No description available.

No description available.

Denna uppsats syftar till att vara ett bidrag till den samtida debatten kring teorin om rättfärdiga krig. I uppsatsen utmanas rådande föreställningar om rättfärdiga krig, i synnerhet idén om att endast suveräna stater utgör legitima auktoriteter. Uppsatsen använder Hizbollah som fallstudie och författaren argumenterar för att rörelsens enorma popularitet och de facto kontroll över stora områden gjort Hizbollah till en legitim härskare. Därmed bör Hizbollah, trots att rörelsen är en icke-statlig aktör i Libanon, betraktas som en legitim auktoritet som kan utkämpa rättfärdiga krig. / This essay aims to be a contribution to the contemporary debate on the “Just War Theory” in a way that challenges traditional concepts of the theory, especially the idea that only sovereign states constitutes legitimate authorities. Using Hezbollah as a case study, the author argues that the organization’s enormous popularity and de facto control over considerable parts of Lebanon makes Hezbollah a legitimate ruler of its territory. Consequently Hezbollah, despite being a non-state actor, should be regarded as a legitimate authority and thus capable of fighting just wars.

This project examines the scientific developments, strategic considerations, and political circumstances that led to the rise and fall of herbicidal warfare in Vietnam. The historical narrative draws on a wide range of primary and secondary source literature on the Vietnam War and the Cold War, the history of science, and American and international history of the 1960s and 1970s. The author conducted archival research in the United States in a variety government and non-government research facilities and toured formerly sprayed areas in Vietnam. This project utilizes oral history interviews of American and Vietnamese scientists who were involved in some aspect of the Agent Orange controversy. The thesis explains why American scientists were able to force an end to the herbicide program in 1971 and ensure that the United States would not engage in herbicidal warfare in the future. This political success can be understood only in the context of two major political transformations in the Vietnam Era: the collapse of Cold War containment as a salient model of American foreign policy, and the development of globally-oriented environmental politics and security regimes. The movement to end herbicidal warfare helped shift the meaning of security away from the Cold War toward transnational efforts to combat environmental problems that threaten all of the world's people. / History

No / As the ‘War on Terror’ evolves into the ‘Long War’ against Islamo-fascism, it demands an enduring commitment to ensuring the security of the United States and its allies. This policy is based on the requirement to maintain control in a fractured and unpredictable global environment, while paying little attention to the underlying issues that lead to insecurity. It is an approach that is manifestly failing, as the continuing problems in Afghanistan and Iraq demonstrate. Moreover, ‘control’ implies the maintenance of a global order that focuses on power remaining in the hands of a transnational elite community, principally focused on North America and Western Europe, but extending worldwide. This elite largely ignores socio-economic divisions and environmental constraints, and sees continuing stability as being best achieved by the maintenance of the status quo, using force when necessary. This collection of essays by Professor Paul Rogers argues that this post-Cold War security paradigm is fundamentally misguided and unsustainable. It concludes with two new essays on the need for a new conception of global security rooted in justice and emancipation. Global Security and the War on Terror will be essential reading for students and scholars of security studies, the Cold War, international relations and development studies.

No

"Unforgetting the Dakota 38" projects a nuanced light onto the history and memory of the mass hanging of thirty-eight Dakota men on December 26, 1862 following the U.S.-Dakota War in Southcentral Minnesota. This thesis investigates the competing narratives between Santee Dakota peoples (a mixture of Wahpeton and Mdewakanton Dakota) and white Minnesotan citizens in Mankato, Minnesota—the town of the hanging—between 1862 and 2012. By using settler colonialism as an analytical framework, I argue that the erasing of Dakotas by white historical memory has actively and routinely removed Dakotas from the mainstream historical narrative following the U.S.-Dakota War through today. This episodic history examines three phases of remembrance in which the rival interpretations of 1862 took different forms, and although the Dakota-centered interpretations were always present in some way, they became more visible to the non-Dakota society over time. Adopting a thematic approach, this thesis covers events that overlap in time, yet provide useful insights into the shaping and reshaping of memory that surrounds the mass hanging. White Minnesotans routinely wrote Dakota peoples out of their own history, a key element of settler colonial policies that set out to eradicate Indigenous peoples from the Minnesota landscape and replace them with white settlers. While this thesis demonstrates how white memories form, it also focuses on Dakota responses to the structures associated with settler colonialism. In so doing, this thesis argues that Dakota peoples actively participated in the memory-making process in Mankato between 1862 and 2012, even though most historical scholarship considered Mankato devoid of Dakota peoples and an Indigenous history. / Master of Arts / The U.S.-Dakota War wracked the Minnesota River Valley region of Southcentral Minnesota. Following a bloody and destructive six weeks in late-Summer 1862, President Abraham Lincoln ordered the mass execution of thirty-eight Mdewakanton Dakota men as punishment for their participation. This controversial moment in American history produced unique and divergent memories of the Dakota War, the hanging, and the Mdewakanton Dakota place in white American society. This thesis examines the memories that formed between 1862 and 2012, highlighting Dakota perspective and memories to shed new light on the history of this deeply contested event. By doing so, we gain new understandings of Mankato, the U.S.-Dakota War, and the mass hanging, but also a realization that Dakota peoples were always active in the memory-making process even though many have considered their participation nonexistent.

This thesis is a study of war as a factor in Ernerst Hemingway's novels and stories.

The domestic and geopolitical disaster of the Vietnam War, and the process that took the United States into such a large-scale and protracted conflict, led Congress to reinforce its checks on executive war powers. The resulting War Powers Resolution (WPR) sought to inject Congress back into the decision-making process, yet no President has ever acknowledged its constitutionality. The initial debates around the WPR revealed four major lines of argument on the balance of war powers; three of those continued to be made over the next 40 years, as Presidents from both political parties deployed U.S. forces abroad, often without Congressional authorization. This study analyzed the prevalence and distribution of those lines of argument in the U.S. Senate over the Republican Administration of President George W. Bush and the Democratic Administration of President Barack Obama. Both administrations were involved in multiple deployments of U.S. forces abroad, and experienced opposition from both parties. The study found that Democrats displayed consistency across both administrations, indicating a preference for institutional loyalty in supporting compliance with the WPR, whereas Republicans tended to support the status quo. In addition, the study found that Senators from both parties acknowledged the rapidly changing nature of warfare as new technologies mostly remove U.S. armed forces from harm's way even as they conduct lethal strikes. What effect this has on Congress's ability and willingness to further check executive war powers remains to be seen, but it is clear that the debate is far from over. / Master of Arts / The Vietnam War led Congress to reinforce its checks on executive war powers. The resulting War Powers Resolution (WPR) sought to inject Congress back into the decision-making process. The initial debates around the WPR revealed four major lines of argument on the balance of war powers; three of those continued to be made over the next 40 years. This study looked at those three lines of argument in the U.S. Senate over the Republican Administration of President George W. Bush and the Democratic Administration of President Barack Obama. The study found that Democrats consistently took a position that defended the powers of the Congress, whereas Republicans tended to support a status quo that deferred to the power of the President. In addition, the study found that Senators from both parties acknowledged the rapidly changing nature of warfare. What effect this has on Congress’s ability and willingness to further check executive war powers remains to be seen, but it is clear that the debate is far from over.

Master of Arts / Department of History / Sue Zschoche / As the world enters the centennial of World War I, interest in this war is reviving. Books, television shows, and movies are bringing the war into popular culture. Now that all the participants of the war have passed away a change is occurring in in American memory. The transition from living to non-living memory is clearly visible in museums, one of the main ways history is communicated to the public. Four museums are studied in this paper. Two exhibits built in the 1990s are in the 1st Infantry Division Museum at Fort Riley, Kansas, and the Chemical Corps Museum in Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. The other two exhibits are newer and are the National World War I Museum in Kansas City, Missouri and the Cantigny 1st Infantry Division Museum in Wheaton, Illinois. Findings reveal that exhibits become more inclusive over time to civilian bodies, wounded bodies, and the specific image of “Americans killing Germans bodies.” However, even though there is change some things are turning into myths. The icon of the American soldier as a healthy and strong man willing to sacrifice his life for the country is still a major theme throughout all the exhibits. Finally, there are several myths that America has adopted from its allies. The icons of the bandages over the eyes from the chemical attacks and the horrors of the trenches are borrowed, to a certain extent, from America’s allies. The Americans were only in the war for a limited time and borrowed cultural memories to supplement their own. The examination of the four museums is important because this transition will happen again and soon. Museums must be conscious of the changes occurring during this transition in order to confront the challenges.