Amalgamation of Disparities Ethnicities, Threatened Unity of Third World Countries

Aside the Middle East where countries were delineated and created by the British through Gertrude Bell, most other countries were organically formed. In creating a country, the building blocks are the most important ingredients. 
In the construction of a building, one commences by building a foundation, then creating the form works in the form of blocks and pillars. The construction is made solid by roofing the building. Then aesthetics are added when the building is plastered, doors installed, windows and all others. The process is from Bottom to the Top.
When an Oak Tree, grows, it starts as an acorn; a seed...the seed on being watered, swells the cells within it, which burst then create some roots...the roots become firm, holding the plant before it sprouts and creates the shoot. The plant germinates and grows into a huge formidable tree. The Process is from Bottom to the Top.
When mountains are formed, volcanoes erupt and shoot lava upwards. The lava cools and forms the hard, rocky Mountains we see around us. The process is from Bottom to the Top.
When you were born, you started as an helpless little thing of barely 1foot in length. You were nurtured until you grew to this formidable size. You didn't grow downwards but..upwards...the process is from Bottom to the Top.
When the United States, Canada, Mexico and several other countries were formed, the towns and cities evolved into states and regions till they agreed to form countries.
All the natural processes took place from Bottom to the Top.

Nigeria was created artificially no doubt. But in trying to form a country, we are being compelled by a Cabal to build the country from the Top to the Bottom. This is against the Law of Natura Creation. We have broken when cardinal Law of Nature and ought not be surprised that things ain't working! That's why we grow downwards and keep falling behind in all facets of human development! That's the consequence of our folly...
You do NOT build a country from the Top to the Bottom! You do not  neglect the building blocks of your home and hope the house would stand! The building blocks and pillars are the most important part of the building! You do not destroy the villages, towns, cities and ethnic nationalities the right to have a say in their existence and hope to build a country; you have succeeded in creating a War Zone...a country in a permanent state of barely Controlled Chaos!
You have subdued us and have attempted to create something by destroying the Laws of Nature!
This house shall not stand! We reject the criminal Constitution! We must negotiate our existence and write our Constitution! Your Evil Empire shall collapse under the weight of its own internal contradictions!
References 
Baron Roy

Critics why Democracy is Best or Not best Form of Government

Democracy comes from a Greek word ‘Demokratia’. In Greek ‘demos’ means people and ‘kratia’ means rule. So, democracy literally means people’s rule. Abraham Lincoln opined that “Democracy is the government of the people, by the people and for the people”.
democracy is arguably the best form of government in terms of guaranteeing the rights and freedoms of the majority. In the older democracies, America, France and Britain, the ballot box freed society from the power of the monarchy and aristocracy, in ‘rights-setting  acts of epochal importance.
Democracy as widely believed is the best form of government around the globe. This accounts to why its popularity has continued to permeate all corners of the world. Eventhrough some analysts have opined that the worst form of democracy is better than the best form of military rule. It's a form of government on which everyone is treated equally and has equal rights. And because were having that kind of government ,we are free to express our ideas ,opinions, suggestions or comments to anyone or somebody.
According to Plato had his own classification: Monarchy, Aristocracy, Timocracy, Oligarchy, Democracy, Anarchy, and Tyranny, and in his "Republic", he had essentially endorsed Aristocracy as the best and ideal form
The Plato quotation above instigate to questioned if the democracy is really the best for government, and lead to ask the following questions, 
=>Do we  think because of that having a democracy, we can do what we want?
=>Do we also think that having that kind of government makes us to freely communicate with others?
=> Stabilize the relationship towards each other?
=> How can we have a peaceful country when we- people are easy to judge and express those words without noticing that some people are too sensitive?
=> Why don't we understand some people and respect them before saying or uttere some words to them? 
=>Why don't we apply the concept of ethics of communicat in our daily life?

Aristotle gives account lapses evolve in the democratic world process because it don't really represent the interests of the minority. 
To him Aristotle Monarchy always prevarted to Tyranny 
Also Aristocracy always prevarted to   Oligarchy 
Finally Rule of all.....: Politeia (Polity) always prevarted to Democracy
Thus Aristotle affirmed that polity is more preferable to democracy
Let's look at some modern examples...

PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEMS feature a combination of 3 systems:

MONARCHY - the single Executive President, assisted by his cabinet who do as he says

ARISTOCRACY - the Congress (House + Senate)

DEMOCRACY - the people who vote for Congress and the people who vote for the Electors in the Electoral College who will vote for President

But in the Presidential Form of Government, there too much focus on the MONARCHY, because once elected, the Executive essentially has free reign on executive matters, pertaining to the implementation of policies. The President is not accountable to the Legislature.
For instance, scholar has opined that democracy is really evil and that the Philippines should become a Communist state? Not really, I don't support a despotic reign either. The problem of the Philippines is not democracy but the kind of democracy that ruins the country. Democracy is defined as a government by the people, for the people and of the people. In the Philippines, the problem is that majority of the people are stupid people who think they are smart and the smart ones who are frequently put down by the stupid people. I have experienced it that whenever I try to post an intellectual post and quote intellectual people, they say I am stupid and that the people I quote are stupid. It's incredibly funny on how people who call me stupid may turn out to be high school dropouts and losers in life.
In conclusion, eventhough democracy have gained relevance in the contemporary world, there are a number of issues that the system of government failed to address, issue such as elections malpractice, corruption, fear of minority, in equal distribution of resources, duplicate of power and waste of nations resources. but in our own perspective this system remain very effective in preventing outbreak of world in the international community. 

International Sanction: Devices to checkmate Aggressive Tension of Worldwide.

Since the end of the Cold War, multilateral sanctions have been honed and refined and have evolved in important ways. The number of cases, types of targets and purposes have expanded. Beginning in 1992, sanctions have moved gradually away from the comprehensive  model, often including a general trade embargo, and their associated humanitarian impact, toward targeting leaders and decision-makers responsible for defying international norms. Security Council sanctions have been in the spotlight lately with respect to Al Qaida-Taliban, Côte d'Ivoire, and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), Iran, and Libya, with significant expansion  of traditional targeted sanctions in some cases. These cases highlight both the increasing utility of the tool and perennial questions about the future of Security Council sanctions in the face of the ever-changing geopolitical landscape, the complexities and resilience of some cur rent targets, pervasive misperceptions, and other challenges to sanctions' legitimacy, credibility, and effectiveness.

Models of international Sanction Davices

Trade/Investment Restrictions: This category may encompass restrictions on exports of certain types  of services or technology, investment in particular  sectors and imports of certain items. Generally the restrictions are more limited than those in the “Trade  Restrictions” category in the U.S. checklist. 

3 Asset Freeze/Travel Restrictions: The EU typically imposes a freeze of assets or restrictions on travel (admission) to the EU only with respect to specified  individuals or entities. For example, in the case of  Moldova, the sanctions in this category are applied  only to persons responsible for the campaign against  Latinscript schools in the Transnistrian region and are valid until September 30, 2014. 

4 Arms and Related Materiel Embargo: The EU often imposes restrictions in this category in accordance with U.N. Security Council Resolutions, as is the case with respect to Sudan. 

Comprehensive Sanctions: These countries are subject to far-reaching economic sanctions implemented by the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”). The restrictions potentially affect nearly all dealings by U.S. persons in property of the listed countries,

Financial Sanctions: U.S. persons may not conduct financial transactions with these countries and their entities. All of these restrictions are implemented by OFAC. 

 Specially Designated Nationals (Individuals and Organizations): U.S. persons are restricted in their ability to engage in transactions with specially designated nationals, or SDNs (a group that includes specified individuals and entities and vessels), wherever they may be located. The  

countries listed are those countries in which SDNs are specifically referenced. In addition to persons linked to these countries, the SDN list also includes individuals, entities and vessels, wherever located, that are regarded as terrorists, narcotics traffickers or proliferators of weapons of mass destruction or as contributing to these activities. An up-to-date list of SDNs is maintained by the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control. See Examples  (source Checklists of Foreign Countries Subject to Sanctions)

Recent the world system has ensuing proliferation of sanctions cases, efforts towards improving the multilateral sanctions mechanism, including the various Sanctions Processes mentioned in chapter 1 have occurred at regular intervals. 

Leaders Perspectives, Personality, and Ideology Shaped State Foreign Policy.

A leader’s personality is likely to affect how she or he organizes the executive, Some leaders gain insight from hearing their advisors debate issues  in their presence, while others like to ponder the policy options their advisors provide to them in solitude. Some leaders are intent that their preferences shape policy, whereas others want policy choices to reflect a consensus among various viewpoints. It also matters whether a leader wishes to be actively involved in foreign policy making, actively seeking out information and shaping the policy options, or, conversely, prefers to rely on the expertise of trusted advisors who help define issues and gather information. Leaders are more likely to actively seek out information when they feel knowledgeable about (and comfortable with) foreign affairs and when they trust the bureaucracy.

How we perceive our world is not only dependent on context but also  quite resistant to change. Perceptions that may have been accurate at one time endure. They become the perspective from which we view the world—the image we have of the world—even if the circumstances have changed. That image guides our interpretation of new information about  our environment and the actors in it.

For instance, why would the leaders of Argentina decide to invade a  group of small islands off their coast in 1982 and risk a war with Britain?Argentina was at the time led by a three-person junta (or military dictatorship), consisting of the President and Commander in chief of the Army,  General Leopoldo F. Galtieri, the Commander in chief of the Navy,  Admiral Jorge I. Anaya, and the Commander in chief of the Air Force,  Brigadier Basilio Lami Dozo.

A focus on the personality or character of leaders is often motivated by  questions such as these: What sort of personality makes a good leader? What sort of leader will this person make? What sort of personality is the leader of that country?  it is not easy to define the qualities that make a good leader. It is easier to determine the personality of a leader and predict what sort of leadership we might expect from that individual.

Leaders decision are so important to foreign act of a country’s it solely determines the country actions and inaction, for instance Saddam Hussein, leader of Iraq, invaded Kuwait in the early 1990s only to find that the United States, under President George H. W. Bush put together a coalition to push him back out. Saddam Hussein knew that the United States was more powerful and much better armed than Iraq.

Although Iraq had, in those days, one of the stronger militaries in the region, it was no match for a superpower. Saddam Hussein may have calculated that the United States was too preoccupied with the demise of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the latter’s economy to worry about his invasion of a small neighboring state. A meeting with the American ambassador to Iraq, career diplomat April Glaspie, reinforced his assessment. She  made the now-famous statement that “we have no opinion on the Arab - Arab conflicts like your border disagreement with Kuwait.”1 Sadam Hussein may have interpreted this to mean that the United States would not take action if his military attacked Kuwait. Should he have realized that the United States, no matter how much it appeared to be otherwise  engaged, could not accept his seizure of the small, but oil-rich Kuwait?.

Or is Why Trump Is Getting Away With Foreign-Policy Insanity

the world saw was a U.S. president Trump on U.S.-Russian  rejecting the findings of his own intelligence services—now headed by his own appointees, by the way—and accepting at face value Putin’s entirely predictable denials. Trump also tossed in a word salad of discredited conspiracy theories about former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s email server and other irrelevant nonsense, and he said that the legitimate investigation into possible Russian interference was utterly baseless and bad for the country. (That very last claim might be true—i.e., the suspicion that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia is bad for the country—but whether it is without foundation remains to be seen.) (sources Foreignpolicy.com)

Hence, when seeking to explain foreign policy  decisions, it is more fruitful to start with the assumption that the leaders  who made these puzzling decisions were rational human beings trying their best to make “good” foreign policy decisions for their countries.

Materials and references 

A Comparetive introduction foreign policy analysis Marijki B

"The world foreign Policy is Rested on Keg of Gun Power"

Despite this advantage, foreign policy analysis has maintained a rather strong focus on U.S. foreign policy and on crisis decision making. Several scholars in foreign policy analysis have remarked that “foreign policy decision making in the absence of crisis-related factors has gone largely unexplored.”25 Indeed, analysis of economic foreign policy making, decision making regarding foreign aid and development cooperation, the negotiation of international environmental treaties, and a range of other subjects remain a small proportion of the total volume of studies in foreign policy analysis. As the world becomes more interconnected, it will be important to begin to explore foreign policy making on subjects beyond crises more earnestly.

There is much more to be said about interdependence than the simple definition previously provided. Interdependence suggests that the relationsbetween states are characterized by mutuality and equality. But we have already seen that states are not equal. They differ in terms of size as well as resources. These differences have consequences for the interactions  between states.

 

Ultimately, size and power are about the degree to which states are constrained in the range of foreign policy  options available to their decision makers. 

The foreign policies of such states are circumscribed by the limitations imposed not only by their size but also by their geographic location and the structure of their relations with other  states. That brings us to the subject of interdependence. 

For Instance, Canada, which is a member of the G8, is a self-described  middle power. Its decision makers began to use this concept to describe t heir role in the international environment, Middle powers are states that t can wield a measure of influence, albeit not through the projection of military might. Consider, for instance, the role Norway played in the negotiations between representatives of Israel and the Palestinians that culminated in the Oslo Accords of 1993. Middle powers are usually affluent states that  employ their resources to foster peace and to lessen global economic  inequality. In addition to Canada and Norway, the Netherlands and Sweden have employed this label. The leaders of these states have at times characterized their countries as “like minded” and have acted as norm  entrepreneurs in the international environment

Effects of Non- colonialism, Colonialism and Imperialism the Highest Stage of Capitalism.

Consequences of imperialism on third World countries 

The nature of imperialism is as profound as its history is chequered. But imperialism cannot be comprehended as a general phenomenon, but only in relation to the stages of development of societies. This is the basic reason why the past, present and future of Third World Countries and the industrialised countries cannot be fully understood without the proper understanding of the role of imperialism in their history. This relation encompasses the processes of the expansion of capital, inequality, domination and exploitation which are fundamental variables of imperialism.

capitalism is used to indicate the passage of capitalism from its earlier stage of more or less free competition to one in which giant firms, trusts and cartels dominate the market. The expansion of production tends to go hand in hand with a rising organic composition of capital. Increase in the organic composition of capital in turn goes hand in hand with the concentration of capital, that is, with monopolisation in production. As a branch of production becomes more mechanised, it becomes difficult for new entrepreneur to enter that branch of production because of the cost of investing in machines to remain competitive with those who are already in the line of production. It is because of such factors that a rising organic composition of capital leads to monopolistic capitalism -a form of capitalism in which the economy is dominated by a few large enterprises who controls the market and make it extremely difficult for new entrepreneurs to break into their lineo f production .

Relationship between Capitalism and Imperialism

Uneven development and wretched conditions of the masses are the fundamental and inevitable conditions and premises of the capitalist  mode of production. The relationship between capitalism and imperialism was aptly captured in the work of Kwame Nkrumah, Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism, published in 1966;  where he posited that, the Third World countries would not make a  formal march towards economic independence until neo-colonialism  was vanquished. 

In addition, since the early days of capitalism, the imperialist relationship between the centre represented by the Advanced Capitalist  Countries (ACC) and the periphery represented by the (Third World countries) is that, the centre is in a position to dominate the periphery by  virtue of its superior power, while this relationship did little to stimulate economic growth and development in the Third World countries. The capitalist mode of production therefore, generated a momentous long run expansion of productivity and economic output at the centre but could not do the same in Third World countries. 

It is against this background that the major classical writers on imperialism such as Hobson, Lenin, and Schumpeter seem to agree that the impetus for imperialism comes from economic interests, and that imperialism is related to the process of capitalist accumulation but they differ on the precise nature of relationship between capitalist  accumulation and imperialism. 

As long as capitalism remains what it is, surplus capital will never be utilised for the purpose of increasing those profits by exporting capital  abroad to the backward countries. In these backward countries, profits  usually are high, for capital is scarce, the price of land is relatively low,  wages are low, and raw materials are cheap. The possibility of exporting  capital is created by the entry of numerous backward countries into international capitalist intercourse. The necessity of exporting capital 

Dependency Theory Critiques :colonialism Via Capitalism Instigate Third World Dependency.

Critiques of the Dependency Theory  As Rodney (1972) contends, under colonialism, the things that developed were dependency and underdevelopment. The central claim  of the dependency theory was that the circumstances of the Third World countries were to a large extent shaped by the global structures within which they found themselves in particular, the dominance of the west.  

However, before looking at the critiques of the dependency theory, it is necessary to give a summary of the theoretical explanations which the proponents share together. 

i. The importance of considering both the historical experience of

peripheral (Third World countries) and the places of their

involvement within wider encompassing systems;

ii. The necessity of identifying specific political, economic and

cultural linkages of centres and peripheries;

iii. The requirement of active state involvement in the pursuit of

development.

Andre Gunder Frank, is seen as the leading representative of the dependency school. His key term, the development of the  underdevelopment can be seen as the radical counterparts of Rostow’s  take-off stage. He argued that the development of the satellites is limited  simply because they are satellites. Development along metropolitan lines  is precisely not possible for satellites given their subordinate position in  the international division of labour. Using the same three indices as yardstick for assessment, Frank is also  found wanting empirically. His view that no real development at all is  possible under capitalism is far from real. It is difficult to identify his  metropole-satellites with any actual sociological entity; rather, they are  mix of geographical and social. There are also policy problems. His  delinking from the Western world capitalist system is still problematic. Dependency theory also ignored the internal factors that may play critical role either to facilitate development or distort the processes of  development. For example, values, leadership, discipline, corruption, etc  constitute these internal obstacles that can ruin the process of  development. Dependency ignored the possibility of cultural resistance  as well as the right of a tribal society to reject or accept change and  innovations, as this diffused into the TWCs. Dependency suffers from

serious failings. Just as early modernisation scholars over emphasised

the internal causes of underdevelopment, dependency theorists

erroneously attributed virtually all of the TWCs problems to external

economic factors.

The most systematic critique of dependency is that of Cardoso, who

argues that their theories are based on five interconnected erroneous

theses concerning capitalist development in Latin America. These are:

1. that capitalist development in Latin America is impossible;

2. that dependent capitalism is based on the extensive exploitation of labour and tied to the necessity of underpaying labour; 

3. that local bourgeoisie no longer exist as an active social force;

4. that penetration by multinational firms leads local states to pursue an expansionist policy that is typically sub imperialist; and, 

5. that the political path of the sub continent is at the crossroads with the only conceivable options being socialism or fascism.