4.0 Theoretical Framework
4.1 The State as a Collective or Person
The state can be a collective or a person based on the political system and the type of leader in place. For instance, people would think of countries governed by dictators such Zimbabwe and North Korea as a person because the dictators make the utmost decisions concerning the country. According to Davis (2005), states governed by political personalities can be reduced to the ideals of those political personalities, while states that function as a collective or a group think on a group basis (p.55). Consequently, states that operate as a collective influence group think and this is the common scenario even when the leaders engage in foreign policy decision-making. This means …show more content…
The fact that some coalitions and alliances worked in the past, for instance, the alliance between the UK, USSR and US during the World War II encourage the formation newer coalitions or the continuation of the past coalitions. In the current era, the US president Barak Obama’s administration through its UN representative and Secretary of State at the NATO were able to forge an alliance that promoted democracy in Libya by implementing a no-fly zone over Libya to safeguard those who were against Gaddafi (UN, 2011). This alliance eventually contributed to his capture and death by Libya rebel groups. The appraisal theory suggests that emotions are extracted from people’s evaluation and estimations of events that cause particular outcomes (Fetzer & Lauerbach, 2007, p. 123). This may explain why some alliances have lasted for decades such as those of north American and Western European …show more content…
Humiliation is defined as “enforced lowering of a person or group, a process of subjugation that damages or strips away their pride, honor and dignity” (Lindner, 2009, p. 55). They are also meant to save face and reassure the world of its dignity. At the global political scene, this may range from verbal attack, terrorist attack or economic sanctions. Perhaps economic and other forms of sanctions have become the undisputed form of humiliating countries that do not ‘abide’ or ‘conform’ to the thoughts of other in an era where violence or war is shunned. Powerful countries use economic sanctions to manipulate less powerful countries into behaving in an expected manner. In an situation of subjection where the masses feel ashamed because they lack the resources and have no alternative to change their situation for the better, desire for revenge becomes commonplace. Retributive action targeted at a specific entity will yield the same type of response to the responsible entity. Economic sanctions as a type of retributive measure leads to this cycle. While in most cases the country being sanction will not transform their course of action because of the sanctions, it is the populations in those countries that suffer and this is normally the intention of the
4.1 The State as a Collective or Person
The state can be a collective or a person based on the political system and the type of leader in place. For instance, people would think of countries governed by dictators such Zimbabwe and North Korea as a person because the dictators make the utmost decisions concerning the country. According to Davis (2005), states governed by political personalities can be reduced to the ideals of those political personalities, while states that function as a collective or a group think on a group basis (p.55). Consequently, states that operate as a collective influence group think and this is the common scenario even when the leaders engage in foreign policy decision-making. This means …show more content…
The fact that some coalitions and alliances worked in the past, for instance, the alliance between the UK, USSR and US during the World War II encourage the formation newer coalitions or the continuation of the past coalitions. In the current era, the US president Barak Obama’s administration through its UN representative and Secretary of State at the NATO were able to forge an alliance that promoted democracy in Libya by implementing a no-fly zone over Libya to safeguard those who were against Gaddafi (UN, 2011). This alliance eventually contributed to his capture and death by Libya rebel groups. The appraisal theory suggests that emotions are extracted from people’s evaluation and estimations of events that cause particular outcomes (Fetzer & Lauerbach, 2007, p. 123). This may explain why some alliances have lasted for decades such as those of north American and Western European …show more content…
Humiliation is defined as “enforced lowering of a person or group, a process of subjugation that damages or strips away their pride, honor and dignity” (Lindner, 2009, p. 55). They are also meant to save face and reassure the world of its dignity. At the global political scene, this may range from verbal attack, terrorist attack or economic sanctions. Perhaps economic and other forms of sanctions have become the undisputed form of humiliating countries that do not ‘abide’ or ‘conform’ to the thoughts of other in an era where violence or war is shunned. Powerful countries use economic sanctions to manipulate less powerful countries into behaving in an expected manner. In an situation of subjection where the masses feel ashamed because they lack the resources and have no alternative to change their situation for the better, desire for revenge becomes commonplace. Retributive action targeted at a specific entity will yield the same type of response to the responsible entity. Economic sanctions as a type of retributive measure leads to this cycle. While in most cases the country being sanction will not transform their course of action because of the sanctions, it is the populations in those countries that suffer and this is normally the intention of the