Topics and Questions We Can Help You To Answer:

Paper Instructions:

In the answers you must demonstrate the reading of the mandatory bibliography and a adequate level of understanding of the subject (articulation of the categories and / or theoretical debates incorporated into the classes with the empirical cases worked). Extension: the answers must be developed in the maximum pages established in Each of the slogans. Times New Roman 12, spaced 1.5. Dating following a style (Chicago Manual of Style or APA). PART I: PACIFIC ASIA – Answer the following question (maximum 5 pages) 1) Lind argues that ″politics of remembrance″ are closely linked to the ″Threat perception″. To what extent does his theoretical proposal allow you to understand the political tensions generated around claims against Japan for violations of Human rights committed during the time of imperialist advancement in the region? Justify his response articulating the different controversies analyzed in class. PART II: Answer the following phrases and analyze it 1) Analyze the double question of intervention and democracy from the following reflection: “Several analysts in the United States and the region initially identified the US military deployment in Afghanistan and Iraq as the expression, in part, of an intervention humanitarian oriented to bring democracy to those countries and their neighborhood. This was part of the thesis of ″democratic peace″ in international relations. Synthetically, that thesis argues that, in relations with other states, democracies are more peaceful than non-democratic regimes. In that sense, and as a corollary of the spread of liberal democracy, global pacification would eventually be achieved. The specialists who accept this thesis and those who suggested it for the cases of Afghanistan and Iraq supported their arguments in a booklet by Inmanuel Kant of 1795: ″Towards a perpetual peace″; A concise work consisting of an introductory paragraph, six preliminary articles, three definitive articles, two supplements and two appendices. A literal interpretation of this text, fundamental for those who defend a liberal or idealist vision of world affairs, allows us to affirm that the attack on Afghanistan and the occupation of Iraq were far from being an emblematic referent of democratic peace. From the preliminary articles one can discern the spirit and scope of Kant′s thinking. In Article 3, he rejects ″offensive wars″ and points out that ″another very different thing is to defend oneself from outside attacks.″ In 4 he detects the ″danger″ of ″a treasure for war that surpasses the treasures of the other states as a whole.″ In the 5 it is taxative: “no state must interfere by force in the constitution and the government of another”; This constitutes ″a violation of the rights of a people.″ In 6 he reinforces his challenge to the ″war of extermination″ (bellum internecinum) and the ″war of punishment″ (bellum punitivum) since he is aware that both would lead to a “perpetual peace over the great graveyard of the species human. ″ The three definitive articles of “Towards perpetual peace” point to the central core of Kant′s proposal: the need for the rule of law, the eventuality of a peaceful union and the defense of a cosmopolitan right. In Article 1 Kant remarks the value of a Constitution of citizens and not of subjects where ″the consent of citizens is necessary to decide whether there should be war or not.″ Article 2 prefigures the relevance of achieving a ″federation of peace″ (foedus pacificum); a ″federation that must be extended gradually to all states, thus leading to perpetual peace.″ It is clear, however, that Kant understands that foedus is achieved and consolidated through adhesion and not of the imposition. In addition, he warns, “if the right of people is assumed and understood as a right for war ... (then) men who think so ... find perpetual peace in the wide grave that hides all the horrors of violence and its causes”. On the other hand, article 3 recalls that unfortunately there are ″powers that want to do many things from their piety and intend to be considered as elected within orthodoxy, while drinking injustice as if it were water.″ Article 3 rejects the “offensive wars” and points out that “another very different thing is to defend oneself from outside attacks. ” In 4 he detects the ″danger″ of ″a treasure for war that surpasses the treasures of the other states together”. In 5 it is taxative: “no state it must interfere by force in the constitution and the government of another”; this constitutes “a violation of the rights of a people”. In 6 he reinforces his challenge to the “war of extermination” (bellum internecinum) and the “war of punishment” (bellum punitivum) since he is aware that both would lead to a “perpetual peace over the great graveyard of the species human. ″ The three definitive articles of “Towards perpetual peace” point to the central core of Kant′s proposal: the need for the rule of law, the eventuality of a union peaceful and the defense of a cosmopolitan right. In Article 1 Kant highlights the value of a Constitution of citizens and not of subjects where “the consent of the citizens to decide whether there should be war or not.” Article 2 prefigures the relevance of achieve a ″federation of peace″ (foedus pacificum); a “federation that must be extended gradually to all states, thus leading to perpetual peace. ″ It is evident without However, that Kant understands that foedus is achieved and consolidated through accession and not of the imposition. In addition, he warns, “if the right of people is assumed and understood as a right to war ... (then) men who think so ... find perpetual peace in the wide grave that hides all the horrors of violence and its causes”. For another On the other hand, article 3 reminds that unfortunately there are “powers that many people want to do things from their piety and pretend to be chosen as orthodoxy, while they drink injustice as if it were water.”