Wednesday, January 29, 2020
The End of the Cold War and the United Nations Essay Example for Free
The End of the Cold War and the United Nations Essay Abstract The end of the Cold War ushered in many significant changes in the international system. Many of these changes are seen to provide an impetus for the reestablishment of multilateralism and the collective security approach to the maintenance of international peace and security, under the aegis of the United Nations. The multilateral movement gathered momentum over the first few years of the post-Cold War era and saw a number of peacekeeping missions mandated by the United Nations across the World. However, a careful inspection of these missions, and other instances when any action failed to materialize, reveals that much of the impetus gained from the end of the Cold War conflict was lost due. Several factors contributed to this outcome, not least a lack of political will on the part of the United Nations and the Member States. The essay concludes by looking at the present situation and arguing that a similar opportunity as the one in 1991 has presented itself, leaving the United Nations in particular, and multilateralism in general, with a chance to redeem itself. Introduction: The UN during the Cold War            The end of the Second World War and the institution of the United Nations in 1945 were landmark events in the history of the world. While the conclusion of the War marked the demise of European imperialism (though the decolonisation process would continue till 1966), it also signalled a change in the norms of international society. Based on the principles of collective security, as elaborated in the Charter of the United Nations, these emergent norms sanctified (international) territorial boundaries, promising to usher in a new era of international history. However, the optimism and confidence which surrounded the formation of the United Nations – as a forward-looking model of international cooperation – was soon disturbed by the Soviet Union’s entry into the nuclear club in 1949. This was the beginning of the Cold War between the USA and the USSR, which mired international politics, as well as the UN, in an ideological conflict for the next four and a half decades.            Though the specifics of how the Cold War was fought fall outside the ambit of this paper, it is important to note its effects on the functioning of the UN. The composition of the UN Security Council – the organ charged with the maintenance of international peace and security – becomes salient here: as permanent members, both the United States and Soviet Union exercised the power of the veto (a single veto from any permanent being enough to sink a Security Council resolution), according to their geopolitical interests (see UN General Assembly, 2004, p. 13-19). This crippled the development of the UN, while consequently stunting the evolution of multilateralism. Changes at the End of the Cold War: Impetus to UN Multilateralism            The end of the Cold War, in 1991, brought with it a renewed optimism and injected fresh vigour into the UN; finally rid of the ideological divide of the previous decades, the new situation led some scholars to say that: The end of the Cold War lifts a central obstacle to the strengthening of multilateral peacekeeping and the extension of multilateral operations beyond traditional peacekeeping tasks. A revived United Nations Security Council and energetic Secretary-General are the global [centre] of this rapidly evolving effort†¦ (Roper, Nishihara, Otunnu and Schoettle, 1993, p. 1). Concomitant to this belief, the number of peacekeeping operation of the UN increased, along with the establishment of the UN Protective Force (UNPROFOR) – made famous by its engagements in Bosnia – in the years following the fall of the Berlin Wall. However, to truly understand the impact of the end of the Cold War on the UN, and its efforts to strengthen multilateralism, we must be appreciative of what actually changed at the â€Å"end of history†(Fukuyama, 1993).            An era of post-internationalism, defined by a complex system of relations between nation-states and non-state actors, was thought to be the most probable outcome of the end of the Cold War (Rosenau, 1990). In reality, the most important changes occurring in the international system were: The emergence of a unipolar world – with the United States as the lone superpower – though there was a brief debate over the possibility of a return to (a somewhat Westphalian) multipolarity. The structural and ideological impediments to the UN’s operations disappeared, resulting in an environment (apparently) conducive to international cooperation. The emergence of â€Å"New Wars,†which were intra-state affairs, and fuelled by ethno-religious and cultural divides (Kaldor, 1999). The intensification of the process of globalization, rapidly intertwining the national economies of the world into the world economy and with each other, meaning that conflicts would produce more stakeholders interested in their resolution. These changes made for an opportunity for the UN to capitalise on the changing dimensions of international politics and drive home the advantage for the renewed consensus for multilateralism.            The American preponderance in the immediate aftermath of the end of the Cold War meant that the future of multilateralism would depend, to a great extent, on the willingness of the United States to support and participate in the operations of the UN. This dependence was only natural: the US was the most economically and militarily dominant power at the time, and for any successful venture on the part of the UN, US assistance (or at the very least, support) was essential. Because of the US’ political importance, Security Council resolutions backed by the country were more persuasive and influential than earlier, thus accelerating the strengthening of the UN’s multilateral foundations. Initially, the United States readily participated in UN-backed interventions and peacekeeping missions – in Iraq/Kuwait (1990) and Somalia (1992) – which coincided with its policy of â€Å"aggressive involvement†in response to international peace and security at the time (Art, 2003, p. 2-3). Thus, American primacy at the end of the Cold War provided a great impetus to UN-led multilateralism.            The fall of the East/West divide provided an opportunity to expand the realm of the UN’s multilateral operations beyond that of traditional peacekeeping, to include such areas of peace-building as providing humanitarian assistance, transitions to democratic governments and helping with national reconstruction in post-conflict scenarios. This expanding perspective was explained by the UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali to have occurred as a direct consequence of the demise of Cold War animosities amongst the permanent members of the Security Council (1992). The proliferation of UN missions in the early 1990s – to Somalia, Cambodia, Namibia, Western Sahara, Angola, Bosnia, Croatia, El Salvador and Mozambique – goes to show how much of an impetus the removal of structural impediments gave to the UN at the end of the Cold War.            The emergence of New Wars called for a change in the understanding of intra-state violence, along with a wider interpretation of the provisions of Chapter VII of the UN Charter (UN, 1945). During the Cold War, the principles of state sovereignty and non-intervention were paramount; according to Article 2(7) of the Charter, Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter†¦ (1945.) However, in the post-Cold War era, there has been a considerable shift towards embracing the principles of internal justice (i.e. within states) and individual rights, which require the maintenance of certain universally accepted standards (Taylor and Curtis, 2003, p. 415). This movement towards a semblance of global governance also resulted from the impetus gained from the end of the Cold War. For example, the intervention in Kosovo (late-1990s) was purely on humanitarian grounds, and explicitly breached the (now contested) sovereignty of the Republic of Serbia. On the other hand, the intervention in Somalia was carried out at the state’s request, while that in Iraq (in 1990) depended on Memorandums of Understanding between the UN and Saddam Hussein. In all of these cases, however, the increasing tendency of multilateral involvement in the domestic affairs of states cannot be overlooked.            Due to the political and economic structural adjustment policies (enforced by the IMF against the supply of loans) experienced in many parts of the world during the 1980s, the end of the Cold War came at a time when the process of globalization had already taken shape to a certain degree. This process meant the expansion of markets, along with goods and services, across the world, making countries increasingly interdependent. Thus conflict, in any part of the world, now has the potential to disrupt more than a handful of national economies. Hence, there are more takers for multilateral action to resolve conflicts, especially after the (formal) removal of ideological differences within the UN after 1991. For example, in the case of the peacekeeping mission in Bosnia, countries as diverse as Nepal, Fiji, Argentina, Senegal and Iceland, among many others, contributed personnel and supplies to the UN. This was another impetus received by the UN at the end of the Cold War, strengthening its role in multilateral ventures.            Indeed, the renewed energy exhibited by the Member States of the UN to multilaterally solve international conflicts is evidenced by the fact that peacekeeping operations undertaken after the Cold War easily outnumber those mandated during 1945 to 1990 (UN Peacekeeping, 2008). There has also been an improved dynamism in the Security Council and the General Assembly since 1990, shown by the rise in the number of resolutions proposed and adopted, as against the oftentimes deadlocked scenario of the Cold War (UN Documentation Centre, 2008). These facts show the momentum gained by multilateralism, under the aegis of the UN, in the post-Cold War era. An Evaluation of Post-Cold War Multilateralism            It is important, however, to make a crucial qualification at this point: greater involvement through the multilateral framework does not tantamount to success in resolving or preventing international conflicts. If we are to make an analytical examination of how far the end of the Cold war proved to be an impetus for the reestablishment of the UN as the focal point for multilateral projects, we must judge the same in terms of what they achieved. The possibilities that the termination of the East/West conflict held for the UN have already been discussed; now, we shall attempt to provide a critical analysis of how multilateralism has fared to obtain the true nature of the impetus in question.            Throughout the UN’s existence, the question of intervention to stop genocide (or for genocide prevention) has been a thorn in its side. The history of the UN is replete with cases of genocide – Uganda (1970s), Paraguay (1974), Democratic Kampuchea (1975-78), Bangladesh (1970-71) and Burundi (1972-73) – where it did not take any concrete steps to stop the conflict (Kuper 1982). Regardless of the changes found in the post-Cold War era, the â€Å"right to intervene†(jus ad bellum, or humanitarian intervention), has only been enforced in Kosovo (Taylor and Curtis, 2003, p. 415). The UN, however, failed to act on time in the cases of Rwanda (1994) and Bosnia (1992-93), resulting in close to a million deaths. In Rwanda alone, the death toll reached more than 800,000, and led Secretary-General Kofi Annan to remark: â€Å"The world failed Rwanda at that time of evil. The international community and the United Nations could not muster the political will to confront it†(quoted in Glazer, 2004, p. 167). Similarly, the Security Council has been sitting on the fence with regard to Darfur, western Sudan, where Arab militias known as the Janjaweed, with help from the central authority in Khartoum, have been systematically killing (and raping and displacing) black Africans since 2003. Due to the reluctance of the UN to label the conflict in Darfur as genocide, hundreds of thousands continue to die, while more are forced to migrate across the western border into Chad (HRW, 2006).            Part of the blame lies with the Genocide Convention (concluded in 1948), which obliges Member Parties to â€Å"prevent and punish†any act of genocide. But, what this clause means in terms of policy directives remains unclear; many Parties are content to push for institutional solutions in these cases, while refraining to term a given situation as genocide, so that they are not dragged into a commitment of conflict resolution. However, at the end of the Cold War, with the consensus for international cooperation and multilateral action on a high, the UN had a golden opportunity to include or append policy recommendations to the Genocide Convention. It was essential to recognise that the history of the UN’s failure to prevent genocide was a function of reluctant nation-states wary of being drawn into a long-term commitment, rather than plainly understanding it as another aspect of the East/West conflict. By oversimplifying the causes of previous failures, the UN also lost that bit of impetus which the end of the Cold War had generated.            In addition, the multilateral movement suffered another jolt when, given the losses it incurred in Somalia (1992), the American policy slowly started shifting from aggressive involvement to selective engagement: the US, by many accounts, was only interested in taking part in such conflicts which served its national interests (Power 2002). It was the intransigence on the part of the US which, in large measure, contributed to the debacle in Rwanda. Indeed, the fact that the US was actively involved in the Bosnian peace process was not lost on many, leading to speculation that the country was atoning for it inaction in Rwanda, while spawning more radical critiques claiming that the US was more sympathetic to conflicts in Europe and North America (Cooper, 2003). In any event, the reliance on the US for multilateral action proved shaky – a reality further reinforced by its unilateral decision to engage in a preventive war in Iraq (in 2003) – and only retarded the impetus gained in 1991.            The UN, Kaldor argues, also suffers from weak conceptual and theoretical comprehension of â€Å"new wars†(1999). She maintains that it was not the unwillingness to provide resources, a lack of cohesion among peacekeepers or the general tendency of making policies offering short-term solutions which protracted the conflict in Bosnia. Instead, the international community failed to grasp the nature of the â€Å"new nationalism†that had steered the country into the abyss of an ethno-religious war (Kaldor, 1999, p. 53). This failure also led to the underestimation of how the war would progress; the UN peacekeeping force that reached Bosnia had neither the resources, nor the specific mandate, for conflict prevention. Hence, there was no peace to ‘keep’.            This brings us to the issues of deployment and mandates. The UN Assistance Mission in Rwanda, which was put in place to see through the transition to democracy – as part of the Arusha Accords of 1993 – employed 2,500 peacekeepers. At the outbreak of genocide in 1994, the Security Council decided to withdraw all but a tenth of the force, leaving those still remaining in Rwanda to stand by and watch the week-long massacres. In Bosnia, the situation was hardly any better; though the total UNPROFOR contingent totalled 23,000, the requisition to the Security Council asked for 30,000 troops for the safe havens – in Srebrenica, Zepa, Tuzla, Sarajevo, Gorazde, and Bihac – alone. In the end, 7,500 troops were provided for these areas, and resources for only 3,500 could be managed (Kaldor, p. 65). Again, in Darfur, the Security Council sanctioned a peacekeeping force of 25,000 to work alongside the African Union’s 7,000-strong peacekeeping mission; however, the mission is yet to be completely deployed, owing to organisational problems.            Most importantly, though, it is crucial to understand that whatever be the deployment, if the same is not supplied with an aggressive mandate, history shows that it is deemed to fail. An aggressive mandate would entail peace enforcement, in turn requiring a wider reading of the provisions of Chapter VII of the UN Charter. Sending lightly armed peacekeepers into zones of conflict only risks their lives and achieves very little in terms of conflict prevention. In recent years, the UN has found it preferable to mandate individual countries to enforce peace in smaller-scale incidents of violent conflict, like Australia (East Timor 1999), France (Congo, 2003) and the USA (Liberia, 2003). Whether such decisions indicate the complications of an aggressive multilateral approach is difficult to say, but these cases do suggest that unilateral solutions are sometimes simpler. The problems of troop deployment and mandates, therefore, seem to have eroded much of the impetus gained by the UN’s multilateral framework at the beginning of the post-Cold War era. Conclusion: Opportunity Lost, Perspective Gained            There are two important conclusions that readily derive from the above discussion. Firstly, the changes in the international system at the end of the Cold War produced a scenario where the UN remained the only organisation capable of maintaining peace. This provided a thrust to the multilateral framework which had suffered till then under the shadow of the East/West bipolarity. Without doubt, the end of the Cold War had supplied the UN with a vital impetus to re-establish multilateralism as the definitive path to peace. Secondly, however, an evaluation of post-Cold War multilateralism reveals that this chance was squandered, leading many to call this phase of the UN’s history as â€Å"opportunity lost†(Johnson, 1999). Indeed, the breakdown of the consensus over the war in Iraq (2003) led Annan to declare that â€Å"[t]he past year has shaken the foundations of collective security and undermined confidence in the possibility of collective responses to our common problems and challenges†(quoted in UN Press Release, 2003).            Looking forward, however, we have to contend that it is precisely the US debacle in Iraq has cast grave doubts over unilateral actions, and has prepared the ground once more for the endorsement of multilateralism. Following its initial failures in peacekeeping, the UN maintained that its role in international peace and security remained â€Å"essential†(Crossette, 1994); the reverses early on in the post-Cold War era now serve as key points of reference from which to learn and devise more viable policies. The lessons of the past, thus, must provide the paths to the present (and the future). The opportunity given to the UN and multilateralism by the fall of the Soviet Union was spurned over the subsequent decade. The international system has again generated a similar impetus which should, this time, be treated with the utmost care and responsibility. References Art, R. J. (2003). A Grand Strategy for America. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Boutros-Ghali, B. (1992). An Agenda for Peace: Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-keeping. A/47/277. Retrieved June 4, 2008, from http://www.un.org/docs/SG/agpeace.html Cooper, M. H. (February 23, 2003). Future of NATO. CQ Researcher, 13, 8, pp. 177-200. Crossette, B. (December 5, 1994). UN Falters in Post-Cold War Peacekeeping, but Sees Role as Essential. The New York Times. Retrieved June 4, 2008, from http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C07E3DC1739F936A35751C1A962958260 Fukuyama, F. (1993). The End of History and the Last Man. New York: Harper Perennial. Glazer, S. (August 27, 2004). Stopping Genocide. CQ Researcher, 14, 29, pp. 165-187. Human Rights Watch. (December 2006). Darfur Bleeds: Militia Attacks on Civilians in Chad. Retrieved June 4, 2008, from http://www.hrw.org/ Johnson, R. (January 1999). Post-Cold War Security: The Lost Opportunities. The Disarmament Forum, 1, 5-11. Kaldor, M. (1999). New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Kuper, L. (1982). Genocide: Its Political Use in the Twentieth Century. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Power, S. (2002). A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide. New York: Harper Perennial. Roper, J., Nishihara, M., Otunnu, O. A., Schoettle, E. C. B. (1993). Keeping the Peace in the Post-Cold War Era: Strengthening Multilateral Peacekeeping – A Report to the Trilateral Commission. New York: The Trilateral Commission. Rosenau, J. N. (1990). Turbulence in World Politics: A theory of Change and Continuity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Taylor, P. and Curtis, D. (2003). The United Nations. In Baylis, J. and Smith, S. The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 405-424. United Nations Documentation Centre. (2008). General Assembly Resolutions | Security Council Resolutions. Retrieved June 4, 2008, from http://www.un.org/documents/index.html United Nations General Assembly. (2004). Report of the Open-ended Working Group on the Question of Equitable Representation on and Increase in the Membership of the Security Council and Other matters related to the Security Council. A/58/47. New York: United Nations. United Nations Peacekeeping. (2008). List of Operations: 1948-2008. Retrieved June 4, 2008, from http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/list/list.pdf United Nations Press Release. (November 2003). Secretary-General Names High-level Panel to Study Global Security Threats, and Recommend Necessary Changes. SG/A/857. Retrieved June 4, 2008, from http://www.un.org/News/dh/hlpanel/press-release-041103.pdf United Nations. (1945). Charter of the United Nations. Retrieved June 4, 2008, from http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/
Tuesday, January 21, 2020
Cather in the Rye :: essays research papers
The Catcher and the Rye is a very controversial book even today. Many schools and libraries across the country have banned this book for various reasons. This paper will explore some of these reasons why this book is still causing debates among educators. To first understand why this book has caused so many debates we have to look at the time it was written in, the 1950’s. In the 1950’s the world was just recovering from the devastations of World War II, which ended five years ago. The United States emerged as a Super Power, the wealthiest nation and the American way of life envied throughout the Western world. This was a time when people were friendlier, more caring, and honest. People were not afraid to leave their homes without locking their doors. Neighbors were always there to help you for whatever reason and, families were close knit. They would have dinner each night, watch television, and do activities together. Children in this time were brought up to respect their elders, conform, and behave according to the their elder’s values. Most of them did so, although a growing spirit of rebellion and a new assertiveness of ideas and styles soon developed. The term â€Å"teenager†became widely used. Teena gers found their own taste in music and fashion. Girls were most likely found wearing clothes like people that they saw on television and the movies. Music had also changed. Teenagers were very fond of a new type of music known as Rock And Roll. Bill Haley and his band was just one group that caused a stir among the elders as to what was respectable, and banned Haley’s movie as well as his record from jukeboxes. This was the first measure that elders took to â€Å"save the children†, from destroying their values. However, the media with magazines, radio, television and the movies fueled the ideas of being a teenager. One popular song of this time was â€Å"All Shook Up†by Elvis Presley that seems to symbolize this time in history. (Stacy & Finkelstein) One author J.D. Salinger wrote his first novel during this time and added to the controversy by his writing style. Salinger chose to write his novel in the first person, told by a seventeen year old boy named Holden Claudfield. Throughout the novel, Holden uses foul language, discussed sexual matter, and rejects the traditional American ideas.
Monday, January 13, 2020
Gender segregation In US Essay
In the recent past, United State has been a victim of gender inequality. For instance, in the colonial era, reading and writing were the essential skills. However, these skills were mainly taught to boys and only privileged girls. This is a clear discrimination that makes the girls child disadvantaged and thus affects her social development and limit her interaction. One of the most important aspects in human development is the gender-role development. Age between two & six are the essential stage when the children start to learn of the abilities, and gender. In making of toys for playing, the America culture separates toys for girls and boys. The boys will shy from playing with dollies and the girls also avoid playing with tennis balls. This separation affects the social development of the children in many ways. First, the playing styles and behaviors will be centered on the identity ‘I am a Girl’ or ‘I am a Boy’. This spreads to the social context of the family, school, and peer group. Most theories of social development highlight early childhood as initial and the essential stage in social development. Much of the learning in this stage occurs by imitation. That is, boys learn to be boys by observing their fathers and girls learn l to be girls by observing their mothers. When children imitate similar sex they tend to be appreciated. However, imitating the opposite sex would attract punishment. This stereotype leaves a lasting impact on the mind of the children who grow up to believe that girls and boys are different and should be treated differently. This has been the root cause of gender disparity in US. Reference: Axtell, J. (1974). Gender-Role Development – The Development of Sex and Gender. Illinois; University of Illinois Press.
Sunday, January 5, 2020
Tiberius Claudius Nero Caesar Essay - 989 Words
Tiberius Claudius Nero Caesar nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Tiberius Claudius Nero Caesar was born in Rome on November 16, 42 BC. Four years after his birth his mother divorced his father and married Octavian. Tiberius was a descendant of the Claudian family who moved to Rome shortly after the foundation of the city. The Claudians did not respect others who were not of noble ancestry. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;After Tiberius was four he was raised to be a loyal servant of Augustus. Tiberius is associated with Augustus for 22 years. Augustus had Tiberius carefully educated. Augustus later forced Tiberius to dissolve his happy marriage to Vipsania Agrippina and marry Augustus daughter Julia. This was arranged to better the chance of†¦show more content†¦Tiberius began to take firm steps against foreign beliefs because he thought they were a threat to traditional Roman values. He expelled followers of the Egyptian and Jewish religions from Rome and banished astrologers. Tiberius believed in astrology himself but probably feared a possible conspiracy inspired by horoscopes. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Tiberius established a central camp for the Praetorian guard in Rome so the military could be quickly called to put down civilian violence. Civilian riots were common because of the large population of unemployed that were provided for by the public dole. Lucius Aelius Sejanus was in charge of these troops and that gave him an enormous amount of potential power. He aspired to marry Livia Julia, Tiberius daughter, and worked to increase the emperors fear and distrust of other members of his Tiberius family. In AD 26 Tiberius left Rome and withdrew to Campania, and the following year went to the island of Capri. Tiberius left Rome under the power of Sejanus. Finally realizing that Sejanus was trying to seize the imperial power he sent a carefully worded letter to the senate. The senate read the letter while the unsuspecting Sejanus sat in the senate chamber. Tiberius bitterly condemned Sejanus. Quick action was then taken to execute Sejanus and his family. Incidents such as this one gave Tiberius a bad name with the people of Rome and the senate. Tiberius continued to rule Rome and theShow MoreRelated The Preatorian Guard1814 Words  | 8 Pagesmen formed the iconic symbol of the Ancient Roman Army: the Praetorian Guard. Rigid and unwavering, these soldiers were the bodyguards of the most powerful men in the ancient world: The Emperors of Rome. Formally created in 23 BC by Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus the Praetorian Guard Served as Bodyguards for the Emperors, About nine cohorts of five hundred men each formed the early Praetorian Guard; they were stationed right outside the center of Rome. The Praetorian Guard were recruited primarilyRead MoreMidterm 3 History Essay8024 Words  | 33 Pages Feel free to format to your hearts content. Cheers! CC 302/CTI 310: Midterm Exam Short Answer Questions  ·       What was the position of the tribunes on the escalating conflict between Caesar, Pompey and the senate?  What was Cicero’s position? o   The tribunes were advocating for compromise with Caesar by offering him legal protection and military power. o   Cicero was supporting the senate and Pompey and was in Rome stirring up trouble for the first Triumvirate by speaking out of endingRead MoreClaudius : The Surprise Emperor1097 Words  | 5 PagesNiko Akaras Mr Bozzi. AMW February 21, 2017 Claudius: The Surprise Emperor Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus was born in 10 AD in Gaul, modern day France. Due to an illness as a child he developed a limp and partial deafness. Because of this he was ostracized from his family, believing he was mentally challenged. Coming from a family of such high stature, Claudius was hidden until his teens, seen as an embarrassment to the family name. He gained the attention of his family when,Read MoreThe Bad Emperors of Rome Essay1677 Words  | 7 Pagesdesirable of an emperor. Augustus encompassed all of these and went as far as restoring the Republican government from its once fallen state, but this was all forgotten when Tiberius became emperor. Tiberius was corrupt by power and Rome began to live in an era of destruction. As well, the subsequent emperors, Caligula and Nero followed in the same path, portraying violence and negatively impacting the city of Rome. Their reign caused them to be unpopular as each marginalized pietas, the duty towards Read MoreCorrupted Imperial Rome1089 Words  | 5 Pagesdynasties ruled after the assassination of Julius Caesar. He was thought to be a conspirator of corruption, but his death was to promote corruption. Among the leaders of Rome, corruption was widespread. Augustus was one of many leaders that supported corruption. Julius Caesar was executed for supporting corruption. Coincidentally, Julius Caesar’s successors were more corrupted than he supposedly was. The reason why Julius was killed was because Julius Caesar was for not doing his actions in secrecy andRead MoreRoman Impact on Christianity1647 Words  | 7 Pagesanother emperor would rise to power: Tiberius. Tiberius’ reign began 14 AD and continued on through until his death 37 AD. Jesus’ ministry began, according to Luke 1, fifteen years into Tiberius’ reign. Albeit the spread of the miracles performed by Jesus spread through Abigania 3 Rome quite rapidly, some debate that Tiberius may not have even known of Jesus’ existence because in 26 AD, Tiberius had moved to his palace on the island of Capri. The impact Tiberius had on the early Christian churchRead MoreTacitus s Influence On The Roman Empire2166 Words  | 9 PagesAgrippina the younger as a sign of weakness of the principate representing Claudius and Nero as her pawn. Her position of power as a female to this day is unmatched; known as the granddaughter, daughter, sister, wife, and mother of men. ( Tacitus) Agrippina, an Imperial woman of the Julio-Claudian bloodline a female Caesar lived through all five of the Julio-Claudian emperors Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, and Nero. Agrippina the younger roles in the empire is recognized but is not creditedRead MoreClaudius : The Second Roman Emperor Of The Julio Claudian Dynasty1288 Words  | 6 PagesTiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus, more commonly referred to as Claudius, was appointed as the fourth Roman Emperor of the Julio-Claudian dynasty, following the assassination of his nephew and preceding Emperor, Caligula, in 41 A.D. (Wasson, 2011) Despite the initial pessimistic perspective held by prominent Roman figures regarding his performance as Emperor, Claudius proved to be an efficient leader whom increased the autocratic nature of Rome through his Empire expansion campaigns and policiesRead MoreRomes Really Bad Emperors Essay1264 Words  | 6 PagesTiberius, who served as emperor from 14 to 37 AD, began his rule after the death of his father-in-law, Augustus. Tiberius was a weak ruler, and he understood that ruling Rome was like â€Å"holding a wolf by the ears.†When conflict arose in Europe, Tiberius sent his nephew, Germanicus, to deal with it. Germanicus did his job, and this resulted in Tiberius fearing the newest war-hero. To avoid the issue, Germanicus was appointed governor of the remote eastern provinces by his uncle. After the suddenRead Mor e Tiberius Essay536 Words  | 3 Pages Tiberius was born Tiberius Claudius Nero Caesar in Rome on November 16, 42BC. Four years later his mother divorced his father and married the triumvir Octavian, later Emperor Augustus, who had Tiberius carefully educated. In 20BC Tiberius commanded an expedition to Armenia, and he subsequently helped subdue the Rhaetians and fought against the Pannonians (12-9BC). In 11BC Tiberius, at his stepfathers command, dissolved his happy marriage to Vipsania Agrippina (died AD20), daughter of the Roman
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)