international relations 22

For Question 1 please can I have a response to the following post:

The conflict in between Chechnya and Russia was driven by two distinct national outlooks. “The Chechens’ collective viewpoint was focused on nationalism and having to defend their land against foreign invaders which over the centuries has molded their character” (Yevsyukova, 1995). “The Russians were focused on expanding their national borders in order to secure the Russian homeland with a combination of military actions and to reign in the Chechens and other Caucasus ethnic groups” (Yevsyukova, 1995). “These ethnic groups continuously resisted the Russian Empire and later the Soviet Union’s continuous (over 200 years) pacification efforts to ensure complete control over Chechnya” (Yevsyukova, 1995). In these circumstances, the opportunities for both Chechens and Russians to directly negotiate, or willingness to allow third party mediators to resolve this situation without violence was limited.

The war can still be resolved without engaging in violence. The best way to end the war is by dismantling the bases whereby both Russia and Chechen can withdraw their military forces so that there will be no one to fight. According to Zhukov (2012), “the bases are often the roots that support and facilitate wars because every side would want to show how far they can function.” Withdrawing the bases also threaten political actors so that they would not chart any course of wars but focus on the welfare of the local populations. Supporting independent economic development would prepare every state to build themselves and stop depending on others whilst being exposed to dictatorship. Interdependence of economic provisions has often exposed countries towards being controlled off their financial, human and natural resources and such cause conflicts.

There are possibilities for this conflict to be resolved without violence. For any non-violent methods of engagement to begin both sides will have to rely on the citizens, politicians, religious leaders, and scholars with an understanding of the opposing sides positions. Dr. Reza Najafbagy’s article, Problems of Effective Cross-Cultural Communication and Conflict Resolution, identifies “co-orientation of any effort that may be necessary to familiarize and train an individual in the life, work, social and political relations, norms, values, traditions, religion and other aspects of one’s own culture and those of other concerned nations” (Najafbagy, 2008). “At its most basic level co-orientation identifies a level of knowledge and understanding not only of your own country’s culture and history, but also your adversary’s culture and history in order to facilitate cross-cultural communication to encourage discussion, mediation, and negotiation instead of violent conflict resolution methods” (Najafbagy, 2008).

The mechanisms for intervening in intra-state conflicts also require some elaboration. For example, “the United Nations identifies three goals in terms of resolving ongoing conflicts: preventative diplomacy, peacemaking, and peacekeeping” (Buotros-Ghali, 1992). Both Russians and Chechens, across every level of their respective societies, need education and training such as the “United Nations Core Pre-Deployment Training Materials (CPTMs) for peacekeepers” (UN, 2017). The training spells out the importance of working with all actors and not just the host government, with regular dialogue maintained by religious leaders, women and student associations, academics, professional organizations, and other parts of civilian society (Curran, 2013). in order for Russians and Chechens to seek nonviolent methods to find ways to start resolving their long and violent interactions. “Peacekeeping and peacebuilding can thus maintain their conflict resolution potential (Curan, 2013). “The training of communication and negotiation skills for military personnel seeks to inculcate non-violent solutions to potentially violent situations and the training in ‘civil–military coordination’ can prepare military personnel for the earliest stages of peacebuilding” (Curan, 2013).


Curran, David. “Training for Peacekeeping: Towards Increased Understanding of Conflict Resolution?” International Peacekeeping 20.1 (2013): 80–97. Web. DOI: 10.1080/13533312.2012.761841.

Najafbagy, Reza. 2008. “Problems of Effective Cross-Cultural Communication and Conflict Resolution,” Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics, Economics & Culture, Vol. 15/16 Issue 4/1, p146-150, 5pages. Accessed November 12, 2019 from…

United Nations, 2017. “Core Pre-deployment Training Materials,” United Nations Peacekeeping Resource Hub. Accessed November 12, 2019 from

Yevsyukova, M. 1995. “The Conflict between Russia and Chechnya,” Conflict Information Consortium (the former Conflict Research Consortium) at the University of Colorado, Boulder, CO. Working Paper No.95-5(1). Accessed November 12, 2019 from

Zhukov, Y. M. “Roads and the diffusion of insurgent violence: The logistics of conflict in Russia’s North Caucasus.” Political Geography, 31(3), (2012):144-156.…

Question 1. With reference to pre-deployment training, what are the cultural attributes of the Chechens; and the cultural attributes of the Russians; and how does this knowledge play into developing a peacekeeping strategy?

Question 2.

Has the growing number of international institutions led to the enhancement of their respective operational effectiveness? Are there also some examples of collaboration among different international organizations?

"Order a similar paper and get 100% plagiarism free, professional written paper now!"