Disarmament and preservation of peace on earth. The problem of peace and disarmament, the prevention of a new world war

THE PROBLEM OF PEACE AND DISARMAMENT

There is every reason to believe that the problem of strengthening peace is decisive in the entire system of global problems of our time.

If at first the history of wars had a local or regional character, then in the era when the world capitalist economy arose, and then mankind was divided into the camp of socialism and the camp of capitalism, wars acquired a world, global character (all mankind knew more than 14 thousand wars).

AT 17 century during the wars only in Europe died 3,3 million people in 18 century - 5,4 million, in 1801 – 1914 years - 5,7 million people. AT first more than died in the world war 20 million people, and second world order 70 million people (and this is not counting indirect losses). Already after the Second World War, there were more than 300 military conflicts in various regions of the planet, and conflicts between the USSR and the USA over Cuba and between India and Pakistan almost led to nuclear conflicts.

Any of the currently existing modern weapons:

- atomic;

- thermonuclear;

- chemical;

- bacteriological;

and the latest ones like vacuum, laser, tectonic in cases of their application, even each of them is capable of destroying the whole of humanity.

The following most important circumstances help to assess in its entirety the real danger of a build-up of armaments as a dangerous global process.

Firstly- the pace of weapons improvement is still far ahead of the process of developing and coordinating political means and methods of arms control.

Secondly, the improvement of military equipment blurs the line between weapons as a means of armed struggle against enemy armies and as a means of struggle against the population and economy of states and entire regions.

Thirdly- miniaturization and improvement of nuclear weapons production technology may lead in the near future to a significant reduction or even loss of the possibility of organizing reliable international control over their production and proliferation.

B - fourth, the current progress in the creation of weapons blurs the line between nuclear and conventional war, lowers the threshold for nuclear conflict.

But the point is not only this, but also the fact that the arms race not only contributes to the aggravation of the threat of war, but also creates serious obstacles to the solution of all other global problems.

Firstly, we are talking about huge military spending. According to the UN, more than 1 trillion dollars a year (as far as no one else knows. In the USSR, almost every civilian factory produced military products. This process is typical for all countries with a totalitarian regime, and there are a fairly large number of such countries in the world.

Secondly, the arms race is increasingly drawing developing countries into its orbit. The military spending of developing countries is almost 10 times greater than all foreign economic assistance to these states.

Thirdly consequently, the arms race slows down the solution of socio-economic problems. Economists everywhere acknowledge that spending on the military creates far fewer jobs than the same money invested in civilian sectors of the economy.

B - fourth, the buildup of armaments and preparations for war hinder the solution of the mineral resource and energy problems. The very preparation for war, the entire huge military machine are large consumers of energy resources, primarily oil and oil products ( for holding 1 exercises 1 battle cruiser needs 50 thousand tons of diesel fuel). The bulk of non-ferrous metals also goes to the needs of the military industry ( once every 5-6 years, old ammunition prepared on case of war destroy and replace them with new ones).

B - fifth preparations for war drew into their orbit approximately 25 % of all scientists in the world. The most qualified scientists, engineers and workers work in the field of development and production of weapons. According to official UN data, the activities of more than 100 million people.

It cannot be said that nothing is being done in the world in the field of arms reduction. Financing ever-increasing military budgets is too expensive even for highly developed countries such as the United States, Germany or France. Therefore, even under L.I. Brezhnev between the USSR and the USA agreements were concluded OSV - 1 and OSV - 2. AT 1988 In the year between the USSR and the USA, an agreement was concluded on elimination of intermediate and shorter range missiles. AT 1993 Russia and the United States signed an agreement on reduction of strategic offensive arms. Both countries started conversion production (the problems of conversion are the same - unemployment, insufficient funding for military orders, the transition of military factories to the production of products of a low level of complexity, the loss of scientific potential).

A great contribution to solving the problems of arms reduction is made by the UN, whose resolutions prohibit the use of:

- chemical;

- bacteriological;

- nuclear weapons;

- bullets with a displaced center of gravity.

International work is underway to ban anti-personnel mines.

But it is clear that the problem of disarmament is still very topical. Armament spending is still high.

(By the way, the most common small arms in the world are the Kalashnikov assault rifle. According to the US Defense Information Center, more than 100 million units of Kalashnikov assault rifles of various modifications. In addition to Russia, Kalashnikov assault rifles produce more than 10 countries of the world. The cost of one machine per " black market» ranges from 10 dollars in Afghanistan up to 3.8 thousand dollars in India. According to American weapons experts, nothing better than Kalashnikovs will appear until 2025 of the year.).

Annual defense spending per one soldier(in USD)

1. USA - 190100

2. UK - 170650

3. Germany - 94000

4. France - 90500

5. Poland - 18350

6. Turkey - 12700

7. Russia - 7500

8. Ukraine - 1550

AT 2004 year Russia assigned to defense 400 billion. rubles, USA also 400 billion., but only dollars.

In addition, today there are many regional military conflicts:

Iraq

Tajikistan

Chechnya

Georgia - Abkhazia

Azerbaijan - Armenia

Republics of the former Yugoslavia

Israel and others.

Potentially, at any moment, civil wars may arise in any of the multinational developing states. And if the interests of 2 superpowers (it doesn’t matter which ones) are affected, then the threat of nuclear war remains quite real (as well as due to computer errors).

International cooperation for peace, solution of global security problems, disarmament and conflict resolution

All global problems are permeated with the idea of ​​the geographical unity of mankind and require broad international cooperation for their solution. Especially acute is the problem of maintaining peace on Earth

From the point of view of new political thinking, the achievement of lasting peace on Earth is possible only in the conditions of the establishment of a new type of relationship between all states - a relationship of all-round cooperation.

The program "International cooperation for peace, solving global problems of security, disarmament and conflict resolution" is designed to support and develop relations between international non-governmental organizations, between government and society in the field of improving international security. This program will deal with issues such as the reduction of weapons of mass destruction and conventional weapons.

The purpose of the program is to respond in time to the development of the political process, both in the CIS countries and around the world. The program will also analyze contemporary problems of peace and security.

The program includes the following projects:

• The structure of international security and cooperation with international institutions and non-governmental international organizations;
• Problems of disarmament and non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction;
• Assistance in improving legislation in the field of military-civil relations;

Security issues in relation to armed conflicts and the solution of global problems are dealt with by scientists, politicians, and non-governmental organizations. In the course of work, international and regional conferences, seminars and meetings are held, reports and collections of articles are published.

At the moment, not everyone has an idea about the existing danger, about the possibility and size of a catastrophe with the use of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Mankind does not pay due attention to this problem due to ignorance and unawareness of the entire depth of the problem. In no case should we forget that the threat of the use of WMD, unfortunately, is present in everyday life through the active propaganda of violence. This phenomenon is happening all over the world. Russian President Vladimir Putin said something like this: We must be aware that the nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction has become one of the most important contemporary problems, if not the most important. The fact is that with the advent of the new century, qualitatively new challenges have appeared for mankind - new types of WMD, the phenomenon of international terrorism, which has complicated the problem of its non-proliferation. Non-proliferation is the prevention and non-admission of the emergence of new states with weapons of mass destruction. This can be understood as follows: Russia cannot allow the emergence of new nuclear powers.

Preventing the threat of WMD proliferation is recognized by Russia, the United States and other countries as one of the main tasks of ensuring their national security.

For the first time the world community thought about the non-proliferation of WMD in the 60s of the last century, when such nuclear powers as the USSR, USA, Great Britain, France had already appeared; and China was ready to join them. At this time, such countries as Israel, Sweden, Italy, and others seriously thought about nuclear weapons and even took up their development.

In the same 1960s, Ireland initiated the creation of an international legal document that laid the foundations for the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons. The USSR, the USA and England began to develop the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). They became the first parties to this treaty. It was signed on 07/01/1968, but entered into force in March 1970. France and China entered into this treaty a few decades later.

Its main goals are to prevent the further spread of nuclear weapons, to stimulate cooperation in the field of the use of the atom for peaceful purposes with guarantees from the participating parties, to facilitate negotiations on ending the rivalry in the development of nuclear weapons with the ultimate goal of its complete elimination.

Under the terms of this Treaty, nuclear-weapon states undertake not to assist non-nuclear states in acquiring nuclear explosive devices. Non-nuclear states undertake not to manufacture or acquire such devices. One of the provisions of the Treaty requires the IAEA to carry out measures to ensure safeguards, including the inspection of nuclear materials used in peaceful projects by non-nuclear States parties to the Treaty. The NPT (Article 10, paragraph 2) states that 25 years after the entry into force of the Treaty, a conference is convened to decide whether it should remain in force or not. Conference reports were held under the terms of the Treaty every five years, and in 1995, when it came to the end of its 25-year period, the parties - participants unanimously supported its indefinite extension. They also adopted three binding Declarations of Principles:

• Reaffirmation of previously accepted obligations regarding nuclear weapons and the cessation of all nuclear tests;
• Strengthening disarmament control procedures;
• Creation of a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East and strict observance of the terms of the Non-Proliferation Treaty by all countries without exception.

There are 178 states parties to the treaty, including the existing nuclear powers (with the exception of North Korea), which have come out in favor of a missile technology control regime. There are also four countries conducting nuclear activities that have not joined the Treaty: Israel, India, Pakistan, Cuba.

The Cold War was accompanied by the development and proliferation of nuclear weapons, both by the main adversaries and various non-aligned countries. The end of the Cold War made it possible for the countries of the world community to reduce and then eliminate nuclear weapons. Otherwise, countries will inevitably be drawn into the process of nuclear proliferation, as each religious "superpower" seeks to either strengthen its hegemony or equalize its nuclear power with the power of the enemy or aggressor. The threat of proliferation of nuclear weapons and, to no lesser extent, nuclear technology and know-how has increased significantly since the collapse of the Soviet Union. For the first time, there was a disintegration of a state possessing nuclear weapons, a state - a permanent member of the UN. As a result, more countries with nuclear weapons appeared. This problem was taken very seriously, and after a while Russia received all the rights and obligations of the USSR related to the NPT. She also received the internationally recognized right to the perpetual possession of nuclear weapons. Together with the UN, the NPT fixes for Russia the status of a great power at the level of such countries as the USA, China, England, France.

Western assistance in this area has become an important element in strengthening the nonproliferation regime. This assistance shows that the West does not want to see the CIS countries as a source of spreading threats. At the G-8 summit in Canada in July 2002, important decisions were made on issues of international terrorism and the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

The most important components of the nuclear and other WMD non-proliferation regimes are:

• Export control system, including a well-established national system for accounting, control and physical protection of weapons materials. This also includes the prevention of uncontrolled export of intangible technologies, including in electronic form.
• Brain drain prevention system.
• Security of storage, warehousing, transportation of WMD and materials suitable for its production.
• System for preventing illicit trafficking in nuclear and other WMD and materials.

As for chemical and biological weapons (CW), the main problem is that they do not require a special technological base during manufacture, so it is impossible to create a reliable CW control mechanism. But no matter how international legal documents are created, conferences are held.

Biological weapons are an effective means of achieving the goals of terrorists: they are capable of hitting large masses of the civilian population, and this is very attractive to terrorists, and can easily provoke panic and chaos.

Terrorism is a very big problem in our time. Modern terrorism appears in the form of terrorist acts that have an international scale. Terrorism appears when a society is going through a deep crisis, primarily a crisis of ideology and the state-legal system. In such a society, various opposition groups appear - political, social, national, religious. For them, the legitimacy of the existing government becomes questionable. Terrorism as a mass and politically significant phenomenon is the result of an endemic "de-ideologization", when certain groups in society easily question the legitimacy and rights of the state, and thus self-justify their transition to terror in order to achieve their own goals.

The main strategic conditions for the fight against terrorism:

• recreating a sustainable block world;
• blocking terrorism at the initial stage and preventing its formation and development of structures;
• preventing the ideological justification of terror under the banner of "defending the rights of the nation", "defending the faith", etc.; the debunking of terrorism by all the forces of the media;
• the transfer of all management of anti-terrorist activities to the most reliable special services, with no interference in their work by any other control bodies;
• the use of an agreement with terrorists only by these special services and only to cover up the preparation of an action for the complete destruction of terrorists;
• no concessions to terrorists, no unpunished terrorist act, even if it costs the blood of hostages and random

Introduction…………………………………………………………………..3

1. The problem of peace and disarmament, the prevention of a new world war…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. Environmental problem……………………………………………...8

3. Demographic problem…………………………………………12

4. Energy problem………………………………………………15

5. Raw material problem…………………………………………………..17

6. Food problem………………………………………….18

7. The problem of using the oceans………………………..21

8. The problem of peaceful space exploration………………………………22

conclusions………………………………………………………………......24

List of sources used ……………………………….25

Introduction

The global problems of mankind, which have become the focus of attention of scientists, politicians and the general public, are studied by many sciences, including geography.

The last decades of the XX century. posed many acute and complex problems before the peoples of the world, which are called global. Global problems are problems that cover the entire Earth, all of humanity, all states, pose a threat to its present and future, and also require joint efforts, joint actions of all states and peoples for their solution.

In fact, never before has humanity itself increased in numbers by 2.5 times during the lifetime of only one generation, thereby increasing the strength of the “demographic press”. Never before has humanity entered a period of scientific and technological revolution, has not reached the post-industrial stage of development, has not opened the way to space. Never before had so many natural resources been required for its life support, and the waste it returned to the environment was also not so great. Never before has there been such a globalization of the world economy, such a unified world information system. Finally, never before has the Cold War brought all of humanity so close to the brink of self-destruction.

All this drew attention to the global problems of not only politics, but also science. Global issues that:

First, they concern all mankind, affecting the interests and destinies of all countries, peoples and social strata;

Secondly, they lead to significant economic and social losses, and in cases of exacerbation, they can threaten the very existence of human civilization;

Thirdly, they require cooperation on a global scale, joint actions of all countries and peoples for their solution.

The global problems of mankind have become an important object of interdisciplinary research involving social, technical and natural sciences (economics, sociology, law, geography, biology, philosophy, ecology, physics, chemistry, oceanology, etc.)

The number of global problems varies over a very wide range: from about ten to forty or more. But if we keep in mind the main problems, then there are no more than a dozen of them.

The object of the course work is to determine the global problems of mankind on the planet.

The subject of this work is the tasks and goals of solving global problems, identifying the possible consequences of the manifestation of global problems at the present stage of development of society.

Tasks that need to be solved to achieve the goal:

The problem of peace and disarmament, the prevention of a new world war;

Ecological problem;

demographic problem;

Energy problem;

Raw material problem;

food problem;

The problem of using the World Ocean;

The problem of peaceful space exploration.

The problem of peace and disarmament, the prevention of a new world war

The process of globalization has finally begun to convey to people one simple truth: we have one planet. If it is destroyed, then there will simply be nowhere to live. That is why the problem of peace and disarmament is so acute. It would seem, what could be easier: to get together and agree. Meetings are constantly held at the UN, where responsible people are trying to reduce the level of tension on the planet. And every time we have to discuss how the problem of peace and disarmament, the prevention of a new world war, can be solved.

The problem of maintaining peace on earth, preventing military catastrophes and conflicts has always been one of the most important throughout the existence of mankind. Formed in many countries, military-industrial complexes spend huge amounts of money on the production of weapons and scientific research in this area. Rapid progress in the military field is precisely what threatens security and contributes to the deepening of global problems.

Disarmament is one of the global problems of our time, which directly affects the survival of human civilization. This is a system of measures aimed at ending the arms race, limiting, reducing and eliminating the means of warfare. Mankind is increasingly aware of the importance and relevance of this problem, trying to keep it within the framework controlled by the world community. Still, the problem of disarmament is ambiguous, since it is connected with the possibility of the death of civilization.

This is the number 1 problem in the world, without solving it, it is impossible to solve other global problems. According to rough estimates, in the entire history of mankind there have been 14.5 thousand wars in the world. It is simply impossible to assess the damage they caused. More than 90% of those killed in wars and armed conflicts account for the 20th century. 82% of the dead are civilians, and the material damage caused by the First and Second World Wars is 345 billion dollars. After the Second World War, the population of Europe decreased by 60-75 million people. Human losses have a negative impact on the development of the economy. The countries spent 208 and 662 billion dollars on these wars.

With the advent of nuclear weapons, there was a threat of destruction of the entire modern civilization. A single nuclear charge can contain a destructive force that exceeds the power of all explosives in all previous wars combined. Nuclear powers, except for the USA, Great Britain, France, China, Russia, are: Iran, Iraq, North Korea, South Africa, Japan, Taiwan, Brazil, Argentina. There are other types of weapons of mass destruction: chemical, bacteriological, laser. It is estimated that there are 10 tons of explosives per person, and daily spending on military purposes is 1 billion dollars 1 trillion. dollars a year - spending on military purposes around the world. Every minute the world spends 2 million US dollars on the arms race. Numerous regional and local conflicts present a military threat today. Thus, there are about 150 nuclear power plants in Europe, and their destruction and the destruction of chemical facilities pose a very great danger. The policy of many countries is ready to sacrifice the fate of entire peoples (for example, the war on the Balkan Peninsula and other parts of the globe). Ultimately, this could lead to a global military conflict.

The following most important circumstances will help to fully assess the real danger of the arms race as a pernicious global process. First, the progress of military technology has reached such a scale that more and more advanced weapons and new weapon systems are appearing at an unprecedented speed. This blurs the line between weapons as a means of armed struggle against enemy armies and as a means of struggle against the population and economy of states and entire regions.

Secondly, the further development of nuclear missile weapons, which are accompanied by the development of appropriate military-political doctrines for their use, makes political control over them more and more difficult.

Thirdly, progress in the creation of modern means of destruction is gradually blurring the line between nuclear and conventional war.

Fourth, the problem of the arms race has included in its ranks the interests of people working in industries that create the means of destroying the military-industrial complex, forcing them to unwittingly come out in defense of it.

Fifth, the problem of increasing or reducing the production of weapons runs into conflicting interests of different states, because it ensures their geopolitical interests.

Statistically, the pernicious danger of a further arms race can be illustrated as follows: global military spending increased more than 30 times during the 20th century. If in the period between the world wars humanity spent from 20 to 22 billion dollars annually on military purposes, today it is more than 1 trillion. dollars. According to UN experts, about 100 million people are included in the sphere of military production activities, the number of armies that exist today reaches almost 40 million people, and up to 500 thousand men are employed in military research and the creation of new weapons. At the same time, military purposes account for 2/5 of all spending on science. Scientists have calculated that the funds spent on armaments for only one year would be enough to irrigate 150 million hectares of land, the use of which could feed 1 billion people. Such spending would be sufficient to build 100 million apartments or other modern housing for 500 million people in one year.

A particularly paradoxical phenomenon is the arms race in the countries of the "third world", where 80% of the population of our planet lives, and the role in world production is less than 20%. The poorest countries (those with a GNP per capita of less than $440), which generate just 5% of the world's goods and services and are home to more than half of the world's population, account for 7.5% of global arms spending, up from 1%. for health care and less than 3% for education. In these countries, there is 1 doctor per 3,700 people, and 250 people per soldier. The direct socio-economic damage accumulated by the arms race on a global scale many times exceeds all the losses suffered by the countries of the world through various natural disasters. The trend towards the growth of resources diverted to military purposes leads to the aggravation of economic and social problems in many countries, and adversely affects the development of civilian production and the standard of living of peoples. Therefore, disarmament, curtailment of military production is today one of the problems that requires the participation of the entire world community.

"Problems of peace and disarmament"

Introduction

1. Wars: Causes and Victims

2. Arms control problem

Conclusion

List of used literature

“Devastating wars will always take place on earth ... And death will often be the lot of all the belligerents. With boundless malice, these savages will destroy many trees in the forests of the planet, and then turn their fury on everything that is still alive around, bringing him pain and destruction, suffering and death. Neither on earth, nor under earth, nor under water will there be anything untouched and undamaged. The wind will scatter the land devoid of vegetation around the world and sprinkle it with the remains of creatures that once filled different countries with life ”- this chilling prophecy belongs to the great Italian of the Renaissance, Leonardo da Vinci.

Today you see that the brilliant painter was not so naive in his prediction. Indeed, who today will take the liberty of reproaching the author of these words, which are not very pleasant for us, of spreading some kind of “absurd fables” or inciting unnecessary passions? These are unlikely to be found, because the great Leonardo turned out to be right in many ways. Unfortunately, the whole history of the development of mankind is a terrible history of military operations.

The second part of the prophecy of Leonardo da Vinci, to our great happiness, has not yet been realized, or rather: it has not been fully realized. But who today is not clear that for the first time in its history, humanity has seriously faced the question: "To be or not to be?" (At the same time, we emphasize: humanity collided, and not an individual person, with whose fate the Hamlet question is connected). Blood, torment and tears were all over the human path. However, new generations always came to replace the dead and the dead, and the future was, as it were, guaranteed. But now there is no such guarantee.

In the period from 1900 to 1938, 24 wars broke out, and in the years 1946-1979 - 130. More and more human casualties became. 3.7 million people died in the Napoleonic Wars, 10 million in World War I, 55 million in World War II (together with the civilian population), and 100 million in all wars of the 20th century. To this we can add that the first world war captured an area in Europe of 200 thousand km2, and the second already - 3.3 million km2.

Thus, the Heidelberg Institute (Germany) in 2006 registered 278 conflicts. 35 of them are of an acutely violent nature. Both regular troops and detachments of militants participate in armed clashes. But not only they suffer human losses: there are even more victims among the civilian population. In 83 cases, the conflicts proceeded in a less severe form, i.e. the use of force occurred only occasionally. In the remaining 160 cases, conflict situations were not accompanied by hostilities. 100 of them were in the nature of a declarative confrontation, and 60 proceeded in the form of a hidden confrontation.

According to the Center for Defense Information (USA), there are only 15 major conflicts in the world (losses exceed 1 thousand people). Experts from the Stockholm SIPRI Institute believe that this year 19 major armed conflicts took place in 16 places on the planet.

More than half of all hot spots are on the African continent. The war in Iraq has been going on in the Greater Middle East for several years now. Afghanistan, where NATO is trying to restore order, is also far from calm, and the intensity of attacks by the Taliban and al-Qaeda militants on government structures, troops and police, and on the military units of the North Atlantic Alliance is only increasing.

Some international experts suggest that armed conflicts annually claim up to 300,000 lives, mostly civilians. They account for 65 to 90% of losses (the figure varies depending on the intensity of hostilities). Statistics show that only 5% of those killed in World War I were civilians, and in World War II, about 70% of those killed were not combatants.

However, in none of the current armed conflicts there are clashes between different countries. The struggle is going on within the dysfunctional states. Governments are confronted by various paramilitaries of rebels, militants and separatists. And they all serve different purposes.

Back in 2001, after large-scale terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, the United States declared war on international terrorism, but even today, five years later, there is no end in sight to it, more and more forces are being drawn into it.

For example, the wave of violence in Iraq does not subside. Since the country was occupied and Saddam Hussein's regime was overthrown in 2003, militant attacks have hit the United States and its allies. Today, Iraq is slipping more and more into the abyss of civil war. Many US experts, and, above all, members of a special commission that recently submitted 79 recommendations to President George W. Bush on settling the situation in Mesopotamia, insist on the withdrawal of US troops from the region. However, the owner of the White House, at the request of the generals and in accordance with his intentions to win at all costs, decided to increase the size of the contingent.

In Sudan, there is a fierce confrontation between the Muslim north and the Christian south, striving for autonomy. The first skirmishes between the Sudan People's Liberation Army and the Justice and Equality Movement took place in 1983. In 2003, the confrontation took the form of a ruthless war in Darfur. Here, too, there is no end in sight to armed violence, and tensions only continue to grow.

The main sources of armed conflicts and the scale of victims associated with them are reflected in Appendix 1 and 3. Let's try to understand the causes of wars of various scales.

If until the 20th century the struggle for territories rich in minerals was carried out primarily by states, now numerous irregular armies of separatists and simply bandits have joined the struggle.

The UN concluded that since the end of the Cold War (1991), the number of armed conflicts in the world has decreased by 40%. Moreover, wars have become much less bloody. If in 1950 the average armed conflict claimed the lives of 37 thousand people, then in 2002 - 600. The UN believes that the merit in reducing the number of wars belongs to the international community. The UN and individual countries of the world are making significant efforts to prevent new wars from breaking out and stopping old ones. In addition, the increase in the number of democratic regimes plays a positive role: it is generally accepted that modern democracies do not go to war with each other.

Renowned analyst Michael Clare, author of Resource Wars, is convinced that the world has entered an era of resource wars, and year by year these wars will become more frequent and fierce. The reason is the growing needs of mankind and the reduction of natural resources. Moreover, according to Clare, the most likely wars that will be waged for control over fresh water reserves.

Throughout human history, states have fought each other for territories rich in minerals. The bloody war between Iraq and Iran was started because of Iraqi claims to a number of Iranian territories rich in oil. For the same reason, Iraq occupied Kuwait in 1990, which in Baghdad was considered an integral part of Iraqi territory. Today, approximately 50 of the 192 countries in the world dispute certain territories with their neighbors. Quite often, these claims do not become the subject of diplomatic disputes, since it is too dangerous to make these claims an integral part of bilateral relations. However, some politicians are in favor of a speedy resolution of such problems. According to the American researcher Daniel Pipes, there are 20 such disputes in Africa (for example, Libya argues with Chad and Niger, Cameroon with Nigeria, Ethiopia with Somalia, etc.), in Europe - 19, in the Middle East - 12, in Latin America - 8. China is a kind of leader in the number of claims - it claims 7 land plots, regarding which its neighbors have a different opinion.

The "resource" component, that is, the factor of the presence of significant mineral reserves in the disputed territory or in the part of the ocean belonging to it, as a rule, makes it difficult to resolve interstate disputes. Examples of such conflicts are the situation that has developed around the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands, which are claimed by Great Britain and Argentina (large deposits of oil have been discovered in the Falklands), the islands in Corisco Bay, which are claimed by Equatorial Guinea and Gabon (oil has also been discovered there) , the islands of Abu Musa and Tanb in the Strait of Hormuz (Iran and the United Arab Emirates, oil), the Spratly archipelago (the subject of a dispute between China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines and Brunei. This area is rich in high-quality oil, competing countries opened hostilities several times ) etc.

The most peaceful dispute is over the territories of Antarctica (which also contain significant reserves of various minerals), which are claimed by Australia, France, Norway, New Zealand, Argentina, Chile and Great Britain, with the last three countries contesting a number of territories of the ice continent from each other. A number of states of the world, in principle, do not recognize these claims, but other countries reserve the right to make similar demands.

Since all applicants for a piece of the Antarctic pie are parties to the Antarctic Treaty, signed in 1959, recognizing the Sixth Continent as a zone of peace and international cooperation, free from weapons, the transition of these disputes to a military stage is almost impossible. However, in the 1970s and 1980s, the military dictatorships of Chile and Argentina demonstratively declared the Antarctic Islands to be the territories of their countries, which provoked protests from the world community.

However, in the modern world, the most bloody wars take place not between two states, but between residents of one country. The vast majority of modern armed conflicts do not occur between states, but are ethnic, religious, class, etc. According to the former financier and now researcher Ted Fishman, with rare exceptions, these wars were, first of all, wars for money. In his opinion, wars began where rival clans began to fight for control over deposits of oil, gas, gold, diamonds, etc.

In the United States over the past 10 years, at least 20 scientific papers have been published on the search for a connection between the country's natural wealth and the risk of war. Most researchers agree that the exact relationship has not yet been determined. It is generally accepted that mineral reserves become an excellent "fuel" for conflict. The reasons for this are quite prosaic: an insurgent group that does not have stable sources of funding (except for minerals, this can be income from the sale of drugs, weapons, rackets, etc.) is not able to arm a significant number of its supporters and, moreover, to conduct a systematic and long-term military campaign. It is also important that the war is fought for control over resources that are not only easy to sell, but also easy to mine.

As a result, the main goal of many such groups is not to overthrow the central government or acquire civil rights that their social, ethnic, religious, etc. group was deprived of, but to establish and maintain control over resources.

Several attempts have been made to identify "risk factors" contributing to the outbreak of such a war. Economists Paul Koller and Anke Hoeffler found that countries with one or two major resources used as their main export (such as oil or cocoa) are five times more likely to experience a civil war problem than diversified economies. The most dangerous is the level of 26% - meaning the share of the state's gross domestic product, obtained through the export of one type of raw material.

The less developed the economy of a country, and the less diversified it is, the more likely it is to start a civil war. James Fearon and David Laytin, authors of Ethnicity, Guerrilla and Civil War, came to a similar conclusion. Ibrahim Elbadavi and Nicolas Sambanis, the authors of the study “How many wars are we waiting for?” argue with them, arguing that the presence of a resource component does not increase the risk of a war.

William Renault, a professor at Northwestern University, names another "risk factor" - the inefficiency of the central government. War often begins where those in power seek, first of all, only for personal enrichment. Michael Renner, author of The Anatomy of Resource Wars, notes that quite often armed conflicts arose due to the existence of vicious schemes for generating income from the exploitation of natural resources (for example, Mobutu, the ruler of Zaire, had a personal fortune that exceeded the country's annual GDP) . This problem is especially acute in Africa, where the ruling clans, through privatization, gain control over the main sources of raw materials and the largest enterprises. Resentful clans and factions sometimes resort to military force to redistribute property in their favor.

David Keane, lecturer at the London School of Economics, notes that such wars are difficult to end. The reason is that the war enriches certain groups of people - officials, military, businessmen, etc., who profit from the underground trade in resources, weapons, etc. If officials and soldiers receive a small salary, then they seek to rectify the situation and, in fact, turn into into field commanders doing business in war.

It is impossible to determine the amount of valuable mineral resources illegally supplied to the world market by rebel and other illegal structures. For example, in 1999, De Beers concluded that rough diamonds mined in conflict zones accounted for 4% of global production. A year later, a group of UN experts stated that up to 20% of all rough diamonds circulating in the world are of illegal origin.

Transnational corporations also play a negative role, periodically trying to capitalize on the conflict. According to the research Worldwatch Institute, De Beers Corporation bought up diamonds put on the market by rebel groups, while oil companies Chevron and Elf sponsored and trained the armed forces of several African states, seeking to ensure their control over oil fields.

O One of the most important issues in the sphere of strategic security is arms control and disarmament in the world. This question has been raised since the end of the 19th century, and in the 20th after the bloody Second World War it became even more important. In this regard, the United Nations and other international organizations have undertaken arms control and disarmament efforts in three areas: nuclear, conventional and biological weapons. However, unfortunately, the human community still does not have a clear program of general disarmament.

In 2004, the countries of the world spent a total of more than one trillion dollars on military needs. This amount means the allocation of more than 6% of the world's gross production for the development and purchase of weapons. According to a report by the International Institute for Peace Studies in Stockholm, of the total world military spending in 2004, about 47% came from the United States alone.

Currently, the arms trade is a significant part of the total world trade, or rather about 16% of the 5 trillion. dollars of world trade, this is 800 billion. The sale of weapons and military equipment in the world continues to grow, so that weapons and defense enterprises in 2002-2003. increased production by 25%. In 2003, these businesses generated $236 billion in arms sales, with US companies accounting for 63%. The United States has been the world's largest arms supplier since the end of the Cold War. They are followed by Russia, Great Britain and France.

It is interesting to know that in 2002 the total value of arms sales in the world was 188 billion dollars, which indicates a significant increase in the production of weapons in a limited number of countries and the supply of these weapons to countries involved in armed conflicts, such as the Middle East. For the past half century, the countries of the Middle East have been among the world's top arms buyers. The facts show that there is an inextricable link between arms transfers and the outbreak of crises and subsequent armed conflicts around the world.

In view of the huge profits received from the sale of weapons in the world, some countries-producers of weapons, provoking friction and disagreements between other countries, which then develop into political and interethnic conflicts, as if create an opportunity to increase the sale of their weapons. For example, the US military-industrial complex is a conglomerate of private defense enterprises, which includes very influential and powerful companies and concerns.

This super-powerful conglomerate has a strong influence on the domestic and foreign policy of governments, for example in the US and the UK. So on May 22, 2005, when the so-called fight against terrorism had not yet freed Bush's hands for aggression and wars, the British newspaper The Guardian wrote:

“George Bush does not hide his main presidential task. This task is to reward all those corporations and companies that helped him get into the White House. In addition to oil corporations and large tobacco companies, rewards in the total amount of $ 200 billion from the US budget are expected by military-industrial complex enterprises. Mr. Bush is looking for the image of a new enemy under the guise of national security to accomplish this task, and he is looking for a new enemy around the world.

After the events of September 2001, Bush, Rumsfeld and other officials in the Pentagon received the necessary pretext to start a war. The war on international terrorism was the pretext that helped the administration raise the defense budget from $310.5 billion to $343 billion in 2002. Following this, Lockheed Martin was awarded the largest defense contract in history worth $200 billion. Unfortunately, today the world community, under the pretext of ensuring world security, is spending huge amounts of money on the purchase of the latest weapons. UN Food Program Executive Director James Morris believes that a small fraction of the Iraq war budget could feed all the hungry and poor people in the world and serve world peace and security. In 2004, the UN Food Program needed three billion dollars to provide humanitarian assistance to millions of people. At the same time, several hundred billion dollars have already been spent on the war in Iraq, and irreparable damage has been done to the Iraqi people.

Due to the devastating consequences of the buildup of armaments, namely wars, conflicts, destruction and the colossal costs associated with this, the world community has been striving for many years to somehow curb the arms race and achieve general disarmament. In recent years, as a result of progress in the development of ever new weapons, it has become increasingly difficult to give qualitative and quantitative estimates of the production of weapons in the world. The complexity is added, on the one hand, by the growing accuracy of destruction, and, on the other hand, by the development of new means of intercepting these weapons. Today, the pace of qualitative, technical development of means of warfare is constantly accelerating. Therefore, the first step is to “slow down”. However, all signs point to the fact that the world community has not yet achieved appreciable success in arms control, curbing the arms race and general disarmament.

Due to the huge profits made from the arms trade, the military industries are constantly developing and applying the latest technologies in production. At the same time, growing investment in the military-industrial complex, mainly from the private sector in Western countries, increases the anxieties and fears of the entire human community. Appendix 2 provides data on arms sales over the past 10 years. In principle, the question of the need for arms control and even disarmament in the world arose at the beginning of the 19th century. However, after two bloody world wars of the 20th century and the hard experience acquired at the cost of millions of lives, mankind has taken up this issue more seriously and in this regard several agreements have been signed at the international and regional levels.

One of the most important international bodies dealing with arms control and general disarmament is the United Nations. This organization, whose philosophy of existence is to protect peace and ensure world security, from the very beginning of its activity, faced problems and disagreements in the interpretation of arms control and disarmament. Studying the track record of the UN in this area, we see that, despite the functioning of numerous committees and commissions, it has not managed to make significant progress in curbing the arms race.

The UN agencies that are somehow connected with arms control include the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Commission on Non-Nuclear Arms, the Disarmament Commission, the Disarmament Committee, etc. For example, after the atomic bombing of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the American Air Force in In 1945, in order to prevent a repetition of these horrors, the Atomic Energy Commission was created in 1946. This commission had overarching powers to oversee the proliferation of primary nuclear substances and had the ability to inspect the country's nuclear facilities in order to gain confidence in the peaceful use of nuclear energy. Following this, in 1947, the Commission on Non-Nuclear Arms was formed.

The tasks of the commission on non-nuclear weapons, which included permanent members of the UN Security Council, included measures to reduce non-nuclear weapons. However, in 1950 this commission was dissolved. After the creation of nuclear weapons in the Soviet Union and the outbreak of the Korean War, a new body was formed, the Disarmament Commission, which operated until 1957. However, by agreement between the USA and the USSR, this commission was also dissolved, and instead of it, a UN Disarmament Committee was formed, in which included 10 UN member states. The Committee, which proclaimed its goal complete and comprehensive disarmament in the world, acted outside the United Nations. Throughout the activity of this committee, various initiatives and programs have been proposed to curb the arms race and general disarmament. However, the cold war between the US and the USSR and tensions in international relations prevented the implementation of any of these projects.

The activities of the 10-party disarmament committee ceased in 1960. Three years later, by agreement between the United States, the Soviet Union and Great Britain, another disarmament committee was created to limit nuclear tests, this time consisting of 18 countries. With the accession of the rest of the UN members to this committee, the Conference on Disarmament was formed, which operates within the framework of the United Nations.

Along with the activities aimed at the control and limitation of arms in the world, other disarmament efforts were also made at the international level. With the division of all weapons into nuclear and non-nuclear, treaties and agreements were concluded between different countries. The most important conventions in this regard are the Moscow Agreement of 1963 and the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of 1968.

Summing up what has been said and taking a look at the entire process of building up armaments in the world, it can be noted that, despite the efforts made in the framework of arms control and global disarmament, the arms race in the world is still ongoing. More than half a century after the formation of the United Nations, the contribution of this organization to world disarmament remains negligible. During the Cold War, this circumstance assigned the UN a marginal, ineffective role in resolving world problems, while at the same time provoking a qualitative and quantitative buildup of weapons, both nuclear and conventional.

Among the countries producing and exporting weapons, the United States still retains, undoubtedly, the leading position. The militaristic plans and ambitions of such powers as the United States since the Cold War have shown that the world community is still very far from realizing its main aspirations, i.e. arms control and, to the extent possible, global disarmament, achieving world peace. For in recent decades, the United States and other arms manufacturers continue to develop new technologies for the production of the latest weapons. This speaks of the failure of all peacekeeping and disarmament efforts, including the already signed agreements and conventions on the control and prohibition of especially dangerous types of weapons. As long as major military powers like the United States do not live up to their obligations under disarmament agreements, all these conventions, with no executive guarantees, remain just beautiful drafts on paper.

1. James A. Russell, WMD Proliferation, Globalization, and International Security: Whither the Nexus and National Security? – Strategic Insights, Volume V, Issue 6 (July 2006)

2. Igor Ivanov, International Security in the Era of Globalization – www.globalpolicy.org/globaliz/define/2003/0304security.htm

3. Stephen G. Brooks, Producing Security: Multinational Corporations, Globalization, and the Changing Calculus of Conflict - Princeton Studies in International History and Politics, Princeton University Press, USA 2005. – p. 337

5. John J. Handful, The Challenges of Transformation - NATO Review, Spring 2005 www.nato.int/review

6. Robert J. Bell, Achievements in NATO Transformation - NATO Review, Spring 2005 www.nato.int/review

7. NATO Response Force being tested. // NATO News No. 2/2006 - p.10

8. Ivo Daalder and James Goldgeier, Global NATO – Foreign Affairs, September/October 2006. – p. 105

9. "G8 countries: the largest exporters of arms" Fragment of the report within the framework of the campaign "Weapons - under control!" // SIPRI. - 22nd of June. 2005.

Attachment 1

Appendix 2

The table lists the leading arms suppliers, as well as the volume of all arms transfers in the world (million US dollars of current purchasing power) from 1996 to 2003 (according to SIPRI).

Appendix 3

Wars and major conflicts in 2006

Problems of Russian foreign trade

Abstract on international relations

Problems of modern globalization of the world economy

"Problems of peace and disarmament"

Introduction

1. Wars: Causes and Victims

2. Arms control problem

Conclusion

List of used literature

“Devastating wars will always take place on earth ... And death will often be the lot of all the belligerents. With boundless malice, these savages will destroy many trees in the forests of the planet, and then turn their fury on everything that is still alive around, bringing him pain and destruction, suffering and death. Neither on earth, nor under earth, nor under water will there be anything untouched and undamaged. The wind will scatter the land devoid of vegetation around the world and sprinkle it with the remains of creatures that once filled different countries with life ”- this chilling prophecy belongs to the great Italian of the Renaissance, Leonardo da Vinci.

Today you see that the brilliant painter was not so naive in his prediction. Indeed, who today will take the liberty of reproaching the author of these words, which are not very pleasant for us, of spreading some kind of “absurd fables” or inciting unnecessary passions? These are unlikely to be found, because the great Leonardo turned out to be right in many ways. Unfortunately, the whole history of the development of mankind is a terrible history of military operations.

The second part of the prophecy of Leonardo da Vinci, to our great happiness, has not yet been realized, or rather: it has not been fully realized. But who today is not clear that for the first time in its history, humanity has seriously faced the question: "To be or not to be?" (At the same time, we emphasize: humanity collided, and not an individual person, with whose fate the Hamlet question is connected). Blood, torment and tears were all over the human path. However, new generations always came to replace the dead and the dead, and the future was, as it were, guaranteed. But now there is no such guarantee.

In the period from 1900 to 1938, 24 wars broke out, and in the years 1946-1979 - 130. More and more human casualties became. 3.7 million people died in the Napoleonic Wars, 10 million in World War I, 55 million in World War II (together with the civilian population), and 100 million in all wars of the 20th century. To this we can add that the first world war captured an area in Europe of 200 thousand km 2, and the second already - 3.3 million km 2.

Thus, the Heidelberg Institute (Germany) in 2006 registered 278 conflicts. 35 of them are of an acutely violent nature. Both regular troops and detachments of militants participate in armed clashes. But not only they suffer human losses: there are even more victims among the civilian population. In 83 cases, the conflicts proceeded in a less severe form, i.e. the use of force occurred only occasionally. In the remaining 160 cases, conflict situations were not accompanied by hostilities. 100 of them were in the nature of a declarative confrontation, and 60 proceeded in the form of a hidden confrontation.

According to the Center for Defense Information (USA), there are only 15 major conflicts in the world (losses exceed 1 thousand people). Experts from the Stockholm SIPRI Institute believe that this year 19 major armed conflicts took place in 16 places on the planet.

More than half of all hot spots are on the African continent. The war in Iraq has been going on in the Greater Middle East for several years now. Afghanistan, where NATO is trying to restore order, is also far from calm, and the intensity of attacks by the Taliban and al-Qaeda militants on government structures, troops and police, and on the military units of the North Atlantic Alliance is only increasing.

Some international experts suggest that armed conflicts annually claim up to 300,000 lives, mostly civilians. They account for 65 to 90% of losses (the figure varies depending on the intensity of hostilities). Statistics show that only 5% of those killed in World War I were civilians, and in World War II, about 70% of those killed were not combatants.

However, in none of the current armed conflicts there are clashes between different countries. The struggle is going on within the dysfunctional states. Governments are confronted by various paramilitaries of rebels, militants and separatists. And they all serve different purposes.

Back in 2001, after large-scale terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, the United States declared war on international terrorism, but even today, five years later, there is no end in sight to it, more and more forces are being drawn into it.

For example, the wave of violence in Iraq does not subside. Since the country was occupied and Saddam Hussein's regime was overthrown in 2003, militant attacks have hit the United States and its allies. Today, Iraq is slipping more and more into the abyss of civil war. Many US experts, and, above all, members of a special commission that recently submitted 79 recommendations to President George W. Bush on settling the situation in Mesopotamia, insist on the withdrawal of US troops from the region. However, the owner of the White House, at the request of the generals and in accordance with his intentions to win at all costs, decided to increase the size of the contingent.

In Sudan, there is a fierce confrontation between the Muslim north and the Christian south, striving for autonomy. The first skirmishes between the Sudan People's Liberation Army and the Justice and Equality Movement took place in 1983. In 2003, the confrontation took the form of a ruthless war in Darfur. Here, too, there is no end in sight to armed violence, and tensions only continue to grow.

The main sources of armed conflicts and the scale of victims associated with them are reflected in Appendix 1 and 3. Let's try to understand the causes of wars of various scales.

If until the 20th century the struggle for territories rich in minerals was carried out primarily by states, now numerous irregular armies of separatists and simply bandits have joined the struggle.

The UN concluded that since the end of the Cold War (1991), the number of armed conflicts in the world has decreased by 40%. Moreover, wars have become much less bloody. If in 1950 the average armed conflict claimed the lives of 37 thousand people, then in 2002 - 600. The UN believes that the merit in reducing the number of wars belongs to the international community. The UN and individual countries of the world are making significant efforts to prevent new wars from breaking out and stopping old ones. In addition, the increase in the number of democratic regimes plays a positive role: it is generally accepted that modern democracies do not go to war with each other.

Renowned analyst Michael Clare, author of Resource Wars, is convinced that the world has entered an era of resource wars, and year by year these wars will become more frequent and fierce. The reason is the growing needs of mankind and the reduction of natural resources. Moreover, according to Clare, the most likely wars that will be waged for control over fresh water reserves.

Throughout human history, states have fought each other for territories rich in minerals. The bloody war between Iraq and Iran was started because of Iraqi claims to a number of Iranian territories rich in oil. For the same reason, Iraq occupied Kuwait in 1990, which in Baghdad was considered an integral part of Iraqi territory. Today, approximately 50 of the 192 countries in the world dispute certain territories with their neighbors. Quite often, these claims do not become the subject of diplomatic disputes, since it is too dangerous to make these claims an integral part of bilateral relations. However, some politicians are in favor of a speedy resolution of such problems. According to the American researcher Daniel Pipes, there are 20 such disputes in Africa (for example, Libya argues with Chad and Niger, Cameroon with Nigeria, Ethiopia with Somalia, etc.), in Europe - 19, in the Middle East - 12, in Latin America - 8. China is a kind of leader in the number of claims - it claims 7 land plots, regarding which its neighbors have a different opinion.

The "resource" component, that is, the factor of the presence of significant mineral reserves in the disputed territory or in the part of the ocean belonging to it, as a rule, makes it difficult to resolve interstate disputes. Examples of such conflicts are the situation that has developed around the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands, which are claimed by Great Britain and Argentina (large deposits of oil have been discovered in the Falklands), the islands in Corisco Bay, which are claimed by Equatorial Guinea and Gabon (oil has also been discovered there) , the islands of Abu Musa and Tanb in the Strait of Hormuz (Iran and the United Arab Emirates, oil), the Spratly archipelago (the subject of a dispute between China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines and Brunei. This area is rich in high-quality oil, competing countries opened hostilities several times ) etc.

The most peaceful dispute is over the territories of Antarctica (which also contain significant reserves of various minerals), which are claimed by Australia, France, Norway, New Zealand, Argentina, Chile and Great Britain, with the last three countries contesting a number of territories of the ice continent from each other. A number of states of the world, in principle, do not recognize these claims, but other countries reserve the right to make similar demands.

Since all applicants for a piece of the Antarctic pie are parties to the Antarctic Treaty, signed in 1959, recognizing the Sixth Continent as a zone of peace and international cooperation, free from weapons, the transition of these disputes to a military stage is almost impossible. However, in the 1970s and 1980s, the military dictatorships of Chile and Argentina demonstratively declared the Antarctic Islands to be the territories of their countries, which provoked protests from the world community.