Category: Political Science

Two editorials by The New York Times discuss the talks that the Obama administration has planned with Iran; “Mr. Obama and Iran” does not explain thoroughly how Washington should interfere but in the other article “Talk to Iran. Then What”, it states that there is all this talk about having ’talks’ with Iran but nothing specific has been planned and imposes the question of how much should we compromise to come to an agreement. In the editorial titled “Mr. Obama and Iran”, the editor writes that former president Bush failed policies in Iran has led them very close to mastering the skills needed to build a nuclear weapon- the skill of mastering nuclear fuel production. The writer backs up his claim by stating that Iran’s scientist have already advanced by putting a satellite in orbit which is a huge sign that their missile program is moving forward. His other claim is that there has to be a mixture of incentives and sanctions to take away Iran’s nuclear ambitions. He goes on to say that the Bush administration never made any attempts to offer the Iranian government any incentives. However, he gives no evidence to support that for sure that Bush never made any attempts.

IntroductionThere is a tendency for research on processes of regional economic integration to be built on national-based paradigms and levels of analysis. Even those approaches that move away from intergovernmental processes of state-led regionalism and instead emphasise non-state directed regionalisation are often concerned with integration between two or more national economies. But, in many cases, real integration is taking place below the national scale. This is reflected in the growing number of formal agreements between subnational political administrations, and also by the uneven geographic spread of international economic relations in many states.

What are the advantages and disadvantages in using a comparative approach to politics?

Contemporary politics is being shaped and transformed right before our eyes. The way citizens interact with the state, its very definition, the source of its power and scope of its authority is being constantly challenged (Gieben, Lewis, 2005, p. 65). The growing influence of the media, changing social values, unbelievable technological advancements and far-reaching impacts of globalisation are but a few factors political writers cite as the driving force behind this transformation. But different countries react to change differently. Not in the least because no two are ruled in exactly the same way. Comparative politics seeks to understand the origins of the changes and compare the range of political responses in order to begin to offer explanations for why certain developments took place and to make a prediction of the future development trajectory. In this essay I will assess the merits and problems of the comparative study of politics to help me illustrate my argument that comparative approach can be a very helpful tool as long as it used to address the right question and the writer realises its limitations and potential pitfalls.

Every state wants to be sovereign and self regulating like America, but today invisibly and imperceptibly America is looking no more sovereign , because of too much influence and interference of Israeli lobby in US. As two conservative American political scientists John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt writing an article in 2006 about the influence of Israel lobby in American politics, say and warn that “its decisive role in fomenting the Iraq war is now being repeated with the threat of action against Iran”. In 2006 former UN weapons inspector in Iraq “Scott Ritter” claimed that certain Israelis and pro-Israel elements in the United States has been trying to push the Bush Administration into war with Iran. Recently a leading American scientist Stewart Nozette has been arrested and charged with espionage .He had been working in Top Secret clearance which included nuclear weapon design information at the Department of Energy. The US Justice Department said that he had been tried to pass on top secret information to an Israeli Intelligence Officer. As in past Lawrence Franklin espionage scandal which is also known as the AIPAC espionage scandal which claims that information regarding United States policy towards Iran was passed to Israel through staff members associated with American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) which directly lobbies the legislative branch of the US Government. Besides the fact that two former AIPAC employees has also been accused but US officials have been constantly stressing that Israeli government has not been involved in it. While as a matter of fact the US government’s current operating budget is dependent on foreign financing and money creation.

Carl von Clausewitz: War and the Role of Military Philosophy

Introduction:
Carl von Clausewitz (1780-1831) is considered to be the father of war. His works can be considered as the corner stone for contemporary military theory. In this paper a biography is presented at first for a better understanding of his background and afterwards his basic ideas presented in his major work “On War” are presented. The significance and influence of these ideas nowadays is also examined under the scope of their presence in the military realm.