Three articles

Text published

Book recently published

Graduated with Honors

Paper published

Thesis published

Appointed Professor

8TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON Food Studies

Student Testimonials

Global security: the number one dilemma of the world community

Abstract | Jean Cédric Obame Emane | Doctorate’s degree in International Relations

This paper is an attempt to deconstruct the concept of security which has been by tradition exclusively confined to the military realm. We make evident that security takes into consideration a number of fields and that its major concern is the human person. In addressing security in this work, we do not only refer to the security of states –the concept of national security–, but also to that of individuals –human security–. Governments should integrate in their security agendas not only their own security, but also the security of their nationals. Accordingly, this implies that they should protect their citizens against any threat to human life. In other words, governments or the people they rule do not merely face military threats from other states; they are as well endangered by other threats to their security, these threats are debated in this research paper. We do not mean that military issues are not to be conceptualized within security frameworks, but we do contend that they are not the unique issues to be securitized. Indeed, this paper displays that other issues should be securitized. Global security is the process that consists of preventing the break-out of military conflicts –with preventive diplomacy–, the mitigation of non-state military violence; it is focused on environmental degradation, arms control issues etc. in order to safeguard global peace and human security. Global security is put in place through diplomatic resolutions, peaceful settlements of armed conflicts, or by sending peacekeeping forces to areas stifled with military conflicts, or even by protecting people against environmental threats. Global security has also something to do with the respect of human rights everywhere in the world and as well the promotion and proliferation of democracy as a political system that guarantees the individual rights of citizens. Another aspect of global security is the global-regional security mechanism between the UN Security Council and regional and sub-regional organizations.

A new understanding of the concept of security has been developing in the 21st century (Nanda, 2009). He contends that the need to redefine the traditional concept of security was eloquently developed in 2003 by the Commission on Human Security, in their report Human Security Now (Nanda, 2009). The writer explains that the Commission co-chaired by Sadako Ogato, former UN High Commissioner for Refugees, and Amartya Sen, Nobel laureate in economics, was launched by the former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan at the 2000 Millennium Summit and was recognized as the initiative of the Japanese government. The new concept of security was different from the traditional one in that it aimed at assuring the security of people. According to Nanda (2000, p.335) the Commission indicated the following: “The security debate has changed dramatically since the inception of state security advocated in the 17th century. According to that traditional idea, the state would monopolize the rights and means to protect its citizens. But in the 21st century, both the challenges to security and its protectors have become more complex. The state remains the fundamental purveyor. Yet it often fails to fulfill its security obligations—and at times has even become a source of threat to its own people. That is why attention must now shift from the security of the state to the security of the people —to human security.” The Commission’s emphasis is on the enablement of people, which can help get them ready against severe present and future dangers, both societal and natural. The Commission sustains that the traditional view of state security has expanded in the 21st century to also encompass human security (Nanda, 2009). The emphasis on human security is to make sure that adequate focus is directed to address the real causes of insecurity from several individuals around the world who suffer. Nuclear weapons represent a serious cause of people’s insecurity, and weapons of mass destruction (WMD) –chemical, biological and nuclear– are apparently among the main dangers to state security (Nanda, 2009). The possession of nuclear weapons has basically three goals: (1) deterrence of intended nuclear attack; (2) deterrence of most important conventional war; and (3) compensation for possible inadequacies in nonnuclear forces, including deterrence or response to attacks with chemical or biological weapons (Watkinson, 1999).

Neither China nor Russia would currently consider reducing their nuclear weapons, while they would like the United States to do it (Watkinson, 1999). Accordingly, the author believed that it would be wiser for the United States to keep up a strong military deterrent. An example can be provided, when the Iraqi government in the Gulf War attributed their decision not to use bioweapons and chemical agents against the United States for the reason that they knew they could undergo a nuclear counter-attack by the USA (Watkinson, 1999). According to the author’s views, it seems to us that possessing nuclear technology if not nuclear weapons is overwhelmingly crucial in this new context of international affairs. The acquisition of nuclear arsenals seems to be significantly important for the reasons of deterrence because a state can decide to attack another state when it knows that it cannot fear any threatening reprisals. Today possessing nuclear weapons is somewhat a certain guarantee of security not to attack but to retaliate. Therefore, it might be argued that conventional weapons are good but not enough to ensure some total protection if an attack is carried out. However, it is not documented that a nuclearweapon state (NWS) ever used preemptive measures against a non-nuclear weapon-states (NNWS). In other words, a nuclear war has never been waged; this is why states are making efforts to avoid such a disaster because as Gorbarchev said in 1988, a nuclear war would have no winner, nor looser, it will have as only outcome the annihilation of mankind (Ó Tuathail et al., 1998, p.98). In the meantime, states with nuclear arsenals know that it would be a mistake to eliminate all their nuclear weapons. The point at this stage is to have dominant nuclear deterrent to dissuade other states to attack them as in the above mentioned case of the United States. For example, North Korea has a nuclear arsenal but is aware that if it ever launches a nuclear warhead to the United States, it will witness a tremendous military response from America. In addition, deterrence is a good strategy to ensure that a nuclear war is unlikely to wage.

Rinn (2013) contends that there are several issues that influence the decision of a state to develop nuclear weapons, but generally speaking, today there are basically two types of nuclear-weapon states: global political actors and issue-specific possessors, that is, the five NPT nuclearweapon states (NWS) and those owning nuclear weapons and are not parties to the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty on Nuclear Disarmament). (See Table 1) By tradition, the questions of global security have basically been centered on the military and national security issues. This means that governments based their security agendas on the protection of their territory in ensuring the integrity of their land, the protection of civilians against any foreign military aggression. What we mean is that dealing with international security is huge and that traditionally, dealing with it would be about the military and issues related to territorial integrity (military viability), the ability for states to ensure one’s sovereignty. However, we come to discover that any single threat to human life represents a problem of security. We think about water scarcity that is becoming gradually serious. We have to mention as well the problem of population pressures that is a threat as more people on the planet will pose a problem to agriculture, which might result in food scarcity. Accordingly, we cannot solve problems of global security –climate change, environmental threat, terrorism, peace building etc.– with isolationism because of the so-called national security interests. A good example on that matter has been COP 21 on global warming, a climate change conference held in Paris between November and December 2015. Buzan (1991) talked about the five sectors defining security, which are political, military, economic, societal and environmental. As Buzan pointed out, these five fields of security do not work in isolation from one another. Each addresses a specific domain comprised within a security problématique, but all of them are intertwined together with a strong connection. We come to the realization that security is not just about military issues, but also comprises other fields like economic security, environmental security, health security, food security, community security, political security and physical security (Bosold and Werthes, 2005).

Terrorism is also a mounting issue in international affairs and an aspect of security that requires military attention as two basic doctrines to fight terrorism are usually considered: counterterrorism and terrorism preemption. There are also other approaches such as appeasement, but no matter the doctrine that we choose to address the issue of terrorism, we need a deep involvement of the military, to some extent, the police. A number of possibilities are explored to combat terrorism in the United States: they can stress the significance of law enforcement function, the crucial role of the intelligence community, the employment of diplomacy or the prerequisite to engage in military actions against nonstate violence and the sponsors of terrorist groups abroad (Sloan, 2000). The reluctance to employ the military option to reactive missions, much less in preemptive actions, is the combination of an essential omission in enhancing an important capability to attack terrorists abroad (Sloan, 2000). The writer pointed out the following question: is terrorism an act of war or an act of criminality? The answer to this question will determine the doctrine that will be developed to address it (Sloan, 2000). To deal with global security has brought us to consider peace and conflict resolution. What is peace? For the common people peace is the absence of warfare, or violent conflict. This definitional approach to peace is not bad, but is limited. In effect, the concept of peace goes beyond that common perception. Peace can also be considered as the absence of every forms of violence. These categorizations of peace have a label in international relations (IR): negative and positive peace. These terms were first coined by Galtung, in the Editorial to the primary edition of the Journal of Peace Research in the year 1964, (Grewal, 2003). The history associated with the distinction between positive and negative peace stems from the 1950s wherein peace research was too deeply dedicated towards direct violence, such as warfare and assault and was dominated by North Americans. The Peace Research Institute of Oslo and the Journal of Peace Research were a source of fresh understanding in peace theory (Grewal, 2003).

Galtung’s chief argument is that an adequate understanding of violence is a prerequisite in order to understand and define peace. Peace is not simply an absence of immediate violence (negative peace) but as well absence of structural violence (positive peace). Structural violence originates from violence in the structure of society, rather than direct violence, that is generated by coercion (Grewal, 2003). In this perspective, to discuss peace journalism and peace education brings us to consider along with Galtung that to argue something about peace journalism, something has to be argued about peace. To argue something about peace, something has to be argued about conflict and its resolution. To argue about conflict resolution, something has to be argued about the United States’ profound participation in numerous international conflicts (Galtung, 2015).

Conflict resolution is a major field in IR as the world has turned out to be drowned in a range of conflicts which constitutes a significant challenge for the world community. Now, what is international conflict resolution? Wanis-St. John and Ghais (2014) define international conflict resolution as that body of knowledge, practices, rules and organizations that strive to prevent, reduce and transform potential or actual violent conflict within and between states. In short, we contend that global security is the major dilemma of the world community. A number of challenges are faced by the world community in actuality; we debate these challenges. We discuss five main fields of security: (I) Armament and Disarmament, (II) Environmental Security, (III) Global and Regional Security, (IV) Military Strategies and Terrorism, and (V) Peace and Conflict Resolution.

REFERENCES.
Bosold, D. and Werthes, S. (2005). Human Security in Practice: Canadian and Japanese Experiences. Internationale Politik und Gesellschaft, retrieved from: www.library.fes.de. | Buzan, B. (1991).”New Patterns of Global Security in the Twenty-first Century”. International Affairs, 67.3, p. 432-433. | Galtung, J. (2015). “Peace Journalism and Reporting on the United States”. The Brown Journal of World Affairs, Vol. 22 (1), p. 321-332. | Grewal, B.S. (2003). “Johan Galtung: Positive and Negative Peace”. Retrieved from: www.activeforpeace.org. | Nanda, V.P. (2009). “Nuclear Weapons, Human Security, and International Law”. Denver Journal of International Law Policy Vol. 37 No3, p.331-350. | Ó Tuathail, G., Dalby, S. & Routledge, P. (1998). The Geopolitics Reader. London and New York: Routledge. | Rinn, A.S. (2013). “A Behavioral Economic Approach to Nuclear Disarmament Advocacy”. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law [VOL 46: p. 969-1002]. | Sloan, S. (2000). Beating International Terrorism: An Action Strategy for Preemption and Punishment. Alabama: Revise Edition, Air University Press, Maxwell Air Force Base. | Wanis-St. John, A. and Ghais, S. (2014). The Handbook of Conflict Resolution. Washington, D.C.: American University. | Watkinson, K. (1999). The Post-Cold War Era and the Future of U.S. Nuclear Weapons Policy. Retrieved from: http:// web.stanford.edu/class/e297c/war_peace/atomic/hnuclear.html.

Publications by Students: aiu.edu/StudentPublication.html

Study Tips How to write essays more easily

Edward Lambert | AIU Academic Coordinator

There are times when a student has a hard time writing an essay, because the ideas just do not flow from the mind. The student does not know what to write. So what can a student do to fill the mind with lots of ideas to write about?

It is important to realize first that the mind processes what we study at night, while we are sleeping. So it is very helpful to study every day, even if it is 10 minutes. When we study every day, the mind is making many more connections between what we study and the life we live. Therefore, it is much easier to talk and write about what we study because it is more a part of our life. There are 3 simple things that help a student to easily write essays.... 1 Study at least 10 minutes per day. It is like giving little snacks of knowledge to your mind. Then, it will be easier to write the assignments because your mind assimilates and develops new ideas at night, when you are sleeping.

2 Talk about what you are studying with another person, you can talk with a friend, a relative, a neighbor, or even a person in a store. The moment you try to explain what you are studying; your mind is stimulated to produce and organize thoughts and ideas. All of a sudden, your mind will have the ideas ready to write in your essay. Then you can write your essay faster. So whenever you get stuck and do not know what to write, the simplest and best solution is to talk with someone about what you are trying to write about.

3 One easy way to study at least 10 minutes per day is to watch videos on the internet about your course, like from Youtube.com. Videos are a great way to keep your mind active on the study material. You can watch one 10-minute video each day related to your field of study. You can prepare assignments based on videos too. Keep studying every day and try to explain what you are studying to another person. You will find essays easier to write, because your mind is continually organizing the ideas.

Assessment criteria

By Dr. Rosa Hilda Lora M. Advisor at AIU | rosa@aiu.edu

When we talk about evaluation, the moments when we were able to obtain the recognition of what we were doing come to our mind. We also think about the less fortunate moments and we get all the reflections of what was good and what shouldn’t be from the school system, to who was good teacher or our mistakes.

The evaluation is still a difficult dish to digest because it always involves the unknown, it is always the search in our thinking for a response that may not be well structured and we must be able to answer what is part of knowledge or what is part of our know about experiences. We always ask ourselves when we have to do to study something: why the evaluation must be anguish of the unforeseen. The answer is something is malfunctioning because it must be an experience like the education system in Finland. In Finland, recognized for its excellent results in education, it happens that the student chooses the subjects when he feels he has the skills to carry out that learning. In the vast majority of countries, the Curriculum is designed so that these or those subjects are taken now; the student can choose certain optional subjects but not the base curriculum. In the twentieth century we already had two schools of thought regarding teaching learning: Behaviorism and Constructivism. Behaviorism is based on the measurement of what the student should know; it focuses on testing and is represented by Educational Technology. Constructivism considers that the student for all learning has prior knowledge that must relate and that education is a function achieved by socialization. Education must be to insert the individual into a society and for him to solve problems of that society or provide solutions to a good coexistence.

Educational technology allowed the massive education that was necessary at a time in our history when the two great wars ended: the First and Second World War to enter the production to all those who had the fortune to return. Nowadays the society is different but there are many who find it easier to evaluate items that to analyze or to structure documents and more still to analyze what the document says because they have to see if the student has a series of skills or not and still more how they’ll achieve them. Regarding Educational Technology says the work of Anijovich: “It is distressing to know that thousands of children and young people have, in the 21st century, their learning legitimated by numerical data, by arithmetic averages, by statistics, and that this is considered (naively) a precise and fair evaluation”. Anijovich and others (2010, p. 78). The traditional beliefs of evaluation where it is regarded as an instrument of information and control, giving great importance to correct and simple answer, have to end. The student knows in the society in which we live that this form of evaluation is not fair but he has no choice but to accept it or he will not do what he wants. Nowadays is considered as the literate, mathematical, scientific, technological and visual domain is a strange mixture an evaluation of questions and short answers or repetition of scientific texts. Knowledge is something more: “...when the new learning of the students is based on previous learning and a network is established that contains the new learning and what they already knew, and between them they enrich each other, when what is taught and learned is interesting and challenging, and when these lessons are perceived as affordable...” Anijovich and others (2010, p.40). Also in the evaluation we have to consider the abilities of each human being, it can’t be the same for all and consider it fair: “...each student, interactively, discovers the world in its own way, different and unique. But he apprehends the world in a richer and more challenging way, with the greater socialization, and the cooperation of the adults who are mediators in his knowledge”. Anijovich and others (2010, p. 78). Piaget and Vygotsky consider the educator as a mediator in the construction of knowledge and emphasize the importance of reciprocal trust between educator and pupil. The graph presented on this page is significant because this is the case with education in many schools, universities and training centers. Here is exemplified with animals but reality overcomes this fiction.

Then there is talk of school failure and governments are doing wonders for students to achieve degrees instead of enriching the education system with what has always been they Achilles heel: the evaluation. For there to be an evaluation that corresponds to the human beings that we are nowadays and to the society that we need to have, we must reform education in terms of the training of teachers and professionals who teach. School failure has many factors that make it up: the economic and social context; the family as a socio-cultural level in terms of dedication and expectations; the educational system and the student in terms of their interest, skills and participation. In Constructivism it is considered that the teacher or professional who exercises as a teacher, the teacher is the companion of the learner, so the evaluation is mediation. In the mediating evaluation the student must receive feedback. When we talk about feedback, we must consider the way to do it: in which way to indicate to the student what should be improved. In schools or educational centers such as universities there is a difference when education is face-to-face or online. In face-to-face relations there is a face-to-face relationship, but in the virtual one, a photo, a telephone does not transmit non-verbal language.

In all education as mediation we must consider that the other person is a human being who deserves respect for what the feedback should consider that aspect. The form of adequate feedback is to say to the student he did this and this is fine but here we can improve it in this way. At Atlantic International University (AIU) we have adult students who may have a long time of not being studying. What happens with mediation? We must consider: 1. The time of accommodation of learning according to Piaget and its socialization in the new society, according to Vygotsky. 2. Current knowledge becomes obsolete every 5 years. 3. The student has to learn the digital language in which he is not literate. Given these factors that occurs in all adults mediation has to consider the emotional aspect a lot. In the mediating evaluation we have the competences, a concept that has received different meanings. We will take the concept as a holistic relationship; here the general attributes such as knowledge, attitudes, values and abilities are united; all attached to the context.

The other forms of competence are: the ability to act in front of a type of situation and as a list of tasks. The training of competences involves a change in the relationship of teachers with knowledge, in their way in the Chair, their identity and their own professional skills. To create a system of evaluation that is competences as a holistic relationship, it is necessary to adopt a flexible form in terms of programming, to privilege the solution of problems and to expand the resources and teachinglearning materials. The skills to consider in a mediating evaluation for holistic competences are the following: 1. Presentation of the work whatever it may be. 2. Scientific concepts handled. 3. Problem presented. 4. Application or solution to some problem. 5. Use of presentation techniques. (There are 5 techniques to present works in science) 6. The use of quotations because the works may not be intentional copies. The student didn’t learn the value of the work of others. Student may not have competencies in terms of presenting papers because he is focused on a banking education, which was what he was given as a skill.

It will cost him to change the type of thought to draw inferences so his accommodation in that aspect is slower, what you would have to see is other skills he probably has. It is convenient to ask him what he likes to do in order to discover his skills and thus increase his self-esteem; remember that he doesn’t have the scaffolding that Vygotsky talks about because he is not together with his peers. All aspects of education, nowadays, can be resolved; the problem of evaluation is dragging on education because it is very difficult for us to learn from Finland and we would need a lot of economic resources for each student to study the subjects when he has the right competences. The online universities solve the problem that we mentioned because we can tell the student you can send this work now or you can send it when you see fit. The open Curriculum of AIU allows a mediating and competency evaluation. Go ahead discover your competitions! Go ahead don’t leave your studies!

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Anijovich, Rebeca y otros (2010). La Evaluación Significativa, Argentina: Paidós. | Ausubel, D. y Joseph Novak (2009). Psicología Educativa, México: Trillas. | Díaz Barriga Arceo, F. y Geraldo Hernández Rojas (2010). Estrategias docentes para un aprendizaje significativo, una interpretación constructivista, México: Trillas.

Odderon, a peculiar quasiparticle

This is the first evidence of its existence.

Single atom photographed

Now you can see it with the naked eye.

AIU makes a huge contribution to the world by giving new scient ifics the space for original investigations and research. Visit MyAIU Evolution

Nora Fok

Find support for your own unique art and design projects, or support other creative projects at MyAIU Research

Babies get strokes, too

Here’s how their brains recover.

Oxytocin, the love hormone

We have some advice to self-generate.

Live a better life learning how to keep your body, mind and soul balanced. Visit regularly MyAIU Body / MyAIU Mind / MyAIU Spirit and MyAIU Energy.

Eco Tip: Simplify your life as much as possible. Only keep belongings that you use/enjoy. Change your life, get sustainable, visit MyAIU Knowledge

Get a better knowledge about our rights and the way we can use them on a daily basis to prevent any abuse or limitations of them. Visit MyAIU Human Rights.