It can be argued that while classical inter-state wars tend to decrease in the post-Cold War era, there are many other serious threats to international peace which seem to be beyond the control of the nation-states. These include ethnic conflicts, religious militancy, terrorism, North-South conflict, and unfair economic competition. Therefore, the Future of the world is stressed to depend on whether major powers are able to overcome and cope up with these threats in a cooperative manner.
- Ethnic Conflicts
Up to the end of the Cold War, it was widely believed that ethnicity and nationalism were antiquated ideas that primarily provided solutions to issues. The Balkans as well as Central Asia, Africa, and many other regions of the globe have lately seen the resurgence of a new cycle of ethno-political movements. Conflicts for political supremacy, succession, or self-determination are often fueled by ethnicity. Over 90% of the major armed conflicts that have been documented in recent years across the globe are intra-national in nature. Intra-state disputes may first seem to be local, but because of globalization and numerous international support, they may swiftly take on an international dimension. Such disputes must be settled, or else world peace will be jeopardized.
- Religious Militancy
Since the end of the Cold War, UN peacekeeping missions have changed to include a variety of peace-building initiatives. One might consider the governments of nations like Iran and Sudan as well as the Islamic groups that are active across the Middle East and beyond that often use language that is inflammatory on the basis of culture. A sense of religious militancy, often referred to as “religious fundamentalism,” is prevalent in many of these areas.
Religious extremism serves as the intellectual foundation for some of the most deadly terrorist groups in existence today. Most members of these groups firmly think that using violence openly in the name of religion is required. This idea eliminates any sense of guilt or dread, which makes killing and passing away much easier as a result. Following the conclusion of the Cold War, terrorism in particular became a significant issue.
The word “terrorism” has been used to refer to a method, a response to oppression, and a criminal offence. A terrorist’s disregard for human life is evident in the eyes of the victim of a terrorist attack. Though it is not unique to this time period, terrorism has grown to be a significant issue in the post-Cold War era.
Terrorists employ violent means to draw attention to their cause by upsetting the community, the authorities, and the wider world. The success of a terrorist attack depends less on the act itself than on how the public or the government responds to it. It is very difficult to combat terrorism since terrorists do not fight on defined front lines and do not adhere to the conventions of war.
- North-South Conflict.
North-South economic antagonism returned throughout the post-Cold War era. At the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in the 1970s, developing nations pushed for a New International Economic Order (NIEO). This goal originated in the 1960s neo-Marxist political economics theory. The NIEO agenda at the UN had failed by the 1980s as a result of differences in developing nation interests.
Developing Countries refused to reduce their agricultural and industry tariffs, while the G-21 rejected agricultural subsidies in developed nations. Many officials commented in Cancun thirty years later that the harsh rhetoric used by major developing nations was strikingly reminiscent of the UNCTAD experience in the 1970s. Neo-colonialism is the term used nowadays to describe the situation of developing countries’ economic dependency on multinational corporations from industrialized nations. Only a small number of nations have been able to escape the global system’s stagnant development patterns. We might anticipate a weak international order to the degree that continued conflict between the North and South is facilitated by poverty and underdevelopment. Particularly the Eurasia’s newly independent states lie at the center of power struggles.
For major countries in general, and the United States in particular, controlling the South Caucasus constitutes a key regional interest for a number of reasons. These include limiting Russian development, containing Iran, managing the region’s natural riches, ensuring the safe delivery of those resources to the world market, and acquiring bases for the “war against terrorism.”
Understanding the underlying causes of intra-state disputes and putting the right measures for putting an end to violence and promoting peace into practice are both necessary for effective management of these conflicts. By far, the international community has had some success sending peacekeeping troops into perilous domestic conflicts. Conflicts are not immediately resolved by peacekeeping troops. They are not there for that, all that they can do is controlling the situation until parties reach a settlement.