1.

The nature of world order The meaning of world order The need for world order

The meaning of world order World order is described as the balance of power among the nations of the world. This informs the ways these nations regulate and order their interactions with each other. World order is reshaped by new, often traumatic forces that realign, for better or worse, the nature and spirit of international relations. Through international legal agreements and instruments, the balance of power is framed and protects a stable and just world order with a set of positive, responsible and mutually-agreed ideals. The need for world order The need for world order is important as without world order, there will be opportunities for greater social and political issues such as: International anarchy, global destruction, global issues not being adequately addressed and the prevention of economic development and globalization. If the power imbalances are too great, conflict can arise and challenge international and domestic situations. Talk about globalization and interdependence

The development of world order over time

1990s end of the Cold War the term the New World Order was first used. US President George Bush (senior) and former USSR President Mikhail Gorbachev used it to define the emerging spirit of cooperation between the super powers With it was the hope that a new era in which states would act collectively to address global problems that were beyond the capability of anyone to solve individually. After WW1 there was a shift towards more peaceful means of dispute resolution throughout the century, and several international agreements have been created The Hague Convention - 1899 and 1907. Stated that nations should use mediation as a means of settling disputes, and proposed ways of reaching a real and durable peace for all people. Article 8, 11, 12 were put into action. The UN charter was agreed to in 1945. Contains two peace principles Article 2 (3)

 The nature of conflict: inter-state and intrastate

all members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means.., Article 2 (4) All members shall refrain in their international relations from threat or use of force. Interstate Conflict between countries Examples Conflict Date Adversaries Course World War I 1914-1918 Germany/AustriaEuropean Hungary v. imperial rivalries Britain/France/Russia and nationalism World War II 1939-1945 Germany/Italy/Japan German and v. Britain/USA/USSR Japanese aggression in the context of the unresolved problems of WWI World War I, World War II, Gulf war Intrastate Conflict within a country, also known as a civil war

Access to resources as a source of conflict 2. Responses to world order the roles of: - The nation state and state sovereignty - the United Nations - international instruments

- courts and tribunals - intergovernmental organisations - non-governmental organisations - Australias federal government - The media working towards world order Political negotiation, persuasion and the use of force 3. Contemporary issues concerning world order Issues that must be studied: The principle of responsibility to protect

Developed by the UN, following up to 10 years of the Rwandan genocide. It states that in instances of humanitarian atrocities, such as genocide, the world should have the responsibility to protect innocent civilians at risk. Syria: Obama has stated that the time has come for intervention in Syria (early September 2013) and that the UN has an incapacity to act. He wishes to use an international coalition to achieve this intervention however, no states have pledged support yet. The UK has however voted against participating. At the current time, Obama has yet to specify what type of intervention he has planned but stated it would differ from intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan in that no soldiers will be deployed. The UN and many international nations are opposed to this proposed intervention. The UN is the body entrusted by international law with the responsibility to protect and the US intervention of Syria, if it goes ahead, will be in clear violation of international law. Obama is relying on a passionate argument regarding the Assad regimes use of chemical weapons, which killed almost 1500 people in August 2013 as the justification for the need to intervene. At the current time, the UN has yet to formalize or conclude their investigation into the attack. Due to this, the UN is hesitant to respond until such time as more evidence is made clear. This issue

shows the difficulties of the world need for peace and security and to protect innocent people when in conflict with the notion of state sovereignty. Any intervention is preferred by the international community to be legally approached through the mechanisms of the UN, however, countries like the US find that it is often too slow in responding to such threats to world peace and as such want more immediate action. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/30/kerry-says-clear-evidencechemical-weapons-used-in-syria-as-intelligence/ In response to the chemical weapons attack in Damascus, President Assad has challenged the west to come up with evidence of his forces involvement in the deaths of 1400-1500 people. On Monday the 2nd of September, Assad has called on UN Secretary General Ban-Ki Moon to prevent any acts of aggression against Syria by other nations and has stated that international legitimacy should be enforced to allow Syria to respond to its conflict on its own terms. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/02/assad-challenges-westchemical-weapons-evidence

Regional and global situations that threaten peace and security The success of global cooperation in achieving world order Rules regarding the conduct of hostilities