far Russia is willing to go in order to protect the national
sphere of influence and control opportunities. Although the many scholars agree that this war
may bring Ukraine real independence and set the country on the path of development
toward the “West”. The image of Russia as an aggressor still remains beyond the understanding
for many citizens of Ukraine. A big brother of the Soviet times has unexpectedly become a
dangerous foe and a source of instability in the course of transition. Russia openly denies the
right of Ukraine for independence and insists on the inevitability of common future. The
Historical Context of Ukraine-Russia Relations The joint history of Ukraine and Russia goes
back to Kievsky Rus. Centered around today’s Kiev, the state came into existence in the 9th
century (Tolochko, 2007) but collapsed in the 13th century as a result of the increased internal
political fragmentation and the Mongol invasion. Most of territories that belong to today’s
Ukraine were conquered by Poland and Lithuania in the early 14th century, remaining under
their influence for around four hundred years (Belyayev, 2012). Both nations left a deep cultural
imprint on the local population who gradually developed an identity distinct from the East Slavs,
living in the territories under Mongol and later Muscovite rule (Düben, 2020). The Cossack
statelets in the eastern territories gradually turned into a Russian vassal state, but its relationship
with Russia was marked by conflicts. In response to sporadic Cossack uprisings against the
Tsars, the ZaporizhianSich was razed to the ground by Russian forces in 1775, while the Cossack
institutions of self-governance were liquidated (Düben, 2020). Following the final Partitions of
Poland in the 1790s, the Russian Empire absorbed most of the remainder of modern-day Ukraine
that became a part of the Russian state for the next 120 years (Subtelny, 2000). In spite of the
occupation, a distinct Ukrainian national consciousness emerged among the local population and
consolidated in the course of the 19th century. In response, Russia’s imperial authorities
systematically persecuted expressions of Ukrainian culture and made continuous attempts to
suppress the Ukrainian language (Chayinska et al., 2021).Lately, Ukraine has attracted a lot of
international attention. Its recent confrontation with Russia has not only demonstrated the
existence of a geopolitical instability but also a certain type of dominance that Russia tries to
impose at any means in the former soviet region. The conflict in the East of Ukraine shows how
far Russia is willing to go in order to protect the national sphere of influence and control
opportunities. Although the majority of experts agree that precisely this war may bring Ukraine
real independence and set the country on the path of development toward the “West”, the image
of Russia as an aggressor still remains beyond the understanding for many citizens of Ukraine. A
big brother of the Soviet times has unexpectedly become a dangerous foe and a source of
instability in the course of transition. Russia openly denies the right of Ukraine for independence
and insists on the inevitability of common future. The Historical Context of Ukraine-Russia
Relations The joint history of Ukraine and Russia goes back to Kievsky Rus. Centered around
today’sKiev, the state came into existence in the 9th century (Tolochko, 2007) but collapsed in
the 13th century as a result of the increased internal political fragmentation and the Mongol
invasion. Most of territories that belong to today’s Ukraine were conquered by Poland and
Lithuania in the early 14th century, remaining under their influence for around four hundred
years (Belyayev, 2012). Both nations left a deep cultural imprint on the local population who
gradually developed an identity distinct from the East Slavs, living in the territories under
Mongol and later Muscovite rule (Düben, 2020). The Cossack statelets in the eastern territories
gradually turned into a Russian vassal state, but its relationship with Russia was marked by
conflicts. In response to sporadic Cossack uprisings against the Tsars, the ZaporizhianSich was
razed to the ground by Russian forces in 1775, while the Cossack institutions of self-governance
were liquidated (Düben, 2020). Following the final Partitions of Poland in the 1790s, the Russian
Empire absorbed most of the remainder of modern-day Ukraine that became a part of the
Russian state for the next 120 years (Subtelny, 2000). In spite of the occupation, a distinct
Ukrainian national consciousness emerged among the local population and consolidated in the
course of the 19th century. In response, Russia’s imperial authorities systematically persecuted
expressions of Ukrainian culture and made continuous attempts to suppress the Ukrainian
language (Chayinska et al., 2021).

The case of Ukraine confirmed the conventional knowledge that policy and institutions spread
over the identity dimensions that are highly visible, such as religion, ethnicity, race, etc.
Culturally similar people ended up choosing very different governance methods and systems.
Ukraine drifted away from Russia and commenced to perceive Russia as a foe that threatened
lasting independence, as well as the country’s preference for more democratic forms of
governance. At the same time, Russia is willing to use any means to restore its control over
Ukraine and continue exploiting Ukraine for building national prosperity and protecting its own
territory from the proximity of the NATO.
While divided over the issue of language, the Ukrainian political elite and the population showed
a significant agreement over the vision about the country’s desirable political and economic
institutions that appeared very different from Russia’s choice (Musliu & Burlyuk, 2019). At that
time, Russia gradually slid toward authoritarianism as an outcome of a hegemonic national
identity adopted by the main political players and society at large. In Ukraine, a hegemonic
identity failed to take roots, while more liberal and democratic aspirations emerge among a
considerable part of the population (Brudny& Finkel, 2011). The two countries’ polar visions
about future patterns of development commenced to contradict the nature of their mutual
relations. The Orange Revolution of 2004–2005 revealed the existence of the pressure for
political change, primarily regarding the extent of Russia’s influence in Ukraine. The clash
between the aggressive imposition of collective identity by Russia and the local adherence to
liberal democratic institutions released collective angst about the future of the country
(Chayinska et al., 2021). The collision of conflicting narratives on ‘what Ukraine is’ and ‘what it
should be’ unveiled the population’s dissatisfaction with the country’s state- and nation-building
processes (Musliu & Burlyuk, 2019). The dissatisfaction reached its highest point in 2013 when
the Ukrainian government decided to suspend the signing of an association agreement with the
European Union, while choosing closer ties to Russia instead. Large protests were held in
Western Ukraine, but throughout the East as well, where there is a significant Russian-speaking
minority. This time, the major motivation of the Ukrainian population to revolt was the support
for democratic values (Reznik, 2016) and the desire to trigger the ultimate turn of Ukraine from
the Russian-driven collective identity and its authoritarian way of development toward a definite
way of the “West” (McGlynn, 2020).
1.2 Statement of the Problem

Russia 2022 attack on Ukraine and intense economic impact on Russia due to the fierce financial
sanctions in bashed on it are not only inflicting an economic catastrophe on president Vladimir
Putin Russia. The representation are also menacing the global economy, shaking financial market
and making life more perilous for everyone. Russia and Ukraine are significant player in the
export of oil, natural gas, coal, wheat and other commodities as in the global market. Analytics
reports that both countries produce 70%of global neo which is a vital commodity in the
production of semi-conductors leading to panic with the current prices as nations and auto
makers especially are already witnessing a scarcity in computer chips.

Several studies has been published on the impacts of Ukraine-Russian conflict before the most
recent crises in 2022.The beginning of the conflict very little academic research compilation has
been made on the 2022 Russia-Ukraine crises. Giving that is an ongoing crises with constantly
updated information flooding in via several news outlets more soa lot of attention is been given
to the Impacts of the current Russian-Ukraine crises on Russia and Ukraine. Thus, this study
researched on the most recent information on the current impact of the Ukrainian war on the
international political system.

Objectives of the study

I. To investigate the dynamics the international system

II. To examine the new order of the international system

III. To examine the sustainability of the US as the hegemony in the international system.

Research Question

The study answered the following research question?

I. what are the dynamics of the international system?

II. What is the nature of the in new order in International system?

III. How the United States have been able to sustain hegemony power in the international
system?
Significance of the Study

This study will give you an insight into the dynamics of the international system on Russo-
Ukraine war. This study seeks to analyze the expectations of a war in both countries. More
specifically, the study focused on defining sources that spur worries about a military
confrontation in Ukraine and Russia that can be framed as a civil war or a war with
another country. By juxtaposing the patterns of war worries formation, I explore
similarities and differences between the two countries as regards the major factors that
shape their population’s concerns about a war. Additionally, I examine change in the
nature of war worries formation that has occurred in response to the current conflict
between Ukraine and Russia. Both analytical strategies are expected to contribute to
clarifying the reasons for the tension in the context of Ukraine-Russia relations that has
every danger to go beyond the two countries’ national borders.

The conflict has far-reaching geopolitical implications, reshaping alliances, and influencing the
balance of power among nations. Understanding the war's impact on Eastern Europe helps in
assessing the stability of the region and potential ripple effects on neighboring
countries.Analyzing the conflict allows for an evaluation of how international norms and
principles are upheld or challenged, such as territorial integrity and the right to self-
determination. The war highlights the importance of security cooperation and conflict
management mechanisms in the international system to prevent further escalations and protect
global peace.Analyzing the conflict provides insights into the effectiveness of diplomatic efforts
and mediation strategies by the international community.

The war's outcomes may shape the behavior of states and influence how the international system
deals with territorial disputes and security challenges.

Scope of the study

The scope of coverage of the research centers on the impact of Russian invasion on Ukraine
and it is limited only to Europe (Eastern part of Europe precisely).This study focus majorly
on the state of Russia and Ukraine because they both sound as industrious countries with
sound economies as one of the oil producing state on the world. Although, they seems to be
of the majority. However they are both my great countries with flourishing economy and
advanced standards of living in terms of technology and trying to grow more to become
countries which world be rearranged as one of the super power on the world. The research
will consider the past relationships between two states the formation of the union of Soviet
socialist Republic and during the cause of the cold war which later ended in 1989 and
would be related to the contemporary conflict between both countries.

Examining the geopolitical implications of the conflict, including the involvement of other
nations, alliances, and how it influences the balance of power in the region and beyond.
Understanding the impact of the war on regional stability, potential spillover effects, and
its implications for neighboring countries in Eastern Europe. Analyzing how the conflict
aligns with international law, sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the role of international
institutions in addressing the crisis.

Investigating the security challenges posed by the conflict, the potential risks of escalation,
and the effectiveness of diplomatic and military responses. Examining the role of
international organizations, such as the United Nations and regional bodies, in responding
to the crisis and promoting peace.

Definition of Terms

New order: Is a recent arrangements or created sequence conformity with law

Dynamics: is forces that stimulates growth,change, development.

International system: The global constellation of state and their relations among each other .

War: a state of armed conflict between different countries or different groups within a country.
 CHAPTER TWO

Review Of Related Literature

2.1 Introduction

The Russo-Ukraine war has emerged as a critical conflict with profound implications for the
international system. Stemming from historical tensions and geopolitical complexities, this
ongoing war has sparked new dynamics that reverberate far beyond the borders of Russia and
Ukraine. As major global powers and regional players engage in a complex interplay of interests,
the conflict has ushered in a new order, reshaping alliances, norms, and diplomatic relations in
the international arena. The roots of this conflict trace back to the dissolution of the Soviet
Union, which led to the emergence of independent states, including Ukraine. Since then, the
region has been a geopolitical battleground, with Russia seeking to maintain its influence and
control over its neighbor. The annexation of Crimea in 2014 marked a turning point, causing
international outrage and triggering sanctions against Russia. However, this act also highlighted
the use of hybrid warfare and disinformation campaigns, challenging conventional notions of
conflict and security in the 21st century.

The conflict's geopolitical significance is magnified by the strategic location of Russia and
Ukraine at the crossroads of Europe and Asia. As major energy transit routes pass through the
region, the war's resolution directly impacts global energy security. Additionally, the conflict's
escalation has raised concerns about regional stability, with neighboring countries anxiously
monitoring the developments and potential spillover effects. International responses to the
conflict have been diverse, with some countries providing support to Ukraine while others seek
to balance their interests in managing relations with Russia. This has led to shifts in alliances and
diplomatic maneuvers, redefining the power dynamics within the international system.

Furthermore, the humanitarian consequences of the war cannot be overlooked, as civilians suffer
the brunt of violence, displacement, and human rights violations. The international community
faces a moral obligation to respond to these challenges, which also adds to the complexity of
resolving the conflict. In this study, we delve into the multifaceted dimensions of the new order
and dynamics of the Russo-Ukraine war in the international system. By analyzing historical
contexts, geopolitical interests, unconventional warfare tactics, regional security implications,
energy considerations, and international responses, we aim to gain a comprehensive
understanding of how this conflict has shaped and continues to shape the broader international
landscape.

This research has been divided into

First,an explanation of the concepts of new order and dynamics will be discussed,the
transformation of the new order in the international system explaining using new order.
secondly, war theory.Secondary war will be discussed and conclusively demonstrate the effect
of war in international system.thirdly, a case study of Russo-Ukraine war will

be illustrated, also to relationship that exited between Russia and Ukraine.

2.2Defining new order

The "New Order" in the context of the international system has been used in various ways
throughout history. It is often associated with a significant shift or reorganization of power and
relationships among nations. While there is no universally agreed-upon definition, I can provide
you with an explanation of some notable instances where the concept of a "New Order" emerged.
Westphalia treaty

he treaty that put an end to the Thirty Years' War, one of the bloodiest wars in European history,
was named after the Westphalia region of northwest Germany.

When the Austrian Habsburgs attempted to convert their Protestant people in Bohemia to Roman
Catholicism in 1618, the war—or series of related wars—began. Protestant and Catholic were
put against one another, as were the Holy Roman Empire and France. The German princes and
princelings were pitted against the emperor and one another, while France was pitted against the
Spanish Habsburgs. The Poles, the Russians, the Dutch, the Swedes, the Danes, the Poles, the
Russians, and the Swiss were all pulled in or dove in. Along with power politics and religious
beliefs, commercial interests and rivalries also contributed.

Two destructive wars were the major triggers behind signing the eventual Peace of Westphalia:
the Thirty Years' War in the Holy Roman Empire and the Eighty Years' War between Spain and
the Dutch Republic. The Thirty Years' War was a series of wars in Central Europe between 1618
and 1648.

The rights to choose the official religion of one's own region and the freedom of religion for
subjects of the Holy Roman Empire were granted by this treaty, which were its most significant
features.The Peace of Westphalia consists of two different documents, the Peace Treaty of
Osnabrück (Instrumentum pacis Osnabrugensis) between the Holy Roman Empire of the German
Nation (HRE) and Sweden, and the Peace Treaty of Münster (Instrumentum Pacis
Monasteriensis) between the HRE and France.The Peace of Westphalia ended with the signing of
two treaties between the empire and the new great powers, Sweden and France, and settled the
conflicts inside the empire with their guarantees. A new electorate was established for the exiled
son of the revolt's leader, the elector Palatine.The Peace of Westphalia is significant because it
marked a departure from the earlier system of religious dominance in politics (the idea of "cuius
regio, eius religio" established the principle of religious toleration) and the rise of the modern
concept of the nation-state, where each state is recognized as a sovereign entity with its own
government and territory.

Moreover, the treaties played a pivotal role in shaping the balance of power in Europe and laid
the foundation for the modern international system based on sovereign equality among states.
The Westphalian principles of state sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of
other states have been influential in shaping the conduct of international relations to this day.The
treaty laid the foundation for the modern system of sovereign nation-states. It recognized the
principle of territorial sovereignty, granting each participating state the right to determine its own
internal affairs without interference from other states or external powers. This notion of state
sovereignty became a cornerstone of international relations and shaped the development of the
modern nation-state system.

The treaty granted religious freedom to several Protestant denominations, as well as to Catholics,
in specific regions. This recognition of religious pluralism and tolerance was a significant
departure from the previous norm of religious uniformity enforced by rulers, contributing to a
more diverse and tolerant Europe.

The Westphalia treaty is often seen as a critical moment in the development of modern
international law and diplomacy. It established the precedent for negotiating treaties between
states as the primary means of resolving disputes and shaping international relations.

Moreso it led to significant territorial changes in Europe. Several states gained independence or
had their sovereignty reaffirmed, and new borders were established, solidifying the territorial
boundaries of various countries that continue to exist in some form to this day.

While the Treaty of Westphalia helped end one of Europe's most devastating wars, its long-term
impact on European politics, diplomacy, and territorial boundaries cannot be overstated. Its
principles of state sovereignty, balance of power, and religious freedom continue to shape the
world's political landscape to this day.
concert of Europe

The Congress's objectives were to develop a system that could use diplomacy to resolve current
and potential disputes as well as to provide a long-term solution to the European order after
Napoleon's conquests. The Congress of Vienna sought to reduce the size of the big countries in
order for them to balance one another, uphold peace, and serve as watchdogs for the minor
powers. Creating world order had other objectives besides simply restoring previous borders.
More fundamentally, conservative intellectuals like von Metternich sought to stifle or end
revolutionary, liberal, and republican movements that, in his opinion, had disrupted and
threatened the European constitutional system.In May 1814, the Napoleonic Wars were over.
The balance of power in Europe was altered by a number of significant conflicts between the
French Empire, its allies, and the other European nations. The European Great Powers (Russia,
Great Britain, Austria, and Prussia) organized a peace conference and asked the representatives
of other European nations to attend it in order to resolve the issues raised by the new global
order. In September 1814, the Congress of Vienna got under way. The Congress, presided over
by Austrian statesman Klemens von Metternich, was attended by representatives from more than
200 European nations, cities, and provinces. On June 9, 1815, the treaty was signed and sealed.

The Congress of Vienna was intended to build a new political order in Europe that would be
distinct from the pre-Peace of Utrecht world order established in 1713, rather than merely to
resolve the ramifications of the Napoleonic Wars. The foundation of the previous order was the
conflicting military alliances of France and Austria. The Peace of Utrecht was unable to stop
Napoleon's expansionist intentions for France, as history has demonstrated. The political group
of European powers proposed a new world order aimed at a "System of Peace." Regular
multilateral conferences and congresses were organized in several European locations to
accomplish this goal, leading to the formation of the balance of power.The treaties played a
significant role in the development of modern international law. By formalizing agreements
between states and recognizing the principles of sovereignty and non-interference, the Peace of
Westphalia contributed to the evolution of international legal norms and practices.

The Peace of Westphalia contributed to the development of the balance of power in Europe. The
territorial adjustments and recognition of different sovereign states helped create a more stable
and balanced political order, where no single state could dominate the others entirely.

The treaties set a precedent for using international treaties and diplomatic negotiations to resolve
conflicts between states. It emphasized the importance of negotiations and diplomacy in
maintaining peace and settling disputes, and this approach has been followed in international
relations ever since

The Peace of Westphalia established the principle of "cuius regio, eius religio," which allowed
rulers to determine the religion of their respective territories. This effectively granted religious
tolerance and ended the religious wars that had plagued Europe for decades. While the treaty did
not create full freedom of religion for individuals, it provided a framework for coexistence
among different Christian denominations within the Holy Roman Empire.

Principles of Westphalia treaty

1) The most fundamental principle of the Westphalian treaties is state sovereignty. It recognized
each state as a sovereign entity with exclusive authority over its internal affairs and the right to
determine its own form of government, laws, and religion without interference from other states.

2). The principle of non-interference, or the principle of non-intervention, was implicit in the
recognition of state sovereignty. The treaties emphasized that states should not interfere in the
internal affairs of other states, including their domestic policies, religious matters, or governance.

3). The treaties contributed to the development of the balance of power in Europe. By
recognizing and legitimizing the existence of various sovereign states, the Westphalian system
created a more stable political order in which states sought to prevent any one power from
becoming too dominant.

4). The treaties recognized the independence of the Dutch Republic from Spain, effectively
acknowledging it as a new sovereign state in Europe.
These principles collectively helped shape the modern nation-state system and the rules
governing international relations. They contributed to the evolution of international law and
diplomacy, and many of these principles continue to be relevant and influential in the present-
day global political landscape

Balance of power

The concept of the balance of power, which holds that governments aim for an equal distribution
of power to prevent dominance by one, is fundamental to the study of international politics. The
status of the balance of power as a theoretical idea has long been a topic of discussion in the field
of international relations (IR). While some contend that the notion does not align with historical
empirical findings, others have modified it by incorporating concepts like "balance of threats,"
"bandwagoning," or "soft balancing." However, the balance-of-power idea has also been widely
used by diplomats throughout history. Practitioners have applied the theory since the Italian city-
states of the fifteenth century, through the Concert of Europe, two world wars, and up to the
present day.

Although this is a common definition, the term "balance of power" has been employed in many
various contexts and with many different interpretations. For instance, it could simply be a
description of how world politics currently stand, i.e., the status quo, and whether or not the
power structure is balanced in the sense described above. For instance, one might discuss "the
balance of power in Europe" at a specific time. It may also serve as a policy prescription for
actions that effective policymakers should take. Like any other political philosophy, the balance
of power can be propagandized to influence the public in favor of one or the other policy
direction.

The pre-war alliance system in Europe was a product of the balance of power. The two main
alliance blocs were the Triple Entente (consisting of France, Russia, and later joined by Britain)
and the Central Powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary, and later joined by the Ottoman Empire and
Bulgaria). These alliances were formed to counterbalance the perceived threats posed by rival
powers.

The balance of power considerations influenced the speed at which the major powers mobilized
their armies at the outbreak of war. Fearful of being caught off-guard, each side rapidly
mobilized their military forces to gain an early advantage over their opponents. This rapid
mobilization led to the escalation of the conflict as diplomatic efforts to de-escalate tensions
quickly gave way to military action.

The Balkans region was a hotbed of tension and rivalry between the major powers before the
war. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary in Sarajevo, Bosnia,
sparked the conflict. In the lead-up to the war, the major powers attempted to balance their
influence in the region through diplomatic means, but tensions eventually escalated into open
conflict.

The balance of power considerations played a role in Britain's decision to enter the war. Britain
was not initially bound by a formal treaty to defend Belgium, but the fear of German dominance
in Europe and the perceived threat to the balance of power prompted Britain to intervene in
defense of Belgium's neutrality.

Despite initial expectations of quick victories, the war quickly turned into a prolonged and
deadly stalemate on the Western Front. Both sides were relatively evenly matched in terms of
military strength, leading to the establishment of extensive trench systems. The balance of power
dynamics contributed to the difficulty in achieving decisive victories and prolonged the war.

While the concept of the balance of power influenced the early stages of World War I, as the war
progressed and the conflict became more entrenched, other factors such as total war
mobilization, new technologies, and changing political dynamics also played significant roles in
shaping the outcome of the war. The war's duration and devastating consequences ultimately led
to a transformation of the international system and set the stage for a reevaluation of traditional
balance of power politics in the post-war era, These could been seen him the world war 1 how
power been separated and acted upon .

Post-World War I:

Following the end of World War I, the term "New Order" was used by President Woodrow
Wilson to describe his vision for a post-war international system. Wilson advocated for the
establishment of the League of Nations, an organization aimed at preventing future conflicts and
promoting collective security. The idea was to replace the old order of balance of power with a
new order based on cooperation and diplomacy.

In the summer of 1914, war broke out all over Europe, starting a conflict that would eventually
claim nine million lives. The Central Powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire,
and Bulgaria) were set against the Allies (at first consisting of Britain, France, Belgium, Serbia,
and Russia, and finally totaling eighteen nations including Japan, Italy, and the United States).
The heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne was assassinated in Sarajevo, Bosnia, which sparked a
flurry of military preparations and fruitless diplomatic negotiations that resulted in Germany
attacking Belgium and France in August 1914. Germany, France, and Britain excavated
defensive trenches in the early stages of the conflict, resulting in a sophisticated network of
earthworks along a western front that stretched 460 miles from the North Sea.

The comprehensive mobilization of American society was necessary for the First World conflict
because it was a total conflict. The federal government used hitherto unheard-of powers to
organize and manage the economy throughout the war. The strategies employed to organize the
industrial and agricultural sectors, choose soldiers for the military, control transportation, and
disseminate propaganda established precedents for how the federal government would respond to
the crises of the Great Depression and World War II. The Committee on Public Information
distributed patriotic posters, booklets, and films while controlling the flow of information to
influence public opinion regarding the war. The organization also hired speakers known as
"Four-Minute Men" (so-called because of how long it took to switch reels in silent movies) to
address crowds in movie theaters, marketplaces, fairs, and churches.

While fighting in western Europe came to an end with the Armistice, the Versailles Peace Treaty
took months to finalize. Germany had to disarm and pay reparations under the terms of the final
treaty. A League of Nations was also established by it. Wilson thought that by providing member
countries with a venue to resolve international disputes and organize combined military
operations to constrain aggressor nations, this collective security body would avert another world
war. But many Republicans rejected the optimistic forecasts of enduring peace made by the
Democratic president. In their view, the United States would lose control of its own foreign
policy if it joined the League. Membership may also open up US armed interventions in Central
America, where the US was accustomed to operating alone, to international scrutiny. Advocates
for the balance of power and isolationists teamed up to vehemently.

Causes:

The war's immediate cause was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-
Hungary on June 28, 1914, in Sarajevo, Bosnia, by a Serbian nationalist. This event led to a
chain reaction of alliances and declarations of war among the European powers, escalating the
situation into a full-scale war.

key Event

1) Assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand death triggered the start of the war.

2) Trench Warfare,the extensive use of trench warfare, with soldiers living and fighting in vast
networks of trenches that stretched across the Western Front.

3) Battle of the Somme was a major battle in 1916 between British and French forces against
Germany, known for its high casualties.

4). Gallipoli Campaign this resulted to some Allied attempt to capture the Ottoman capital,
Constantinople (Istanbul), which ultimately failed with heavy losses.
5). Entry of the United State they entered the war in 1917 on the side of the Allies,
significantly bolstering their resources and manpower.

6). Russian Revolution In 1917, the Russian Revolution erupted, leading to the abdication of
Tsar Nicholas II and Russia's withdrawal from the war.

7). Armistice and Treaty of Versailles On November 11, 1918, an armistice was signed, ending
the fighting. The Treaty of Versailles was later signed in 1919, officially ending the war and
imposing heavy penalties on Germany.

Consequences

1). Casualties resulted in millions of death and leaving a devastating effects on countries
affected.

2). Political change led to the collapse of several empires, including the Austro-Hungarian,
Ottoman, and Russian empires, with new countries emerging from their remnants.( multipolar )

3). Economic Impact caused severe economic disruption and contributed to the Great Depression
in the 1930s.

4) League of Nations was established in the aftermath of the war as an international

organization aimed at preventing future conflicts but later failed due to The prime actors which is
the United States back out and other super power which led to World war 2.

5). Shift in Power Dynamics,The war reshaped the balance of power in Europe and set the stage
for future conflicts, including World War 2.

Overall, World War 1 was a catastrophic event that left a lasting impact on the 20th century and
shaped the course of history.

Post-World War II:

The phrase "New Order" gained prominence again during and after World War II. It was
primarily associated with Nazi Germany's attempt to establish a new global order under Adolf
Hitler's leadership. Hitler envisioned a totalitarian regime that would reshape Europe and
eventually the world. The Allies, after defeating Nazi Germany, sought to establish a new
international order based on principles of collective security, human rights, and the rule of law.

Second World War, was a global conflict that lasted from 1939 to 1945. It involved most of the
world's nations, including all of the great powers, organized into two opposing military alliances:
the Allies and the Axis.

In terms of industrial capacity, population, and military manpower in September 1939, the Allies
—Great Britain, France, and Poland—were superior. However, the German military, or
Wehrmacht, was the world's most effective and efficient fighting force for its size due to its
equipment, training, doctrine, discipline, and fighting spirit. The number of divisions that each
country could mobilize in September 1939 served as a barometer of military strength. In
comparison to Germany's 100 infantry divisions and six armoured divisions, Poland had 30
infantry divisions, 12 cavalry brigades, and one armoured brigade, 90 infantry divisions in
metropolitan France, 10 infantry divisions in Great Britain, and 30 reserve infantry divisions that
could not be quickly mobilized. A division had between 12,000 and 25000 men.

Since the Allies had a significantly larger number of large surface warships in 1939 than
Germany did, the odds against Germany were substantially higher at sea than they were in
August 1914. But at sea, only the individual operations of German pocket battleships and
commerce raiders were to take place instead of a conflict between the Allied and German massed
fleets.

Causes of World War II

1) Treaty of Versailles,Germany after World War I led to economic hardships and political
instability, which helped pave the way for Adolf Hitler's rise to power in Germany.
2). Expansionist ambitionsGermany, Italy, and Japan sought to expand their territories and
influence, leading to aggressive actions in Europe, Africa, and Asia.

3). Japanese expansionism,Japan aimed to establish a Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere
and expand its empire in Asia.

4). Appeasement policy, Some Western democracies attempted to avoid conflict by appeasing
the aggressive actions of Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, which only emboldened these regimes
further.

Key Events and Phases:

1) Invasion of Poland (1939), Germany's invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939, marked the
official beginning of World War II.

2) Phoney War,After the fall of Poland, there was a period of inactivity on the Western Front,
known as the "Phoney War," which lasted until 1940.

3). Blitzkrieg and the Fall of France, Germany launched a lightning-fast invasion of France and
the Low Countries in May 1940, leading to the defeat of France and the evacuation of British and
Allied forces from Dunkirk.

4). Operation Barbarossa, In June 1941, Nazi Germany launched a massive invasion of the
Soviet Union, breaking their non-aggression pact and expanding the conflict to the East.

5) Pearl Harbor, On December 7, 1941, Japan attacked the United States' naval base at Pearl
Harbor, bringing the US into the war.

6)Pacific Theater, The war in the Pacific saw major battles like Midway, Guadalcanal, and Iwo
Jima, as Allied forces pushed back against Japanese expansion.
7) End of the War, The war in Europe ended on May 8, 1945, when Germany surrendered (V-E
Day), and in the Pacific, it ended on August 15, 1945, after the US dropped atomic bombs on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki (V-J Day).

In Conclusion the Dynamics of the world war 2 is Bipolar with two blocs the Western and
Eastern results to balance of powers.World War II resulted in an estimated 70-85 million
fatalities, making it one of the deadliest conflicts in history. The war led to significant
geopolitical changes, the emergence of the United States and the Soviet Union as superpowers,
and the beginning of the Cold War. It also paved the way for the establishment of the United
Nations, aiming to prevent future global conflicts through international cooperation. The
Holocaust led to the recognition of the need to protect human rights and promote tolerance and
understanding among nations. The war's economic and social impacts were far-reaching and
shaped the world for decades to come.

Post-Cold War:

The end of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union marked another period
where the concept of a "New Order" emerged. With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the
Eastern Bloc, there was a shift in the global balance of power. The United States emerged as the
sole superpower, and the term "New World Order" was often used to describe the perceived
American dominance in shaping the international system. It implied a new era of cooperation,
globalization, and the spread of liberal democratic values.

The Cold War was a geopolitical tension and ideological conflict that lasted from the end of
World War II in 1945 until the early 1990s. It primarily occurred between two superpowers, the
United States and the Soviet Union, along with their respective allies. Although direct military
confrontation between the two powers was avoided, the Cold War was characterized by intense
political, economic, and military rivalry, as well as a dangerous arms race.

Cold War, the post-World War II competition between the US and the Soviet Union and its
allies, was an open but restrained conflict. There was little use of actual weapons throughout the
Cold War; instead, it was fought on fronts of politics, economics, and propaganda. The phrase
was first used in a 1945 article by English writer George Orwell to describe a nuclear standoff
between "two or three monstrous super-states, each possessed of a weapon by which millions of
people can be wiped out in a few seconds." In a speech at the State House in Columbia, South
Carolina, in 1947, American businessman and presidential advisor Bernard Baruch used it for the
first time in the country. The tense wartime alliance between the Soviet Union and the United
States and Great Britain started to fall apart. In the nations of eastern Europe that the Red Army
had freed by 1948, the Soviets had erected left-wing regimes. The Soviet Union's enduring
control over eastern Europe and the possibility of communist parties with Soviet influences
gaining power in western Europe's democracies were fears shared by the United States and the
United Kingdom. On the other side, the Soviets were adamant about keeping hold of eastern
Europe in order to protect themselves from a potential resurgence of German aggression. They
were also adamant on establishing communism globally, partly for ideological reasons.( 1947–
1948)

It is important to note that the concept of a "New Order" can have different interpretations
depending on the context and the actors involved. It can reflect aspirations for positive change,
such as promoting peace, cooperation, and human rights, or it can be associated with more
negative connotations, like attempts to impose hegemony or consolidate power.

Impacts of cold war

1) Arms Race and Nuclear Proliferation: The Cold War saw both the US and the Soviet Union
engage in an arms race, building up their military capabilities and nuclear arsenals. This
competition led to the development of increasingly powerful and destructive weapons. The fear
of nuclear war also gave rise to the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), where both
superpowers possessed enough nuclear weapons to ensure that any attack on one would result in
the destruction of the other.

2) The rivalry extended beyond Earth as the US and the Soviet Union competed in the space
race. This competition led to significant advancements in space technology and exploration. The
successful moon landing by the United States in 1969 was one of the most iconic moments of
this era.

3) The rivalry extended beyond Earth as the US and the Soviet Union competed in the space
race. This competition led to significant advancements in space technology and exploration. The
successful moon landing by the United States in 1969 was one of the most iconic moments of
this era.

4) The Cold War resulted in the division of Germany into East and West Germany, with the
Berlin Wall becoming a potent symbol of the ideological and physical separation between the
capitalist West and the communist East. The division of Europe also took place with the
establishment of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) by Western countries and the
formation of the Warsaw Pact by the Soviet Union and its allies.

5) Many developing nations became battlegrounds for ideological influence during the Cold
War. The US and the Soviet Union vied for control and support in these regions, often backing
opposing factions in civil wars or conflicts, which frequently destabilized these nations and left
lasting impacts on their development.

6) The Cold War had substantial economic implications as both superpowers invested heavily in
military spending and supporting their allies. This military-industrial complex stimulated
economic growth but also diverted resources from other critical sectors.

7) The Cold War saw extensive espionage and intelligence operations on both sides. Both the
CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) in the US and the KGB (Committee for State Security) in the
Soviet Union engaged in covert operations and intelligence gathering to gather information and
influence events worldwide.

8) The Cold War influenced popular culture, literature, films, and art, often portraying themes of
nuclear anxiety, espionage, and political intrigue. It also affected the development of science
fiction, with dystopian and post-apocalyptic narratives becoming prevalent.
 The collapse of USSR

The collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) was a significant event that
occurred in the late 20th century. The USSR, often referred to as the Soviet Union, was a
socialist state and a federal union composed of multiple Soviet republics, with Russia being the
largest and most influential.The events leading up to the Soviet Union's breakup on December
31, 1991, are known as the "collapse of the Soviet Union." 15 sovereign nations—Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova,
Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan—have supplanted the previous
superpower.

Gorbachev and his family were placed under house arrest by Gen. Igor Maltsev, commander-in-
chief of the Soviet Air Defense Troops. Both Gorbachev and his wife, Raisa, later stated that
they had fully expected to be killed. Although outside communication had been cut off,
Gorbachev was able to get word to Moscow and confirm that he was fit and well. Members of
Gorbachev’s personal bodyguard remained loyal throughout the episode, and they were able to
fashion a simple receiver so that the imperiled president could learn what was happening beyond
the walls of the dacha. BBC and Voice of America broadcasts kept Gorbechev abreast of the
coup’s progress and international reaction to it. Gorbachev and his family arrived back in
Moscow on August 22. Pugo shot his wife, but she survived, and then he shot himself. Later,
Nikolay Kruchina, the former party administrator, and Marshal Sergey Akhromeyev, a
Gorbachev advisor and former head of the General Staff, also killed themselves. There were
more fatalities after that, and rumors began to spread that the suicides were actually murders
committed as retaliation. Ivan Silayev, the Russian Republic's premier, described Lukyanov as
the "chief ideologist of the junta." Lukyanov and Gorbachev have been friends since their days
as law students at Moscow State University. Although Lukyanov resigned on August 26 and was
soon detained, he denied complicity. Even as it appeared that things were getting out of hand in
the republics, Russia made a real effort to create a respectable pro-democracy movement. The
Movement for Democratic Reforms was formally established by Shevardnadze, Yakovlev,
Leningrad mayor Anatoly Sobchak, and Moscow mayor Gavriil Popov in July 1991. Even while
these seasoned politicians continued to support the perestroika objectives, it was obvious that
actual reform could not be made within the CPSU's organizational structure.
Causes of the Collapse of the USSR

1) The Soviet economy was characterized by inefficiency, central planning, and a lack of
innovation. Over time, it became increasingly unable to keep pace with the economic
developments in the West. The reliance on heavy industry and military spending, combined with
a stagnant consumer goods sector, led to resource mismanagement and economic stagnation.

2). The Soviet political system, dominated by the Communist Party, suffered from corruption,
nepotism, and a lack of political reforms. The centralized power in the hands of the Politburo,
with little room for meaningful political competition, stifled new ideas and led to a disconnect
between the party leadership and the general population.

3). The Soviet Union was a vast multinational state, comprising various ethnic groups and
nationalities. Nationalism began to rise in many republics, leading to demands for greater
autonomy and, in some cases, full independence. This further weakened the central government's
control and cohesion.

4). The Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania) were among the first to assert their
independence from the Soviet Union in the late 1980s. Their successful movements inspired
other republics to seek self-determination, leading to the unravelling of the Soviet state.

5). In August 1991, a group of hardline Communist Party members attempted a coup to remove
Gorbachev and reverse his reforms. The coup failed, but it further weakened the central authority
and strengthened the resolve of independence movements in various republics.

2.3 Concept of the dynamics of new order in the International systems

The Dynamics of International system

The international system refers to the complex web of relationships, interactions, and structures
that exist among nation-states and other actors on the global stage. Understanding the dynamics
of the international system involves analyzing various factors that shape and influence the
behavior of countries, such as power dynamics, diplomacy, international organizations, and
global trends. Here are some key dynamics to consider:

Power Dynamics: Power plays a central role in the international system. It can be measured in
terms of military capabilities, economic strength, diplomatic influence, or soft power. The
distribution of power among states affects their interactions and can lead to cooperation or
competition. Major powers, such as the United States, China, Russia, and the European Union,
have a significant impact on the dynamics of the international system.

Diplomacy and International Relations: Diplomacy is the practice of managing international

relations through negotiation, dialogue, and compromise. Diplomatic interactions take place
through bilateral or multilateral channels, including diplomatic missions, international
conferences, and treaties. Diplomatic efforts shape alliances, trade agreements, and resolutions to
conflicts, and they play a crucial role in maintaining stability and resolving disputes in the
international system.

International Organizations: International organizations, such as the United Nations (UN), World
Trade Organization (WTO), and International Monetary Fund (IMF), provide platforms for
countries to engage in multilateral cooperation and address global challenges. These
organizations facilitate dialogue, negotiation, and the establishment of norms, rules, and
regulations that govern various aspects of international relations, such as security, trade, and
finance.

Globalization and Interdependence: Globalization has interconnected countries economically,

politically, and culturally, leading to increased interdependence among nations. Economic
globalization, in particular, has facilitated the flow of goods, services, capital, and information
across borders. Interdependence can foster cooperation and shared interests but can also lead to
vulnerabilities and conflicts if not managed effectively.

Security and Conflict: Security is a fundamental concern for states in the international system.
Traditional security issues, such as territorial disputes and military conflicts, coexist with
emerging non-traditional security challenges, including terrorism, cyber threats, climate change,
and pandemics. Conflicts and security dilemmas shape the dynamics of the international system,
influencing alliances, military strategies, and cooperation efforts.

Norms and International Law: Norms and international law provide a framework for behavior
and interactions among states. International norms, such as sovereignty, human rights, and non-
proliferation, guide state conduct and shape the expectations of the international community.
International law, as embodied in treaties, conventions, and customary practices, regulates
various aspects of state behavior, including diplomacy, trade, and the use of force.

Global Trends and Challenges: Understanding the dynamics of the international system requires
considering global trends and challenges that impact states and societies. These include
demographic shifts, technological advancements, climate change, resource scarcity, economic
inequality, and the rise of nationalism and populism. Addressing these challenges requires
international cooperation and coordination.It is important to note that the dynamics of the
international system are complex and constantly evolving. Factors such as economic
developments, political changes, and technological advancements can significantly influence the
dynamics and reshape the global order.

The changing world order

The end of world war ll marked a new beginning for the global economy.Under the leadership of
a new hegemon ,the United State of America,and aid by the technologies. Rapid technological
advancements, particularly in the areas of information technology, artificial intelligence, and
biotechnology, have disrupted traditional power structures. They have enabled non-state actors
and individuals to exert influence and challenge the authority of states. Additionally, emerging
technologies like 5G, quantum The results has been a globalization on steriid .In the 2000s,
global reached a milestone as they rose to about a quarter of global GDP , Trade , the sim of
imports and exports consequentially grew to about half of world GDP . In some countries like
Singapore,Belgium or other trade is worth muchore than 100% of GDP. A majority of global
population has benefited from this : more people than ever before belong to the global middle-
class and hundred of millions achieved that status by participating in the global economy.That
brings us to today, when a new wave of globalization is once again upon us In a world
increasing dominated by two global powers ,the US and China, the new frontier of globalization
is the Cyber world. The digital economy in it's infancy during the third wave of globalization is
further enabled by artificial intelligence but threatened by cross-border hacking and cyber-
attacks. At the same time, a negative globalization is expanding too through the global effect of
climate change. pollution in one part of the world leads to extreme weather events in another.
And the cutting of forest in the few "green lungs" the world has left ,like the Amazon rainforest,
has a further devastating effect on not just the world's biodiversity, but it's capacity to cope with
hazardous greenhouse gas emissions

2.4Define war and History of war

War defined

War is an intense armed conflict between two or more groups, nations, or states, typically
involving the use of force and violence. It is characterized by organized and sustained
aggression, often with the goal of achieving political, territorial, ideological, or economic
objectives. War involves a breakdown of peaceful relations and is generally marked by the
deployment of military forces, the engagement of combatants, and the infliction of harm or
destruction upon the opposing side.
Wars can take various forms, including conventional warfare, guerrilla warfare, asymmetric
warfare, and cyber warfare, among others. They can be fought on land, at sea, in the air, and
even in cyberspace. The methods and technologies employed in war have evolved throughout
history, ranging from primitive weapons and tactics to sophisticated modern weaponry and
strategies.

Warfare often results in significant human suffering, loss of life, and widespread destruction. It
can have far-reaching consequences, affecting not only the combatants but also civilians,
infrastructure, economies, and the overall stability of regions or even the world. War has the
potential to reshape political boundaries, alter power dynamics, and transform societies.

The world of terrorism became something tangible to America. It solidified in Americans minds
that war can and will be conducted between state and non-state actires. This distinction is
significant in the context of the traditional perception that war was fought between natiis-state
(or city-state as early as the Peloponnesian war). It also challenges the belief that war is governed
by some form of decorum or rileof law ,In which the belligerent agree to engage utilizing
specific limitations and exclusions .Efforts have been made throughout history to regulate and
mitigate the impact of war through the development of international laws and conventions, such
as the Geneva Conventions, which aim to protect civilians, prisoners of war, and other non-
combatants. Additionally, diplomatic negotiations, peace treaties, and international organizations
like the United Nations are established to prevent and resolve conflicts peacefully, reducing the
likelihood of war.Overall, war represents a state of extreme conflict and violence, with
significant implications for the parties involved and the broader global community.

2.4.1 Understanding world Wars and Globalizing Wars

world war are inter-State conflict that culminate over right of power, reasources or
position's.Going back to the wars of early empires or those such as Dutch Spanish Wars of 1517-
1600.The terms "world war" is applied to the wars of 1914 and 1939 at a taken granted
conversation and has no real analytical weight.The same World war l is know as "the Great War"
or 'War to end-all Wars'.

The history of war spans thousands of years, and it has been a prevalent aspect of human
civilization since ancient times. Wars have been fought for various reasons, including territorial
disputes, ideological differences, economic interests, and the pursuit of power. Here's an
overview of the history of war:

Ancient Warfare (3000 BCE - 500 CE)

Ancient Mesopotamia: The earliest recorded wars took place in ancient Mesopotamia, where
city-states clashed over resources and power.

Ancient Egypt: Egypt experienced numerous conflicts, both internal and external,
withneighboring kingdoms and empires like the Hittites and Assyrians.Ancient Greece and
Rome: Ancient Greece witnessed the famous Trojan War and the Peloponnesian War. Later, the
Roman Empire emerged as a dominant military power, engaging in numerous conquests and
defending its vast territories.

Viking Raids: During the Viking Age, Scandinavian warriors conducted raids across Europe,
terrorizing coastal regions.

Crusades: The Crusades were a series of religious wars fought between Christians and Muslims
over control of the Holy Land.

Mongol Invasions: Led by Genghis Khan and his successors, the Mongol Empire embarked on
vast conquests, establishing the largest contiguous empire in history.

Hundred Years' War: Fought between England and France, this prolonged conflict reshaped the
balance of power in Western Europe.
Atlantic charter

The Atlantic Charter was a declaration made on August 14, 1941, outlining American and British
objectives for the world following the conclusion of World War II. The joint declaration, later
known as the Atlantic Charter, outlined the goals of the United States and the United Kingdom
for the post-World War II era as follows: no territorial encroachment, no territorial changes made
against the wishes of the people (self-determination), restoration of self-government to those
who had been denied it, lowering trade restrictions, international cooperation to ensure better
economic and social conditions for all, freedom from fear and want, and freedom of the press.
The Declaration of the United Nations, which was signed on January 1st, 1942, by the
signatories to the charter. Many of the ideas in the charter were inspired by the Anglo-American
internationalist philosophy, which favored cooperation between the two countries for global
security.Churchill's desperate attempts to connect the US to the war effort and Roosevelt's
attempts to tie Britain to specific war goals served as inspirations for the meeting that resulted in
the Atlantic Charter. In Britain at the time, it was believed that the British and the Americans
would play equal roles in any post-World war II international organization founded on the ideals
of the charter.

At the time of the Atlantic Charter's creation, the United States had not yet entered World War II,
and Britain was still fighting alone against Nazi Germany. The meeting between Churchill and
Roosevelt provided an opportunity to discuss their shared vision for the post-war world and to
establish common principles that would guide their efforts to achieve a more just and peaceful
international order.

Key Principles of the Atlantic Charter

1) The Charter declared that there would be no territorial changes made contrary to the wishes
of the affected people. It opposed the idea of expanding territory through conquest and
emphasized self-determination.

2). The Charter called for economic cooperation and the advancement of trade and welfare, with
the goal of improving global economic conditions and fostering prosperity for all nations.
3). The Charter expressed a commitment to disarmament and the reduction of armaments to the
lowest level consistent with national security.

4). It affirmed the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will
live, echoing the principle of national self-determination.

5). The Charter advocated for free trade and the right of all nations to have access to raw
materials and markets, as well as freedom of navigation on the high seas during both peace and
war.

6) The Charter highlighted the importance of creating a post-war international organization to

promote international cooperation, peace, and security.

Impact of Atlantic charter

The Atlantic Charter served as a unifying document for the Allied powers and helped to
solidify their shared commitment to the principles of democracy, self-determination, and
collective security. The Charter's principles were incorporated into the United Nations
Declaration, which was signed by 26 Allied nations in January 1942, further solidifying the
commitment to the principles outlined in the document.

The Atlantic Charter is often seen as a critical moment in the development of the post-war
international order and played a significant role in shaping the ideals and objectives of the United
Nations, which was established in 1945. It remains an important historical document that reflects
the shared values and aspirations of the Allied powers during World War II and continues to
influence international relations and diplomacy to this day.

Globalizing wafare wars which have Globalizing implications withouts necessarily being fought
across a global theatre or integrating extended social relations into conflict itself. In this
definition,just because a world power is involved in a war does not make it global war. For a war
to be conceived as a global war it has to have proximate consequence and involvement across the
world-space,however unevenly where 'world-space' is understood in terms of the sensibilities of
the time . World-space if the end of eighteen century (the war of 1656-75) or the beginning of
the twentieth (World war l) was much more extensive than that of the North America and
European metropolitan territories.

Industrial Revolution: Technological advancements, including the development of firearms,

railways, and telegraph communication, transformed warfare.

World War I: The Great War saw the use of new weapons, such as machine guns and poison gas,
and involved many nations in a global conflict.

Early Modern warefare (1500 CE - 1800 CE):

Age of Exploration: European powers like Spain, Portugal, England, and France engaged in
conflicts as they sought to establish colonies and control trade routes.

Thirty Years' War: This war, primarily fought in Central Europe, involved a complex web of
alliances and religious conflicts.

American Revolutionary War: The American colonies fought for independence from British rule,
leading to the formation of the United States.

Napoleonic Wars: Napoleon Bonaparte's military campaigns and conquests reshaped Europe and
challenged existing power structures.

Modern Warfare (1800 CE - Present):

Industrial Revolution: Technological advancements, including the development of firearms,

railways, and telegraph communication, transformed warfare.
World War I: The Great War saw the use of new weapons, such as machine guns and poison gas,
and involved many nations in a global conflict.

World War II: This global conflict witnessed the rise of fascism, the Holocaust, and the use of
atomic weapons, resulting in significant devastation.

Cold War: The ideological standoff between the United States and the Soviet Union shaped
international relations, leading to proxy wars and arms races.

Recent Conflicts: The late 20th and early 21st centuries have seen conflicts like the Gulf War,
Balkan Wars, War on Terror, and conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It's important to note that this is just a brief overview, and there have been numerous wars,
conflicts, and military campaigns throughout history. The causes, strategies, and outcomes of
these conflicts vary widely, reflecting the complexity of human interactions and the pursuit of
power and resources.

2.4.2. Transformation of War

Since the end of the cold war there has been debate among war-scholars about a transformation
of War, mainly whether there has been one or not ( Williams,2008:163). The debate has been
divided into sides where one side mean that the formation of war is constantly in alteration, but
that the logic of war is same today as it has been through history ( Kalyvas, 2001). On the other
side we find those who are convinced that the logic of war we see today different from the war
our knowledge is based on . They argue we need so approach many of the wars we see today
differently and see it through a new perspective where globalization is included in order to
understand them and

deepen our knowledge ( Mello,2010, Williams, 2008). They are challenging Clausewitz's
dominating war philosophy and questioning it's relevance in the wars we see today
( Sheehan,2014). One of the main difference is the war im relation to state building. While the
old wars are strongly associated with the formation of the state are the new wars claimed to be
the opposite, which will be described in following sections.
2.5The New war Theory

Since the end of the WW2 we've been witnessing a sufficient decrease of interstate wars, and just
a remarkable increase in the number of intra state wars ( Williams 2008:156). In addition to this
have the violence in war with deadly outcome markedly increased ( Williams 2008). The new
war theory emerger in the early 90s in connection to the wars that arose after the Cold War. Most
of the new wars emerge out of already weak states, as the ones in some Africa State ,the war
Balkan-Herzegovina ( Kaldor 2005). or later also the war in Iraq (Kaldor 2012).

New wars theorists argues that the not only subjective nature of wars have changed,but also the
objective nature of wars. They means that we are witnessing a fundamental change in wars, a
change in which the dominating theoretical Clausewitzean understanding of warefare isn't as
applicable on today's conflicts as it was on traditional, old wars. The main idea with the new war
concept is to change the fundamental conceptions of war and see the essence of globalization and
the illegitimacy in that change the formation of contemporary war ( Kaldor 2012:3). The new
war concept is relevant since it offers a new perception of war, where warfare us strongly
connected with globalization and the disintegration of state ( Kaldor,2005). As Kaldor herself
points out :

"Attempt to think of the new world in terms of the old prevents us from dealing with the realities
of today's globalized world. We can only develop alternative strategies against war if we see how
different the new wars are from previous conflicts" ( Kaldor 2005:491). The approach of
understanding warfare one chooses to adopt is relevant for what direction the analysis later will
lead ( Williams,2008:156).

2.5.1 Old Wars

Old wars according to Kaldor refed to the "style" of the "ideal" type of wars that took place
around late 18th and mid-20th century in Europe and are characterized with state actors, big
armies and standardized uniforms ( Kaldor, 2005, Cohen 1984). These are also the wars strongly
connected to a state building ( Kaldor,2005, Cohen 1984). The prominent war scholar Carl Von
Clausewitz describe these war as a political and social behavior, and the fundamental nature of
war with "a continuation of political intercourse with a mixture of other means" ( Von
Clausewitz 1975). Violence can you be called warwhwn a state constitute the actor , according to
Von Clausewitz. He also distinguish on the objective and subjective nature of the wars, where
the objective nature is the features all war share, independentof time and place, and where the
subjective nature of war is what makes each war exclusive. He argue that the subjective features
of wars, characteristics and form , change from war to war but that the objective, essential,nature
of war don't ( Sheehan 2014)

2.5.2 Characteristics of New Wars

Kaldor describe new wars as civil wars with transnational connection and that new wars are
mixture of war and organized violence, where war usually is defined as violence between states
or political groups with political motives and where organized violence have the same violent
expression but between privately organized group with private , in most cases financial purposes
( Kaldor 2013). She argue that new war include and emphasize on the transnational connections
in new war, which divide them from traditional civil or internal wars ( Kaldor 2013).

2.6 The relationship between Russia and Ukraine

The relationship between Russia and Ukraine has been characterized by a long and complex
history, shaped by historical, political, economic, and cultural factors. The war between Russia
and Ukraine is a manifestation of this intricate relationship, with deep-rooted tensions and
conflicts that have evolved over time. Here are some key aspects of the relationship and the war.

The war between Russia and Ukraine has been a longstanding and intricate conflict that has
shaped the geopolitical landscape of Eastern Europe. This thesis delves into the multifaceted
relationship between Russia and Ukraine, seeking to understand the historical, political,
economic, and social factors that have led to the eruption and perpetuation of the conflict. By
analyzing the roots of the conflict and tracing its evolution, this study aims to provide a
comprehensive understanding of the war's origins, dynamics, and potential implications on
regional and global stability.

The history of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine is deeply rooted in their shared past as
part of the Soviet Union. When the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, Ukraine declared its
independence, which laid the groundwork for the tensions and conflicts that followed.After the
collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukraine declared its independence on August 24, 1991. The newly
independent country faced numerous challenges in establishing its statehood, including the need
to build its political, economic, and social structures.(The Dissolution of the Soviet Union 1991).

One of the earliest points of contention was the status of Crimea, a region with a significant
Russian-speaking population and a strategic Black Sea port. The issue of Crimea's status and the
ownership of the Black Sea Fleet led to disputes between Russia and Ukraine, although Crimea
initially remained part of Ukraine.(crimea and the Black sea Fleet 1991-1994).

In 2004, Ukraine experienced the Orange Revolution, a series of protests triggered by allegations
of electoral fraud in the presidential election. The pro-Western candidate, Viktor Yushchenko,
emerged victorious, leading to tensions with Russia, which had

supported the pro-Russian candidate, Viktor Yanukovych.

Tensions between Russia and Ukraine escalated during disputes over natural gas prices. Russia, a
major gas supplier to Europe, accused Ukraine of siphoning off gas intended for European
markets. These disputes resulted in temporary disruptions of gas supplies to Europe and further
strained bilateral relations.( The gas dispute 2006, 2009)

In February 2014, Ukraine witnessed the Euromaidan protests, triggered by then-President

Yanukovych's decision to reject closer ties with the European Union in favor of closer relations
with Russia. As the protests intensified, Yanukovych fled Ukraine, leading to a change of
government. In response, Russia annexed Crimea in March 2014, a move that was widely
condemned by the international community and further escalated tensions between Russia and
Ukraine. Following the annexation of Crimea, pro-Russian separatist movements emerged in
Eastern Ukraine, particularly in Donetsk and Luhansk regions. These movements escalated into
an armed conflict, with Russia being accused of supporting the separatists with weapons,
funding, and military personnel. The conflict, which is ongoing, has resulted in thousands of
deaths, displacement of civilians, and significant instability in the region.(Annexation of Crimea
2014).

Several ceasefire agreements have been brokered between Ukraine, Russia, and the separatists in
an attempt to end the conflict. The most notable of these agreements were the Minsk Agreements
(Minsk I in 2014 and Minsk II in 2015). However, the implementation of these agreements has
been challenging, with violations and sporadic violence continuing to this day.

The war between Russia and Ukraine has had far-reaching implications, not only for the two
countries involved but also for regional and global security. The conflict remains a complex and
unresolved issue with various geopolitical, historical, and socio-cultural factors contributing to
its protraction.

Highlighting the importance of understanding the complex relationship between Russia and
Ukraine and its broader implication

Understanding the complex relationship between Russia and Ukraine is of utmost importance
due to its broader implications on regional and global stability. Several key reasons highlight the
significance of delving into the intricacies of this relationship:

Geopolitical Significance: Russia and Ukraine both hold crucial geopolitical positions in Eastern
Europe, and their relationship greatly influences the dynamics in the region. The conflict affects
neighboring countries and may lead to spillover effects, potentially destabilizing the broader
European security landscape.

Security Concerns: The war between Russia and Ukraine has escalated tensions and raised
concerns about the potential for broader military confrontations. The conflict has already
demonstrated the capacity to escalate into a full-fledged armed confrontation, posing risks to
international peace and security.

Energy Interdependence: The energy relationship between Russia and Ukraine, particularly in
the context of natural gas supplies to Europe, is essential for the energy security of many
European nations. Any disruption in energy flows can have significant economic consequences
and political ramifications.
Economic Implications: The conflict has adversely impacted the economies of both Russia and
Ukraine and has had ripple effects on international trade and investment. Understanding the
economic aspects of the relationship is crucial for devising effective economic policies and
mitigating potential risks to the global economy.

Humanitarian Concerns: The ongoing conflict has resulted in significant humanitarian

consequences, with casualties, displaced populations, and human rights violations.
Understanding the root causes of the war is vital for finding pathways to alleviate human
suffering and promote reconciliation and peace.

International Relations: The conflict has strained Russia's relations with other nations and led to
sanctions imposed on Russia by the international community. Analyzing the intricacies of the
relationship helps to comprehend the broader implications for international diplomacy and
cooperation.

Ongoing Conflict and Peace Efforts: The conflict in Eastern Ukraine remains unresolved, despite
multiple ceasefire agreements and peace negotiations. The Minsk Agreements, brokered in 2014
and 2015, aimed to de-escalate the conflict but have faced challenges in implementation.

In conclusion, comprehending the complexities of the relationship between Russia and Ukraine
is essential for effectively addressing the conflict's underlying causes, finding pathways to peace
and stability, and mitigating potential risks to regional and global security. By understanding the
broader implications, the international community can work towards constructive engagement,
conflict resolution, and fostering cooperation in this critical region of the world.

2.6.1. History of the Conflicts

History of Russia and Ukraine war:

As of my last update in September 2021, the conflict between Russia and Ukraine had been
ongoing since 2014. However, it's important to note that the situation may have evolved since
then, and I recommend checking more recent sources for the latest developments.

The conflict began in early 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea, a region of Ukraine with a
significant Russian-speaking population, following a controversial referendum. The annexation
was widely condemned by the international community, with most countries considering it
illegal and not recognizing Crimea as part of Russia.

In the aftermath of the annexation, tensions escalated further in Eastern Ukraine, particularly in
the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. Pro-Russian separatists, with alleged support from Russia,
declared self-proclaimed republics in these areas and launched armed conflicts against Ukrainian
forces. The conflict in Eastern Ukraine resulted in thousands of deaths and widespread
displacement of civilians.

Ukraine and many Western countries accused Russia of direct military involvement, supplying
weapons, and deploying troops to support the separatists. Russia denied these allegations,
claiming that any Russian citizens fighting in Ukraine were volunteers and not part of the
Russian military.

Attempts at resolving the conflict through diplomacy have been made, with various ceasefire
agreements and peace talks taking place. The Minsk agreements, brokered by the Organization
for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), were particularly significant. However, the
implementation of these agreements faced challenges, and ceasefire violations continued to
occur.

The situation in Ukraine and Russia's actions have strained relations between Russia and many
Western countries, leading to sanctions against Russia and ongoing diplomatic tensions.The
conflict in eastern Ukraine, often referred to as the Russo-Ukrainian War, has resulted in
thousands of deaths and a significant humanitarian crisis. Numerous attempts have been made to
find a peaceful resolution, including the Minsk agreements, but the situation remains unresolved
and highly tense.
The conflict in eastern Ukraine, often referred to as the Russo-Ukrainian War, has resulted in
thousands of deaths and a significant humanitarian crisis. Numerous attempts have been made to
find a peaceful resolution, including the Minsk agreements, but the situation remains unresolved
and highly tense.

Please keep in mind that geopolitical situations can change rapidly, and it's crucial to refer to up-
to-date and reliable sources for the most current information on the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

2.6.2. The role and place of Ukrain in Europe

Ukraine holds a significant role and place in Europe due to its geographical location, history,
culture, and geopolitical importance. Here are some key aspects of Ukraine's role in Europe:

Geographical Location: Ukraine is situated at the crossroads of Eastern Europe and Western
Asia, making it a bridge between the two continents. It shares borders with several European
countries, including Russia, Belarus, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, and Moldova. Its
location provides it with strategic importance in regional and international affairs.

Size and Population: Ukraine is the largest country entirely within Europe in terms of land area.
It is also one of the most populous countries in Europe, with a population exceeding 40 million
people. Its size and population contribute to its economic and political significance in the region.

Historical and Cultural Heritage: Ukraine has a rich historical and cultural heritage that has
greatly influenced European history. The Kyivan Rus' state, centered in present-day Ukraine,
played a crucial role in the formation of Eastern Slavic culture and laid the groundwork for the
development of Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine. Throughout its history, Ukraine has been a
melting pot of various ethnicities, languages, and religions, contributing to its diverse and vibrant
culture.
Since gaining independence in 1991, Ukraine has sought closer ties with Europe and has
expressed its aspirations for European integration. It signed an Association Agreement with the
European Union (EU) in 2014, aiming to strengthen political and economic relations with the EU
member states.Ukraine's geopolitical importance is underscored by its proximity to Russia and
its natural resources, including fertile agricultural land and significant reserves of coal, iron, and
natural gas. These resources make Ukraine an important player in the energy sector and
influence its relationships with neighboring countries and the EU.

Ukraine's position on the eastern edge of Europe has made it vulnerable to security challenges,
particularly in the aftermath of the annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014 and the ongoing
conflict in Eastern Ukraine. The country's security concerns are of interest to European and
international partners as they impact regional stability.Ukraine's strategic location and extensive
transportation infrastructure, including its ports on the Black Sea, make it an essential hub for
trade between Europe and Asia. The country serves as a transit route for energy supplies and
goods, contributing to regional and global trade networks.

While Ukraine has expressed its desire for closer integration with Europe, its path to European
integration faces challenges and complexities, including domestic political issues and the
ongoing conflict in the eastern regions. The relationship between Ukraine and Europe continues
to evolve, shaped by regional and global dynamics, and will play a crucial role in the future of
the continent.

2.7 The New order in the ongoing Russian and Ukraine war

The ongoing Russia and Ukraine war has led to the emergence of a new order, characterized by
shifts in regional power dynamics and changes in international relations. It is essential to note
that the situation may have evolved since then, and any assessment of a "new order" should be
contextualized with current developments. However, some key elements of the new order that
have emerged during the conflict include.

Shifts in Regional Power Dynamics: The conflict has reshaped the balance of power in the
region. Russia's actions in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine have increased its assertiveness and
influence in neighboring countries. Ukraine's efforts to resist Russian aggression have
demonstrated its determination to assert its sovereignty and seek closer ties with the West.

Security Concerns for Neighboring Countries: The conflict has raised security concerns for
neighboring countries, particularly those with significant Russian-speaking populations.
Countries in Eastern Europe have been closely monitoring the situation, leading to increased
defense spending and stronger ties with NATO and the European Union.

Impact on International Norms: Russia's annexation of Crimea challenged the post-Cold War
norm of respecting territorial integrity and sovereignty. This act has been widely condemned by
the international community and has raised concerns about the stability of international borders

Impact on International Alliances: The conflict has strained international alliances, with Western
countries supporting Ukraine and imposing sanctions on Russia in response to its actions. Russia,
in turn, has sought closer ties with some non-Western countries, leading to shifts in alliances and
partnerships.

Humanitarian and Refugee Crisis: The conflict has resulted in a significant humanitarian crisis,
with many people internally displaced and seeking refuge in neighboring countries. This has put
pressure on humanitarian organizations and host countries.

Economic Consequences: The conflict has had economic implications for both Russia and
Ukraine, as well as for the broader region. Economic sanctions and disruptions to trade have
impacted regional economies and investment flows.

Impact on Global Security: The ongoing conflict has implications for global security, as it
highlights the potential risks of military aggression and territorial disputes in a multipolar world

The new order emerging from the Russia and Ukraine war is characterized by geopolitical shifts,
altered security dynamics, and changes in international norms and alliances. As the conflict
continues, the consequences will continue to evolve, shaping the regional and global order in
complex ways. Resolving the conflict and establishing a stable and peaceful order will require
sustained diplomatic efforts, cooperation among stakeholders, and adherence to international law
and norms.
2.7.1 Involvement of the regional and global actors

we have the likes of NATO, European Union, United Nations organisation playing a crucial role
i Russo--Ukraine war.As a concept, deterrence is not universally well understood.It differs from
defence in that defensive strategies aim to prevent an adversary from achieving its objectives by
force of arms or other measures NATO’s implicit strategy for defending the Baltics since they
joined the Alliance has been extended deterrence, the claim that the United States would be
willing to use nuclear weapons to defend the Baltic states. The great advantage of this strategy is
that it is very costeffective, since it requires no additional forces in the region and permits the
redeployment of those forces elsewhere. It is also, for the same reason, more politically feasible
than forward deployed ground and air forces in Eastern Europe would be. The big problem, of
course, is that extended deterrence lacks credibility against the kind of hybrid, limited warfare
that Russia has used in Ukraine. That the United States would be willing to risk thermonuclear
war and self-destruction to protect the Baltic states from minor incursions of ununiformed
Russian forces and mercenaries is dubious, and Russian military and political leaders know this.
The weakness of extended deterrence under the current conditions was not a problem in the
period when the threat was remote, but given the renewed threat, the deterrence problem is now
real and increasingly widely recognised both in Washington and European capitals.During the
Cold War, as in the Baltics today, NATO was not postured to defend, in the strict sense of the
term, front line allies. Instead, the Alliance’s strategy was based on defence in depth, which
assumed that NATO would fight Warsaw Pact countries largely within Western Europe, at least
in the initial stages of a conflict. Moreso, a defence in depth strategy is not appropriate for the
Baltics today because Russia’s political objectives in any incursion would be fundamentally
different

from the political objectives of the Soviet Union in Western Europe.The core of deterrence at the
strategic level should be an effort to demonstrate that salami tactics in which Russia has engaged
in Ukraine will not, in fact, weaken NATO. To the contrary, it should be clear that they will
strengthen the Alliance and incur costs for Russia. The need to do both – strengthen the Alliance
and impose costs – is of course the crux of NATO’s own strategic dilemma, since threatening to
impose costs tends to divide the allies. In this latter regard, NATO member states have fared
well. Political unity has been good in the face of the Ukraine crisis. There have of course been
differences, and the current Russian regime has bought influence in some European capitals, but
in the end the United States and the European Union have managed multiple rounds of sanctions,
undertaken military steps to reassure Eastern Europe, and proved willing to incur costs to
strengthen the current deterrent regime.
At the apex level, the strategy should deter the kind of limited, hybrid warfare that was used to
such effect in Crimea and, initially, in south-eastern Ukraine. Developing an effective deterrent
against this strategy is difficult, but by no means impossible. It requires a combination of efforts
to track and thwart Russian covert activities, increase risks for Russian operatives in the region,
improve the livelihoods of ethnic minorities, and ensure effective police practices. It may also
involve steps to strengthen cyber defences and potentially some form of NATO declaratory
policy on external efforts to manipulate more vulnerable NATO populations. At the operational
level, the deterrent strategy would have to involve either denying Russian forces the ability to
hold territory in the Baltics, or make it so costly as to be unthinkable. Russian forces would have
an enormous advantage geographically against NATO in the Baltics, simply by virtue of
proximity to operating bases and the relatively short distance between the Russian border and the
Baltic capitals. Preventing Russia from holding part of the Baltics would require a large NATO
force deployed in north-eastern Europe, the Baltics themselves, and the North and Baltic Seas.
Such a force would not only be very expensive, it would also be exposed to pre-emptive attacks,
and politically a target of constant Russian recrimination that could undermine the need to
engage with Russia.

Nevertheless, moreso frustrating, continued engagement is important for two reasons. First
Russia remains a player on the international stage. It is not in a position to offer much positive
good, but can play a spoiler role, especially if the United States and its allies remain committed
to the United Nations (UN), as they should. Second, in the event of escalation or crisis, the
ability to send messages about red-lines will be critical to escalation management. It is thus very
important that the maximum number of official and unofficial channels remain open. It is also
essential that NATO invest in understanding which of those channels are liable to be most
effective under which circumstances.
2.7.2 STRATEGIC PRINCIPLES

There are more good reasons to be concerned about NATO’s resolve and its

capabilities for the challenges ahead. To believe Russia can be deterred and security in Europe
restored without costs – military, financial, or otherwise – would be naïve. Europe and the
United States, however, have demonstrated a willingness to incur costs through sanctions at a
level that many experts would surely have doubted before the crisis began. This should have
some deterrent value against future Russian adventurism. At the same time, European militaries
remain depressingly underfunded (Larrabee et al 2012). Broader change in the willingness of
European publics to spend on defence for the new security challenges of the 21st century, which
include Russia but are not limited to it, is still sorely needed. NATO is unable to stabilise
security in Europe, the European Union will also suffer the consequences. A credible defence of
NATO’s territory is a necessary precondition not only for sustaining the European Union’s
partnership with Eastern Europe, which it appears to continue to pursue, but also for sustaining
the European Union itself. Putin’s actions in Ukraine have made it clear that he sees NATO and
the European Union as interlocked instruments of Western power (or American power, as Putin
considers the Europeans for the most part American pawns). The European Union may not want
a conflict with Russia, but as several commentators have pointed out, it has one (Speck 2014,
Lukin 2014). Given this, it would be foolish to assume that if the Kremlin successfully
undermined NATO, the European Union would not also suffer a serious blow. If European
citizens still believe in the European project, they can no longer afford to neglect Europe’s
defence. It is crucial to make a serious effort to constantly and consistently articulate the
principles and rationales that underpin NATO policy, and especially any military moves such as
changes in NATO force posture.

What principles should the United States and its allies stand for in this conflict?
 Firstly, the commitment to defending and strengthening the European liberal-democratic
order, which is intimately linked with the security of the US own systems of government and
way of life.

Second, a rules-based international order, in which changes to borders are accomplished

through diplomacy, consensus and the rule of law rather than the use of force. The callousness
with which Russia has approached the conflict – as well as the apparently accidental downing of
flight MH-17 by Russian-backed Ukrainian rebels – is particularly noxious in contemporary
Europe. It undermines several decades of mutual efforts that have been made – through military,
legal, arms control, and other diplomatic arrangements – to build lasting security in this once
extravagantly violent continent.

Third, the good not only of the people who are fortunate enough to live within NATO’s
borders, but also the good of the Russian people themselves. This principle will be difficult to
uphold, yet it is critical for long-term success and the minimisation of violence. The problem that
NATO has with Russia is not with the Russian people, but with the politces of today’s Russian
leaders, and specifically their willingness to use force to redraw borders in Europe. NATO
leaders must also continue to emphasise that Russia has a right to security and that the United
States and NATO are respectful of this right under international law, and that today’s
disagreement is over the particulars of the issue, and the way in which Russia has sought to
pursue its objectives, not the right itself. The importance of certain issues such as access to the
Black Sea fleet should be recognised as legitimate security concerns, even if Russia’s methods of
securing those interests is not acceptable.

Eventually, one can hope that change in Moscow will bring about a regime that is more
willing to abide by the post-Cold War treaties and norms of security in Europe. In these
circumstances, the United States and its allies can consider a return to the conflict-free zone that
Europe enjoyed for two decades after the end of the Cold War. Of course, change in the Kremlin
could also bring even greater turmoil if it results in greater nationalism or, equally frightening,
fragmentation and state collapse. In both the latter cases, however, the United States and Europe
will be better served if current policies strengthen rather than weaken security and deterrence in
Europe.
2.8 Theoretical Framework

2.9 Empirical Studies

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This study strictly analyze the research design methodology to be adopted in carrying out this
research work, and validity and reliability to evaluate this research work. The aim of this
research is to investigate the roles and experiences of the United State of America in the global
antiterrorism efforts in international system. Therefore, this study entails a qualitative research
and critical analysis are made.

3.2 Research Design

This research is a qualitative research and the Research design for this study on an analysis of the
roles of the United States of America in the global antiterrorism efforts in international system is
historical research design where data collected is verified and analysed qualitatively.

3.3 Sources of Data Collection

The content of this work is be based on the assembling of some publications which stands as an
idea of what the researcher's has work on such as journals, textbooks, Magazines, releant
secondary datas from internet, which gives a valid information on terrorism and United State of
America’s effort on antiterrorism.

3.4 Population and Sample of The Study

The population of this study is South East Asia while the sample is Afghanistan.

3.5 Method of Data Collection

The data for this research is gathered through secondary sources using online libraries, journals,
digital resources, textbooks and articles.

3.6 Instrument of Data Collection

The instrument for data collection for this research based on online libraries, journals , digital
resources, textbooks and articles

3.7 Reliability of The Study

The reliability of this study is hinged on the use of scholarly work, and relevant journals, and
articles .

3.8 Validity Of The Study

The validity of this study is based on different sources of data that the researcher used.

3.9 Ethical Consideration

This study is strictly carried out with the ethics of research committee of Harvarde College of
Science, Business and Management Studies.

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS

4.0 Introduction

The aim of this section is to analyze how the nature of the change in balance of power and it
dynamics, secondly Understanding the New order and it activities in the international system.
Thirdly thus section will examine the sustainability of the United States as the hegemony in the
international system.
4.1 The changing Nature and dynamics in the international system.

From the on set, There have been relationship between one state with another. Either state is
conflicting or having good relations in terms of political connections,commerce , Trading
activities which promote peace and unity also develop state Economics. Even at war time state
relate when there's mass destruction causing to loose life's and properties, which later results to
negotiation through means of a mediator. At the end of each war the dynamics of new order
come in place in the international system.

Multipolar system was firstly illustrated at the peak where various super power wages war
against themselves. The treaty of Westphalia which ended the thirty years war between the
protestant and Roman Catholic have a vital dynamics behinds it .super powers at this perosid are
france, Italy, Germany, Sweden, Britain. Balance of power was highly induced because these
state actors checkmates themselves because of the great tension they had to one another. After
which some super power fell due to poor Economic development and they looses polital
recognition.

Bipolarity

When various supper power looses it political and military recognition they now form two parts
the Allied and the Axis. At which various state want to regain it military power at first then
recognition Economically, socio-cutural activities, political reform.

The first war, broke out all over Europe starting a conflicts that eventually cause lost million of
lives. The central power ( Germany,Austra-hungary, the Ottoman Empire and Belgium) were set
against the Allies ( At first consisting Britain, France, Belgium, Serbia and Russia. Finally total
eighteen nations including Japan, Italy, and untied State). A great depression and world war 1.
Casualties resulted to internal crises amongst state that affected Economic, growth in developing.
Second world war shows much the effects of Bi polarity system in the international system.
When the league of Nations fail due to the founder backing out .

The Western and Eastern blocs fought at the second world war 1939-1945. It involves war of
Germany invasion of Poland 1 September 1939 which marked the beginning of the world war 2.
Also Japan attacked the untied State naval base at Pearl a

Harbour at which brings United States into the war. The United States later retailate which ended
the world war 2 by throwing atomic bomb to the city of Japan called Heroshima and Nagazaki.

The cold war a geopolitical tension and ideological conflicts that lasted from the end of world
war 2 in 1945 until the early 1990s. It primarily occurred between two super power, the US and
USSR, along with their respective allies. Although direct military confrontation between the two
power was avoided. The cold war uses different policy to get more territories occupies by their
allies . The cold war was focus by intense political, Economic and military rivalry as well as
dangerous arm race .At some point both axis uses different policies to get more territories to
itself. The containment policy of the Western and expansionims by the Eastern blocs. At which
US containment policy conquered the expansionims policy of the USSR die to various internal
crisis that made the dissolvement of Soviet Union and a new order of unipolarity came on board
in the international system showing the dynamics.

The Unipolar

After tge end of cold war, The US had been the hegemony power for more than 30 years. The
US took on the role of the "world Police" or global enforcer. It offend intervened in regional
conflicts and crises to maintain stability and projects its interest and allies. Moreso , the US had
significant influence in shaping and leading global institution such as the untied Nation,
International monetary fund ( IMF ), World Bank and World Trade Organisation ( WTO ). This
allowed the US to set set agenda and norms governing global affairs .

Furthermore, The US possesses the world's most advanced military capabilities including a
robust nuclear arsenal and vast network of military dominance allowed the US to project power
and protect its interest across the globe .
Lastly, it's important to note that the international system is dynamics and new order established
over time . The rise of new powers and shifts in global dynamics can shape the future of
International relations and role of United States as a global hegemon.

4.2 The New order In the international system

The term "BRICS" was originally coined by economist Jim O'Neill in 2001 as part of a thesis
that highlighted the increasing economic influence of these five countries on the global stage.
The BRICS nations are known for their rapid economic growth, large populations, and
considerable natural resources. Together, they represent a significant share of the world's land
area, population, and economic output.

The formation of BRICS was formalized in 2006 when these five countries held their first
official summit in Russia. Since then, they have been meeting annually to discuss issues of
mutual interest and cooperation in various fields, such as economics, finance, trade, and
geopolitics.

The main objectives of BRICS include promoting cooperation and collaboration among member
countries, supporting each other's economic development, and advocating for reform in
international financial institutions to better reflect the emerging economies' interests.

Each BRICS member has its unique strengths and challenges:

Brazil: Known for its rich natural resources and agricultural sector.
Russia: A major player in the energy sector, particularly in oil and natural gas.

India: Boasts a massive and diverse economy, with a strong services sector.

China: The world's most populous country and a global manufacturing and trading hub.

South Africa: Rich in minerals and an influential player in the African continent.

The BRICS bloc represents a significant force in the global economy and geopolitics. However,
it's essential to note that economic and political developments might have evolved since my last
update in September 2021, and you may want to verify the latest information regarding the
BRICS group.

Impacts of BRICS

1). Collectively, the BRICS countries represent a significant share of the global economy. Their
rapid economic growth and large populations have made them important players in international
trade and investment. They have also been instrumental in shaping global economic dynamics
and have increasingly sought to promote South-South economic cooperation.

2). BRICS nations have taken initiatives to create development and infrastructure financing
mechanisms. For example, the New Development Bank (NDB) was established in 2014 by
BRICS countries to provide financial support for infrastructure and sustainable development
projects in member states and other emerging economies. This initiative has provided an
alternative source of funding for major projects, reducing reliance on traditional Western-
dominated institutions.
3). BRICS has emerged as a significant geopolitical force, challenging the dominance of
traditional Western powers in global affairs. By working together and coordinating their
positions on international issues, BRICS countries have sought to amplify their collective voice
in forums such as the United Nations and G20, influencing debates on global governance and
development agendas.

4). BRICS countries have advocated for reforms in international financial institutions like the
International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. They argue that these institutions
should better reflect the changing economic landscape, giving more representation and decision-
making power to emerging economies.

5). Several BRICS countries are major producers and consumers of energy and natural resources.
Their collective influence in these sectors impacts global energy markets and resource
distribution, leading to shifts in global economic and political power dynamics.

6). BRICS has facilitated cultural exchanges, academic collaborations, and people-to-people
interactions. This has contributed to a better understanding of each other's cultures, traditions,
and languages, fostering deeper ties between the member countries.

7). BRICS has promoted South-South cooperation, encouraging dialogue, collaboration, and the
exchange of best practices between emerging economies. This form of cooperation has resulted
in various initiatives, such as joint research projects, technology transfer, and capacity-building
efforts.

It's important to note that the impacts of BRICS in the international system are subject to
ongoing developments and may change over time. Additionally, geopolitical and economic
circumstances can influence the group's cohesion and ability to achieve its objectives. Therefore,
for the most current and comprehensive analysis of BRICS' impacts, it is recommended to refer
to up-to-date sources and studies
4.3 Sustainability of the US hegemony in the international system

The United States have been trying all possible best to retain the hegemony power in the
international system through various ways

politically , Economically, socio cultural activities, Militarily as "world Police man" . At which
regulates and set principles through signing of treaties, setting out rule of law, which at some
point put world to Global order.

The only fear US have now is against the BRICS STATE coming together to wage war against
it politicall, Economic, military control.

However, it is important to understand that the dynamics between the US and individual BRICS
member states can vary significantly based on geopolitical interests, economic considerations,
and foreign policy priorities

The rise of BRICS as a group of major emerging economies has challenged the traditional
global economic order, where the US and Western countries have played dominant roles. This
shift in economic power has sometimes led to competitive tensions between the US and BRICS
nations, particularly China.

The US and some BRICS nations have differing stances on various international issues, such as
conflicts in the Middle East, sanctions against Russia, and the South China Sea dispute. These
differing positions can lead to disagreements and tensions in international forums.

The US has raised concerns about human rights issues in some BRICS countries, particularly
China and Russia. These concerns have sometimes strained diplomatic relations.

The US and BRICS countries have sometimes had differing views on how to address global
challenges and the role of multilateral institutions. BRICS nations have sought reforms in global
governance to increase their influence, which may not always align with US interests.
While some BRICS countries are major energy producers, the US has taken various approaches
to energy policies and climate change mitigation. This divergence can influence international
negotiations on climate agreements and energy-related matters.

It is essential to recognize that the international landscape is fluid, and relations between
countries can change based on geopolitical developments, leadership changes, and economic
shifts. While some aspects of US-BRICS interactions may lead to tensions, these relationships
are complex and multifaceted, with areas of cooperation and engagement alongside areas of
competition and disagreement.

Also United Nations also been headed by the United States also set principles at which check
balance other contending state who are against the policies.

4.4 Discuss on findings

Balance of power

The status of the balance of power as a theoretical idea has long been a topic of discussion in the
field of international relations (IR). While some contend that the notion does not align with
historical empirical findings, others have modified it by incorporating concepts like "balance of
threats," "bandwagoning," or "soft balancing." However, the balance-of-power idea has also been
widely used by diplomats throughout history. Practitioners have applied the theory since the
Italian city-states of the fifteenth century, through the Concert of Europe, two world wars, and up
to the present day.

Although this is a common definition, the term "balance of power" has been employed in many
various contexts and with many different interpretations. For instance, it could simply be a
description of how world politics currently stand, i.e., the status quo, and whether or not the
power structure is balanced in the sense described above. For instance, one might discuss "the
balance of power in Europe" at a specific time. It may also serve as a policy prescription for
actions that effective policymakers should take. Like any other political philosophy, the balance
of power can be propagandized to influence the public in favor of one or the other policy
direction. The balance of power considerations influenced the speed at which the major powers
mobilized their armies at the outbreak of war. Fearful of being caught off-guard, each side
rapidly mobilized their military forces to gain an early advantage over their opponents. This
rapid mobilization led to the escalation of the conflict as diplomatic efforts to de-escalate
tensions quickly gave way to military action. The balance of power dynamics contributed to the
difficulty in achieving decisive victories and prolonged the war.

While the concept of the balance of power influenced the early stages of World War I, as the war
progressed and the conflict became more entrenched, other factors such as total war
mobilization, new technologies, and changing political dynamics also played significant roles in
shaping the outcome of the war. The war's duration and devastating consequences ultimately led
to a transformation of the international system and set the stage for a reevaluation of traditional
balance of power politics in the post-war era, These could been seen him the world war 1 how
power been separated and acted upon .

BRICS:

The formation of BRICS was formalized in 2006 when these five countries held their first
official summit in Russia. Since then, they have been meeting annually to discuss issues of
mutual interest and cooperation in various fields, such as economics, finance, trade, and
geopolitics.

The main objectives of BRICS include promoting cooperation and collaboration among member
countries, supporting each other's economic development, and advocating for reform in
international financial institutions to better reflect the emerging economies' interests.
Each BRICS member has its unique strengths and challenges:

Brazil: Known for its rich natural resources and agricultural sector.

Russia: A major player in the energy sector, particularly in oil and natural gas.

India: Boasts a massive and diverse economy, with a strong services sector.

China: The world's most populous country and a global manufacturing and trading hub.

South Africa: Rich in minerals and an influential player in the African continent.

The BRICS bloc represents a significant force in the global economy and geopolitics. However,
it's essential to note that economic and political developments might have evolved since my last
update in September 2021, and you may want to verify the latest information regarding the
BRICS group.

Impacts of BRICS

1). Collectively, the BRICS countries represent a significant share of the global economy. Their
rapid economic growth and large populations have made them important players in international
trade and investment. They have also been instrumental in shaping global economic dynamics
and have increasingly sought to promote South-South economic cooperation.
2). BRICS nations have taken initiatives to create development and infrastructure financing
mechanisms. For example, the New Development Bank (NDB) was established in 2014 by
BRICS countries to provide financial support for infrastructure and sustainable development
projects in member states and other emerging economies. This initiative has provided an
alternative source of funding for major projects, reducing reliance on traditional Western-
dominated institutions.

3). BRICS has emerged as a significant geopolitical force, challenging the dominance of
traditional Western powers in global affairs. By working together and coordinating their
positions on international issues, BRICS countries have sought to amplify their collective voice
in forums such as the United Nations and G20, influencing debates on global governance and
development agendas.

4). BRICS countries have advocated for reforms in international financial institutions like the
International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. They argue that these institutions
should better reflect the changing economic landscape, giving more representation and decision-
making power to emerging economies.

5). Several BRICS countries are major producers and consumers of energy and natural resources.
Their collective influence in these sectors impacts global energy markets and resource
distribution, leading to shifts in global economic and political power dynamics.

6). BRICS has facilitated cultural exchanges, academic collaborations, and people-to-people
interactions. This has contributed to a better understanding of each other's cultures, traditions,
and languages, fostering deeper ties between the member countries.

7). BRICS has promoted South-South cooperation, encouraging dialogue, collaboration, and the
exchange of best practices between emerging economies. This form of cooperation has resulted
in various initiatives, such as joint research projects, technology transfer, and capacity-building
efforts.
United States:

The United States is a superpower with the most powerful military in the world. It maintains a
massive network of military bases and alliances, which profoundly affects the dynamics of
international security.

For instance, the United States' attack on Japan in 1945, which signaled the end of the Second
World War Untied states have been able to rule the world in a variety of ways ever since the
New Order in the international system was established. Economicall One of the biggest and most
powerful economies in the world is that of the United States. The US dollar is the main reserve
currency, and it is important for international trade, finance, and investment.

The US aggressively engages in international diplomacy and frequently takes the initiative to
solve pressing issues like terrorism, climate change, nuclear proliferation, and conflicts.

The ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine illustrates the diplomatic role that the United
States played in preventing the start of a new conflict that is likely to be resolved through a
variety of approaches.

The US is a global leader in technology, innovation, and research. Its tech companies and
institutions have a major impact on global. American culture, including music, movies, television
shows, and social media, has a significant influence worldwide, contributing to soft power and
shaping perceptions of the US.

The US has historically been a key player in influencing the policies and choices made by
international organizations like the United Nations, an entity tasked with maintaining,
establishing, and fostering peace among other state actors. The task for promoting economic and
commercial development falls to the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, and World
Trade Organization.
Global influence

Global influence refers to the impact and power that a country, organization, or individual has on
the international stage. It can be measured by various factors, such as economic strength,
political reach, military capabilities, cultural diffusion, technological advancements, and
diplomatic relationships. A nation's global influence can shape international policies, trade
agreements, alliances, and even influence the global narrative on various issues.

Global influence is not limited to military power alone; it encompasses various aspects, including
economic strength, technological advancements, cultural appeal, diplomatic skills, and soft
power. The ability to project influence on the international stage enables countries to secure
strategic alliances, negotiate favorable trade agreements, and promote their values and interests
worldwide. Having strong global influence allows a country to be heard and respected in
multilateral forums like the United Nations and have a say in shaping global norms and
standards. Countries with global influence can also play a significant role in addressing global
challenges such as climate change, terrorism, pandemics, and human rights issues.

However, global influence is not static and can shift over time due to changing geopolitical
dynamics, economic conditions, and technological advancements. Different countries and
entities may rise or decline in their global influence, shaping the dynamics of the international
system.

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

 5.1 Summary

The study investigated the dynamics of the International system : Russo-Ukraine War.

5.2 Conclusion

New Order and Dynamics of the Russo-Ukraine War in the International System" that
includes developments or changes beyond that date

Up until my last update, the Russo-Ukraine War had significant implications on the
international system. It led to increased tensions between Russia and Western countries, resulting
in economic sanctions and geopolitical realignments. The conflict raised concerns about the use
of hybrid warfare and disinformation campaigns in modern conflicts, influencing international
security strategies

The war also showcased the challenges of regional powers trying to assert their influence in
Eastern Europe and how it impacted the broader international order. International organizations
and diplomatic efforts played a role in trying to mediate the conflict and address humanitarian
challenges. The United States have Ben trying possible best to stop the war between both
countries so as to avoid Third world war. In other to prevent the change in International system
having know after each war there's always a change politically. This have been the fear of the
United state because she want to remain the only Hegemony power.

5.3 Recommendations

Geopolitical Implications of the Russo-Ukraine War on the New World Order"

 "The Role of Regional Powers in Shaping the Russo-Ukraine Conflict in the Global Context"

"The Impact of Hybrid Warfare in the Russo-Ukraine War on International Security"

"NATO's Response to the Russo-Ukraine War and its Significance in the Changing
International System"

"Economic Sanctions and their Effectiveness in Managing the Russo-Ukraine Conflict in the
International Arena". Economic Sanctions and their Effectiveness in Managing the Russo-
Ukraine Conflict in the International Arena"

"Energy Politics and the Russo-Ukraine War: Implications for the International Energy Market

Media Narratives and Information Warfare in the Context of the Russo-Ukraine Conflict and the
International Order

Humanitarian Challenges and the Russo-Ukraine War: Implications for the International
Human Rights Regime

The Role of International Organizations in Mediating the Russo-Ukraine Conflict and

Restoring Order

The Future of Eastern Europe in the Post-Russo-Ukraine War International System"

The Role of International Organizations in Mediating the Russo-Ukraine Conflict and Restoring
Order

The Future of Eastern Europe in the Post-Russo-Ukraine War International System

References

2021, from https://www.gumilev-center.ru/rus-i-varyagi-evrazijjskijj-istoricheskijjvzglyad/

Aliyev, H. (2019). The Logic of ethnic responsibility and progovernment mobilization in East

Belyayev, A. (2012). Rus and Varangians.Eurasian historical perspective.Lev Gumilev Center.

Retrieved September 17,

https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414019830730

Ukraine conflict. Comparative Political Studies, 52(8), 1200–1231.

Kaldor 2005

Kaldor 2005:491

Kaldor 2005, Cohen 1984

Kaldor 2007

Kaldor 2012

Kaldor 2012:3

Kaldor 2013

Kaldor 2013:4, Münkler 2012

Kalyvas 2001

Leander 2005, Taul bee 2002

Mello, 2010

Mello, 2010, Williams 2008

Williams 2005

Williams 2008

Williams 2008:156

Williams 2008:163

Shechan 2014

Von Clausewitz 1975