The introduction of “Rebels without Borders” starts with a quote from Max Weber, “The state is a human community that claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of force within a given territory” It goes without saying that the rebel organizations - a human community - are not based on this principle.
I want to emphasize that this critical response is based on the book's introduction, my critical arguments may be specified later in the same book, but, I will focus on talking about the topics spoken in the introduction.
The same title, "Rebels without Borders" synthesizes the most defining point to be treated. The introduction speaks of both the advantages and the problems caused by transnational rebel groups that are based outside the state …show more content…
It cannot be overlooked that many of these groups are extremely violent, the Popular Front for Recovery have been the protagonists of attacks on civilians and soldiers in the Central African Republic and in Chad. from my perspective it would have been more appropriate, in the introduction, to talk about who the Rebels are, of course there are too many to point to all, but at least give a general idea based on the concept of "rebel” meaning “opposing or taking arms against a government or ruler” according to the Merriam Webster Dictionary. The introduction is based more on the meaning of transnational.
In the introduction only, at least 6 different rebel groups are mentioned, of which only vague examples are given of who they are and against whom they fight, there is no historical context of what they are fighting for and what do they wish to eventually achieve.
This introduction could have been more summarized, the author was repetitive instead of touching other introductory points, as I mentioned, to the concept of rebel and a bit of international historical context of how rebellion has affected the current thinking of this
I want to emphasize that this critical response is based on the book's introduction, my critical arguments may be specified later in the same book, but, I will focus on talking about the topics spoken in the introduction.
The same title, "Rebels without Borders" synthesizes the most defining point to be treated. The introduction speaks of both the advantages and the problems caused by transnational rebel groups that are based outside the state …show more content…
It cannot be overlooked that many of these groups are extremely violent, the Popular Front for Recovery have been the protagonists of attacks on civilians and soldiers in the Central African Republic and in Chad. from my perspective it would have been more appropriate, in the introduction, to talk about who the Rebels are, of course there are too many to point to all, but at least give a general idea based on the concept of "rebel” meaning “opposing or taking arms against a government or ruler” according to the Merriam Webster Dictionary. The introduction is based more on the meaning of transnational.
In the introduction only, at least 6 different rebel groups are mentioned, of which only vague examples are given of who they are and against whom they fight, there is no historical context of what they are fighting for and what do they wish to eventually achieve.
This introduction could have been more summarized, the author was repetitive instead of touching other introductory points, as I mentioned, to the concept of rebel and a bit of international historical context of how rebellion has affected the current thinking of this