[i]Could someone comment on this essay and point out any grammatical error or awkward expressions?
I'm still working on the conclusion of this essay. Any suggestions on how to end this essay are welcomed=).
Briefly discuss a current global issue, indicating why you consider it important and what you suggest should be done to deal with it.
After the Cold War, non-traditional security threats, as opposed to traditional security threats, have taken on unprecedented importance. Traditional security threats refer to high security threats such as those pertaining to national security, territorial conflict, and sovereignty. These threats are existential. Non-traditional security (NTS) threats surpass conventional notions of security, which are usually confined by the country's boundary. NTS threats, such as economic turmoil, terrorism, Internet hacking, environmental degradation, population explosion, drug trafficking, trans-national organized crime, and HIV/AIDS, usually do not involve military clashes, but are highly global and transnational. The definition is, of course, disputable. For example, the US considers terrorism and "rogue states" as one piece and sees them as an extension of traditional security threats. Besides, scholars have not reached a consensus as to whether non-traditional security is a broader concept that includes traditional security, or a separate idea that excludes traditional security. Albeit sometimes varied classifications, the characteristics of NTS threats are in fact clear.
Firstly, the sources and subjects of traditional security threats are easier to identify; they usually come from the clash of interests among nation states and the subjects of traditional security threats are therefore the governments. On the other hand, the sources and subjects of NTS are more variegated. They usually result from the actions of individuals and non-governmental organizations rather than from the will of the state. In fact, most of the time, they are against the will of the state and the order of the law. This characteristic of NTS threats determines that despite the atypicality of the security threats, nations have good objective bases for cooperation. Secondly, NTS threats have a stronger transnational and global nature. As NTS is often directly related to individuals and communities, NTS threats spread with the movement of those, transcending national, geographic and cultural boundaries. One country's problem can soon escalate to become a global issue. This makes NTS threats hard to be dealt with. Furthermore, non-traditional security problems are deeply rooted in the economy, society and culture of the countries and therefore the specific social context often complicates the security issue.
In the past, non-traditional security threats did not receive much attention. After the Cold War, especially after 9/11, a sense of urgency for strengthening non-traditional security emerged, when the old bipolar world system collapsed and the world had walked out of the shadow of world wars. Although military crossfire, territorial conflict, and religious wars still exist in the world at large, it is unlikely that large-scale wars will breakout in the near future. Hence, conventional problems now pose a lesser threat to security. On the other hand, the increasingly hastening pace of globalization starts to give prominence to non-traditional security threats, adding complexity to world stability. 9/11 attacks marked a paradigm shift in terrorism. Fluctuating oil price and the economic crisis the world is experiencing now have elevated economic crisis to a renewed level of importance. Those are just two examples of the many non-traditional security threats that recently emerged.
Given the variegated nature of non-traditional threats to security, it's hard to propose specific solutions. The US approach of immediate military action is effective, but this approach makes it difficult for the US to garner international support as the approach is US-centric. The European approach of integrated cultural, economic, social and legal policies based on EU integration is somewhat too idealistic. Its short-term effect is limited. The Asia-Pacific approach of depending on negotiations lacks a substantial mechanism and is, too, painfully slow. In my opinion, international cooperation leveraged on multi-lateral diplomacy and international organizations is the way out. However, among diplomacy, military actions and other approaches, none should monopolize conflict resolution. In addition, the legal tools can be used more extensively.
I'm still working on the conclusion of this essay. Any suggestions on how to end this essay are welcomed=).
Briefly discuss a current global issue, indicating why you consider it important and what you suggest should be done to deal with it.
After the Cold War, non-traditional security threats, as opposed to traditional security threats, have taken on unprecedented importance. Traditional security threats refer to high security threats such as those pertaining to national security, territorial conflict, and sovereignty. These threats are existential. Non-traditional security (NTS) threats surpass conventional notions of security, which are usually confined by the country's boundary. NTS threats, such as economic turmoil, terrorism, Internet hacking, environmental degradation, population explosion, drug trafficking, trans-national organized crime, and HIV/AIDS, usually do not involve military clashes, but are highly global and transnational. The definition is, of course, disputable. For example, the US considers terrorism and "rogue states" as one piece and sees them as an extension of traditional security threats. Besides, scholars have not reached a consensus as to whether non-traditional security is a broader concept that includes traditional security, or a separate idea that excludes traditional security. Albeit sometimes varied classifications, the characteristics of NTS threats are in fact clear.
Firstly, the sources and subjects of traditional security threats are easier to identify; they usually come from the clash of interests among nation states and the subjects of traditional security threats are therefore the governments. On the other hand, the sources and subjects of NTS are more variegated. They usually result from the actions of individuals and non-governmental organizations rather than from the will of the state. In fact, most of the time, they are against the will of the state and the order of the law. This characteristic of NTS threats determines that despite the atypicality of the security threats, nations have good objective bases for cooperation. Secondly, NTS threats have a stronger transnational and global nature. As NTS is often directly related to individuals and communities, NTS threats spread with the movement of those, transcending national, geographic and cultural boundaries. One country's problem can soon escalate to become a global issue. This makes NTS threats hard to be dealt with. Furthermore, non-traditional security problems are deeply rooted in the economy, society and culture of the countries and therefore the specific social context often complicates the security issue.
In the past, non-traditional security threats did not receive much attention. After the Cold War, especially after 9/11, a sense of urgency for strengthening non-traditional security emerged, when the old bipolar world system collapsed and the world had walked out of the shadow of world wars. Although military crossfire, territorial conflict, and religious wars still exist in the world at large, it is unlikely that large-scale wars will breakout in the near future. Hence, conventional problems now pose a lesser threat to security. On the other hand, the increasingly hastening pace of globalization starts to give prominence to non-traditional security threats, adding complexity to world stability. 9/11 attacks marked a paradigm shift in terrorism. Fluctuating oil price and the economic crisis the world is experiencing now have elevated economic crisis to a renewed level of importance. Those are just two examples of the many non-traditional security threats that recently emerged.
Given the variegated nature of non-traditional threats to security, it's hard to propose specific solutions. The US approach of immediate military action is effective, but this approach makes it difficult for the US to garner international support as the approach is US-centric. The European approach of integrated cultural, economic, social and legal policies based on EU integration is somewhat too idealistic. Its short-term effect is limited. The Asia-Pacific approach of depending on negotiations lacks a substantial mechanism and is, too, painfully slow. In my opinion, international cooperation leveraged on multi-lateral diplomacy and international organizations is the way out. However, among diplomacy, military actions and other approaches, none should monopolize conflict resolution. In addition, the legal tools can be used more extensively.
Do You Need