Tuesday, February 09, 201604:37 PM (GMT +5)

You, Naseer Ahmad and 445,382 others like this.Like Share

Home Beginner's Guide Rules Syllabus Past Papers CSP Members

Home Register Awards Community Today's Posts Search

#11

CSS Forums > CSS Optional subjects > Group I > International Relations I.R. Essay Notes on Important Topics­Yesterday­Today­Tomorrow

User Name User Name Remember Me?

Password Log in

International Relations Notes on IR

Share Thread: Facebook Twitter Google+ Page 2 of 2 < 1 2

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Noman Senior Member

Join Date: Feb 2006Location: BahawalpurPosts: 373Thanks: 191Thanked 406 Times in 287 Posts

International Relations [Part­II The Study of IR]

II THE STUDY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

Over time, scholars have developed a number of approaches to the study of international relations. These approachesinclude realism, neorealism, idealism and liberalism, neoliberalism, and Marxism.A RealismThe most widely accepted approach to understanding international relations is called realism. Realists believe that nationsact only out of self­interest and that their major goal is to advance their own positions of power in the world. The ideas ofrealism come from the writings of such historical figures as Sun Tzu of ancient China, Thucydides of ancient Greece, andRenaissance Italy’s Niccolò Machiavelli. All of these thinkers argued that the leaders of nations use their power to advancethe interests of their own nations with little regard for morality or friendship. In order to survive, realists believe leadersmust build their power and avoid feelings of friendship or morality that might make them vulnerable to more ruthlessadversaries. They believe conflict and war are inevitable. For one nation to gain something, another must lose. This meansalliances with other nations cannot be counted on and cooperation between nations cannot last. Realists believe nationsshould always be heavily armed and ready for war. Friendships, religions, ideologies, cultures, and economic systemsmatter little. Nations act selfishly and do not answer to a higher authority. Realists generally believe that the actions of individual nations have the biggest influence on international relations. Theybelieve that nations act rationally, not impulsively, and that nations weigh the benefits and drawbacks of all their optionsbefore choosing a course of action. They believe nations are not driven by psychological or cultural influences. Instead, theyact with the knowledge that they live in a world where there is no central government over all nations that they can appealto for justice or protection. Without that higher authority, nations must protect themselves and look after their owninterests. Realists believe that these characteristics have applied to all nations throughout history. As a result, realists think that international relations is primarily influenced by international security and military power.They consider military force the most important characteristic of any nation. Other characteristics, such as wealth,population, or moral beliefs, matter primarily because they affect military strength. They see international trade as apotential source of national power, because nations can accumulate wealth by controlling trade. They believe a nation’srelative power compared to other nations is more important than the well­being of its citizens. In a world with an ever­present possibility of war, winning matters above all. The realist approach has been criticized for being too simplistic and for failing to capture the complexities of internationalrelations. Because a nation’s power typically is very difficult to measure, realists have been criticized for their belief thatnations strive only to accumulate power. Critics also argue that a nation’s actions result from the conflicting pulls of variousinterest groups, constituencies, agencies, and individuals. They maintain that the national interest of any nation may beimpossible to define because so many different constituencies exist, and a nation’s pursuit of its interests may be far fromrational. One glaring example is World War I (1914­1918), which seems irrational because almost all participants lost morethan they gained. B NeorealismNeorealism explains international events by looking at the distribution of power among nations rather than the militarymight of individual nations. Neorealism is also called structural realism because it looks at the power structure of the entiresystem of nations. Neorealists believe that events unfold according to general laws or principles. Neorealists often usegame theory and other models to predict the behavior or the participants in international relations. Game theory is amathematical analysis of any conflict that calculates the best course of action under given conditions. However, neorealismlacks some of the richness of traditional realism, which weighs many complex elements—such as geography, willpower, anddiplomacy—to understand the relationships between nations. C Idealism and LiberalismIdealists believe international law and morality are key influences on international events, rather than power alone.International law refers to principles and rules of conduct that nations regard as binding. Idealists think that human nature

#12

is basically good. They believe good habits (such as telling the truth in diplomatic dealings with other nations), education,and the existence of international organizations—such as the UN to facilitate good relations between nations—will result inpeaceful and cooperative international relationships. Idealists see the world as a community of nations that have thepotential to work together to overcome mutual problems. Idealists were particularly active in the 1920s and 1930s, following the painful experience of World War I. United Statespresident Woodrow Wilson and other idealists placed their hopes for peace in the League of Nations, an internationalorganization that existed from 1920 to 1946 to promote world peace and cooperation. These hopes were dashed when theLeague failed to stop German and Japanese aggression in the 1930s, which led to the outbreak of World War II in 1939.Realists blamed idealists for looking too much at how the world should be instead of how it really is. Although the term idealism fell out of use, related liberal approaches to international relations continued after World War IIended in 1945 (see Liberalism). Liberals believe international relations evolved through small changes over time. Liberalsfocus on the interdependence of the world’s countries and the mutual benefits they can gain through cooperating with eachother. Unlike realists, liberals believe that by cooperating together, all nations could win. They also think gaining actualwealth is more important than acquiring more power relative to other countries. Liberals tend to see war not as a naturaltendency but as a tragic mistake that can be prevented or at least minimized by international agreements andorganizations. D NeoliberalismNeoliberalism, also called neoliberal institutionalism, emerged in the 1980s as a new liberal response to realism.Neoliberals believe that the UN and other international institutions can play an important role in resolving conflicts and thatit makes more sense for nations to cooperate and work toward long­term mutual gains rather than focusing on short­termindividual gains. Neoliberals agree with realists that nations act only out of self­interest, but they do not share thepessimism of realists about the possibility for international cooperation. Instead, neoliberals believe nations can cooperatefairly often because it is in their best interests to do so. E MarxismThe theories of 19th­century German philosopher Karl Marx have provided alternatives to both realism and liberalism.Marxist theories have received much less attention since the collapse of Communism in the Soviet Union in 1991. Marxfocused on the inequities between the rich and poor in society and the tendency for the wealthy, more powerful classes toexploit the poorer, weaker ones. Marxists view international relations as an extension of the struggle between the classes,with wealthy countries exploiting poorer, weaker ones. Marxists mainly study imperialism—that is, the practice of strongernations to control or influence weaker ones. They look at the unfair and exploitative aspects of relationships between theworld’s rich and poor nations. This approach is rooted in the theory of imperialism developed by Vladimir Lenin just beforethe 1917 Communist revolution in Russia (see Russian Revolution). Marxists tend to see economic relationships as both thecause of and potential solution to the problem of war. F Other ApproachesIn the 1980s and 1990s, a number of new approaches to international relations emerged. Feminist theories of internationalrelations emphasize the importance of gender roles among the politically powerful in understanding how foreign policy isdeveloped and why nations behave the way they do. Postmodern approaches call into question the basic categories andmethods by which international relations has traditionally been studied, arguing that international relations scholarship is anarbitrary discipline invented by powerful special interests to advance their own agendas. Peace studies is aninterdisciplinary approach to questions of war and peace, openly promoting peace over war. Peace studies teach thatscholars can learn more about certain aspects of international relations, such as diplomacy, by becoming involved in them.

Source:­US Encarta Encyclopedia ® 2008Library of Congress Catalog­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

regards,Noman !

The Following User Says Thank You to Noman For This Useful Post:

sonia shamroze (Wednesday, July 08, 2009)

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Noman Senior Member

Join Date: Feb 2006Location: BahawalpurPosts: 373Thanks: 191Thanked 406 Times in 287 Posts

I.R. Part­III "ACTORS IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS"

III ACTORS IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

The participants in international relations, often called actors, have a great influence on the relationships between nationsand on world affairs. The major participants include the nations themselves, the leaders of those nations, substate actors(groups or organizations within a nation), transnational actors (organizations operating in more than one country), andinternational organizations.

Start Downloadreadingfanatic.com

Get 1 Million Free eBooks & More Get ReadingFanatic for Free - Now!

Form Online

Start Download

Facebook® Account Sign Up

#13

A Nations

The nations themselves are the most important actors in international relations. A nation is a territory with a defined borderand a government that answers to no higher authority than its own. All or part of the population shares a group identity,often based on a combination of common ancestry, language, or culture. In 1997 there were 186 recognized nations in theworld. There also are a number of political entities sometimes thought of as nations. These include territories that functionindependently, such as Taiwan, which is officially considered a province of China; colonies, such as Martinique; and nationsthat are not yet recognized, such as Palestine. Also included in this list is Vatican City, which does not fit into any of thesecategories.

Nations vary in size and power—from the United States with a $7 trillion economy and China with more than 1 billion peopleto nations with fewer than 100,000 people, such as Andorra and Greenland. Size and power are two important variables indetermining a nation’s relationships with other countries and its influence in international affairs. The handful of the mostpowerful nations that control most of the world’s military and economic strength are called great powers. The great powersinclude the United States, Great Britain, Russia (formerly the Soviet Union), France, China, Germany, and Japan. Thesepowers are the most important actors in international relations.

B Leaders of Nations

The most important individual actor within a nation is the top leader of that country. The top leader is the person who hasthe primary political power or authority in country. For example, the top leader in Great Britain is the prime minister, whois the head of government and has the most political power, even though the king or queen of that country is considered thehead of state. The top leader in the United States is the president.

C Substate Actors

Besides the top leader of a nation, there are other groups and individuals within that nation that influence its internationalrelationships. These domestic actors, called substate actors, include particular industries with distinct interests in foreignpolicy (such as the automobile or tobacco industry) and ethnic constituencies with ties to foreign countries, as well as laborunions, cities, and regions. All of these actors may be affected by international events differently from each other or thecountry where they operate. These groups can influence a nation’s foreign policy in several ways, such as by lobbyingpolitical leaders, donating money to political candidates or parties, or swaying public opinion on certain issues.

D Transnational Actors

United Nations Forces in Bosnia This photograph shows United Nations (UN) peacekeeping forces helping to fortify a buildingoutside the besieged city of Sarajevo, in Bosnia in August, 1993.PNI/Christopher Morris/Black Star

Organizations operating in more than one country are known as transnational actors. They often have specific interests ininternational issues that differ from those of any nation. Transnational actors include multinational corporations. They alsoinclude nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), such as Planned Parenthood and the Roman Catholic Church, which promotetheir interests across international borders. NGOs often align themselves with particular nations that support their interests,and come into conflict with those that show lack of support. Intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) are groups whosemembers are national governments. Examples of intergovernmental organizations include the European Union (EU) and theIntelsat Satellite Consortium. They are usually created to promote cooperation between different nations on a particularissue or in a particular geographic region. Nongovernmental organizations and intergovernmental organizations together arecalled international organizations.

E Evaluating the Influence of Actors

Scholars of international relations have divided the various influences on international events into different categories, orlevels of analysis. There are three widely used levels of analysis: (1) individual actors, (2) domestic influences, and (3)interstate influences. Some scholars also study a fourth level of analysis, global influences.

In the individual level of analysis, scholars study the concerns, perceptions and choices of the individual people involved—great leaders, crazy leaders, activists, or individual citizens. For example, if the assassin of Archduke Francis Ferdinand in1914 had bungled the job, World War I might not have broken out when it did.

In the domestic level of analysis, scholars look at how international relations is influenced by domestic actors, includingspecial interest groups, political organizations, and government agencies. Scholars study how different kinds of societiesand governments behave, such as democracies versus dictatorships. They also look at the politics of ethnic conflict andnationalism, both of which can lead to international conflict and war. The domestic level of analysis is also called the stateor societal level.

In the interstate level of analysis, scholars focus on the interactions of states themselves, without regard to their internalmakeup or the particular individuals who lead them. For realists, this is the most important level because it looks at how anation’s relative power compared with other nations affects its behavior. The interstate level of analysis is also called theinternational or systemic level of analysis.

Some scholars also look at the global level of analysis. In this analysis, scholars study how global trends and forces, suchas technological change and the global environment, affect international relations. They also study how the lingering effectsof colonialism influence international relations.

Source:­US Encarta Encyclopedia ® 2008Library of Congress Catalog­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

regards,Noman !

The Following User Says Thank You to Noman For This Useful Post:

supersonic dexter (Saturday, June 27, 2009)

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Join Date: Feb 2006

Noman Senior Member

Location: BahawalpurPosts: 373Thanks: 191Thanked 406 Times in 287 Posts

International Relations Introduction Last Part

IV THE INTERSTATE SYSTEMLast PartScholars studying international relationships look at the world as a system of nations that interact according to a set ofwell­defined and long­established rules. They call this system the interstate system. The rules of the system govern hownations treat each other. The rules are based on common understandings of the rights of a nation. For example, accordingto the traditions of the interstate system, one nation should not infringe upon another nation’s rightful territory or interferein another nation’s internal affairs. Many of these rules were codified in the Peace of Westphalia, which ended the ThirtyYears’ War (1618­1648) in Europe.

The system evolved because nations realized it was in their best interest to develop basic ground rules for dealing with eachother in the absence of a central authority that could set and enforce rules worldwide. The lack of a central authority is themost important characteristic of the interstate system. It has meant that nations must look out for themselves first and hasshaped the way they relate to each other. They cannot rely on any higher power to enforce the rules or make sure othernations play fairly. Instead, they must enforce the rules by themselves or form alliances with other nations and collectivelyenforce them. The rules are also enforced by the power of world censure.

One of the most important rules of the interstate system is that nations should respect each other’s internationallyrecognized boundaries. Almost all of the world’s land falls under the control of existing nations except Antarctica. Under theinterstate system, no nation has the right to invade or take over another’s territory or interfere with the actions of agovernment within its own territory. But defining the borders of a territory is more complicated than it may first appear.For example, many of today’s borders resulted from wars in which winners expanded their rule by taking territory fromlosers. Some nations have borders that were imposed upon them by another nation that colonized them before they gainedindependence. These borders can create many problems. They can create oddly shaped nations that lack ports or otherresources. They can also split up previously existing nations or ethnic groups so that they are in different nations. Thisdivision has become a major source of conflict and war.

A Membership in the Interstate System A nation is considered a member of the international system if other nations recognize the authority of its government.Other nations can formally extend this recognition by establishing diplomatic relations with that nation. A nation can alsobecome recognized by being admitted as a member of the UN. Recognition does not imply that a government has popularsupport, only that it controls the territory within its borders and has agreed to assume the nation’s obligations in theinternational system. These obligations include respecting the internationally recognized borders of other nations, assumingthe international debts of the previous government, and not interfering in the internal affairs of other nations.

B Development of the Interstate System Before the development of the modern interstate system, people were organized into more mixed and overlapping politicalunits, such as city­states, empires, and feudal fiefs. The modern interstate system arose in Europe, beginning after aboutad 1500, when France and Austria emerged as powerful nations. The system grew to encompass the European continentover several centuries, although it long coexisted with other systems such as the Holy Roman Empire. With the colonizationof much of the rest of the world by European nations, the European idea of nations was exported globally. After Europeancolonies in Africa and Asia began to win their independence, they also aspired to become recognized as nations in theinternational system. Today, the legal basis for the universal application of these principles is the charter of the UN. The UNcharter, adopted in 1945, explicitly recognizes the central principles of the interstate system.

C Structure of Relationships Throughout the history of the interstate system, the relationships between nations have been structured in various ways,depending on how power was distributed among them. For example, power may be concentrated in one or two nations,which then set and enforce the rules for other countries. The predominance of one nation is called hegemony. Historicalexamples of hegemony include Great Britain after 1815 and the United States after 1945—periods when these nations werethe most powerful in the world, dominating trade and military relationships.

Power may also be distributed more equally among a half­dozen great powers and other somewhat weaker nations. In thiscase, alliances between nations play a crucial role in structuring their interactions. Power can also be distributed relativelyequally among nations or alliances of nations. This is called a balance of power. Some scholars and political leaders believethat peace is best preserved this way because no one nation can win a war easily. The evidence for this theory, however, isnot strong. The opposite proposition, called power transition theory, has more support. This theory suggests that peace ismost likely when one nation predominates, or when two opposing but equally powerful nations do. In this theory, majorwars are likely when a challenger starts to surpass a dominant nation in power.

D Future of the Interstate System Cheering the End of the Berlin Wall A man sitting on the Berlin Wall, which divided East and West Germany from 1961 to1989, raises a fist and cheers the dismantling of the wall. The wall was a symbol of the Cold War—the struggle between theUnion of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) and its allies, which included East Germany, and the United States and its allies,which included West Germany. The Cold War dominated international relations from just after World War II (1939­1945)until the early 1990s.CORBIS­BETTMANN/Paul Turnley

Today, many of the foundations of the interstate system are being challenged by changes in technology and internationalnorms. The idea of territorial integrity and a nation’s sovereignty—that is, its absolute authority over its own internalmatters—are being undermined. Neither ballistic missiles nor television signals respect borders. Television, the massmedia, telephones, and the Internet are erasing the boundaries between nations, blending once­distinct cultures togetherand expanding transnational connections. Mass communication is also drawing worldwide attention to domestic issues thatin the past were of little concern to other nations, such as human rights, the status of women, environmental practices, anddemocracy. In addition, the territories of nations are changing. Some nations are becoming integrated into larger entities—for example, the European Union. Others are fragmenting into smaller units, as did the Soviet Union.

These changes have led to a debate among scholars about whether the interstate system will survive in its current form orevolve into another system that does not yet exist. Some scholars believe nations—with their different cultural identities,boundaries, and governments—are becoming obsolete. They believe economics is becoming the driving force ininternational relations, encouraging increased cooperation among nations. They believe that cooperation, along withtechnological changes, will continue to blur the distinction between nations and the importance of national borders. Other

#14

#15

#16

scholars think that the interstate system will endure because nations have military force, and military force still determineswhat happens in the world and always will. Both are right to some extent. The interstate system of nations remains intact,but it is increasingly overlaid with new forces and realities that respect neither the idea of sovereignty nor borders.

Source:­US ® Encarta ® Encyclopedia © 2008 Library of Congress CatalogAll rights reserved­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

regards,Noman !

The Following User Says Thank You to Noman For This Useful Post:

sonia shamroze (Wednesday, July 08, 2009)

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Noman Senior Member

Join Date: Feb 2006Location: BahawalpurPosts: 373Thanks: 191Thanked 406 Times in 287 Posts

Best books for scholars interested in study of International Relations

Aoa dear fellow members !

The following text I found very usefull in the study of International Relations at introductory or medium level scholars eitherpursuing to study IR for competitive exams or for study in general. If you are in Lahore,,, and want to have a copy of yourown.... you may get genuine editions of these texts from Regal chowk Vanguard book store on order and a couple of onesnearby on order else these may be located in the central library of your home town or the University Library IR or PoliticalScience or History section or else if you have access to HEC Digital Library you may search and find from there as well.

PS: Though I am a CSE graduate but have interest in the subject of IR. And I'm eager to do a masters degree in IRsometimes in future Insha­ALLAH from a university (with good ranking) of International standing.

If Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad (whose head is Tanvir Ahmed Khan) started offering degree courses in future I'llbe the first to take admission there otherwise have to try to go abroad to fulfill my desire for knowledge and a MastersDegree in IR Insha­ALLAH. At present my knowledge in IR is limited to introductory texts and Encarta Encyclopedia.

regards,Noman !­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

Carter, Jimmy. Talking Peace: A Vision for the Next Generation. Dutton, 1996. Former president's strategies for achievingpeace and ensuring human rights.

Evans, Graham, and Jeffrey Newnham. Penguin Dictionary of International Relations. Penguin, 1999. Handy referencefor concepts, terms, events, and organizations.

Goldstein, Joshua S. International Relations. 4th ed. Addison­Wesley, 2001. Introductory text on international relations

Huntington, Samuel P. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. Simon & Schuster, 1997. Harvardhistorian theorizes that cultural divisions will be the major source of conflict among nations in coming years.

Keylor, William R. The Twentieth­Century World: An International History. 4th ed. Oxford University Press, 2001.Thorough study of international politics.

Kissinger, Henry A. Diplomacy. Simon & Schuster, 1995. The role of diplomacy and a balance of power in shaping theworld we live in.

Morgenthau, Hans. Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. 6th edition. McGraw­Hill, 1985.Landmark treatise on the nature of international politics; first published in 1948.Rich, Norman. Great Power Diplomacy: 1814­1914. McGraw­Hill, 1992. Explores how statesmen conducted foreign policy.

Tuesday, November 03, 2009

ASPZIA 39th CTP (PSP)

Join Date: Feb 2009Location: PESHAWARPosts: 120Thanks: 42Thanked 119 Times in 60 Posts

Lisbon treaty

could anybody please give information about the lisbon treaty

Wednesday, November 04, 2009

Muhammad Ali Awan Senior Member

Join Date: Mar 2008Location: City Of Eagles & Lahore.Posts: 233Thanks: 192Thanked 282 Times in 165 Posts

Treaty Of Lisbon at Glance.

On 13 December 2007, EU leaders signed the Treaty of Lisbon, thus bringing to an end several years of negotiation aboutinstitutional issues.

The Treaty of Lisbon amends the current EU and EC treaties, without replacing them. It will provide the Union with thelegal framework and tools necessary to meet future challenges and to respond to citizens' demands.

A more democratic and transparent Europe, with a strengthened role for the European Parliament and national parliaments,more opportunities for citizens to have their voices heard and a clearer sense of who does what at European and nationallevel.

A strengthened role for the European Parliament: the European Parliament, directly elected by EU citizens, will seeimportant new powers emerge over the EU legislation, the EU budget and international agreements. In particular, theincrease of co­decision procedure in policy­making will ensure the European Parliament is placed on an equal footing withthe Council, representing Member States, for the vast bulk of EU legislation.

A greater involvement of national parliaments: national parliaments will have greater opportunities to be involved inthe work of the EU, in particular thanks to a new mechanism to monitor that the Union only acts where results can be betterattained at EU level (subsidiarity). Together with the strengthened role for the European Parliament, it will enhancedemocracy and increase legitimacy in the functioning of the Union.

A stronger voice for citizens: thanks to the Citizens' Initiative, one million citizens from a number of Member States willhave the possibility to call on the Commission to bring forward new policy proposals.

Who does what: the relationship between the Member States and the European Union will become clearer with thecategorisation of competences.

Withdrawal from the Union: the Treaty of Lisbon explicitly recognises for the first time the possibility for a MemberState to withdraw from the Union.

A more efficient Europe:with simplified working methods and voting rules, streamlined and modern institutions for a EUof 27 members and an improved ability to act in areas of major priority for today's Union.

Effective and efficient decision­making: qualified majority voting in the Council will be extended to new policy areas tomake decision­making faster and more efficient. From 2014 on, the calculation of qualified majority will be based on thedouble majority of Member States and people, thus representing the dual legitimacy of the Union.A double majority will beachieved when a decision is taken by 55% of the Member States representing at least 65% of the Union’s population.

A more stable and streamlined institutional framework: the Treaty of Lisbon creates the function of President of theEuropean Council elected for two and a half years, introduces a direct link between the election of the Commission Presidentand the results of the European elections, provides for new arrangements for the future composition of the EuropeanParliament and for a smaller Commission, and includes clearer rules on enhanced cooperation and financial provisions.

Improving the life of Europeans: the Treaty of Lisbon improves the EU's ability to act in several policy areas of majorpriority for today's Union and its citizens. This is the case in particular for the policy areas of freedom, security and justice,such as combating terrorism or tackling crime. It also concerns to some extent other areas including energy policy, publichealth, civil protection, climate change, services of general interest, research, space, territorial cohesion, commercialpolicy, humanitarian aid, sport, tourism and administrative cooperation.

A Europe of rights and values, freedom, solidarity and security, promoting the Union's values, introducing the Charter ofFundamental Rights into European primary law, providing for new solidarity mechanisms and ensuring better protection ofEuropean citizens.

Democratic values: the Treaty of Lisbon details and reinforces the values and objectives on which the Union is built.These values aim to serve as a reference point for European citizens and to demonstrate what Europe has to offer itspartners worldwide.

Citizens' rights and Charter of Fundamental Rights: the Treaty of Lisbon preserves existing rights while introducingnew ones. In particular, it guarantees the freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights and gives itsprovisions a binding legal force. It concerns civil, political, economic and social rights.

Freedom of European citizens: the Treaty of Lisbon preserves and reinforces the "four freedoms" and the political,economic and social freedom of European citizens.

Solidarity between Member States: the Treaty of Lisbon provides that the Union and its Member States act jointly in aspirit of solidarity if a Member State is the subject of a terrorist attack or the victim of a natural or man­made disaster.Solidarity in the area of energy is also emphasised.

Increased security for all: the Union will get an extended capacity to act on freedom, security and justice, which willbring direct benefits in terms of the Union's ability to fight crime and terrorism. New provisions on civil protection,humanitarian aid and public health also aim at boosting the Union's ability to respond to threats to the security of Europeancitizens.

Europe as an actor on the global stage: It will be achieved by bringing together Europe's external policy tools, bothwhen developing and deciding new policies. The Treaty of Lisbon will give Europe a clear voice in relations with its partnersworldwide. It will harness Europe's economic, humanitarian, political and diplomatic strengths to promote Europeaninterests and values worldwide, while respecting the particular interests of the Member States in Foreign Affairs.

A new High Representative for the Union in Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, also Vice­President of the Commission, willincrease the impact, the coherence and the visibility of the EU's external action. A new European External Action Service will provide back up and support to the High Representative.

A single legal personality for the Union:It will strengthen the Union's negotiating power, making it more effective onthe world stage and a more visible partner for third countries and international organisations.

Progress in European Security and Defence Policy: Progress in European Security and Defence Policy will preservespecial decision­making arrangements but also pave the way towards reinforced cooperation amongst a smaller group ofMember States.__________________

Sweat in peace will lessen the blood in war.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Muhammad Ali Awan For This Useful Post:

ASPZIA (Saturday, November 07, 2009), pisceankhan (Monday, October 26, 2015)

Page 2 of 2 < 1 2

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Posting Rules

You may not post new threadsYou may not post repliesYou may not post attachmentsYou may not edit your posts

BB code is OnSmilies are On[IMG] code is OnHTML code is OffTrackbacks are OnPingbacks are OnRefbacks are On

Forum Rules

Similar Threads

Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post

Essay Writing saharsyed Essay 7 Saturday, October 25,2014 12:38 PM

Essay Writing mnadeem Essay 1 Friday, April 18, 200807:35 PM

Essays on Essay Writing atifch Essay 6 Friday, December 22, 200611:24 PM

indo­pak relations atifch Current Affairs 0 Monday, December 11,2006 09:01 PM

CSS Forum ­ Privacy Statement ­ Terms of Service ­ Top

Disclaimer: This is not the official website of Federal Public Service Commission Pakistan. This is a non­commercial website helping individualswho intend to join civil service of Pakistan. The material on this website is provided for informational purposes only. We do not claim that the siteis an exhaustive compilation of information about Civil Service of Pakistan neither represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of anyinformation, content contained on, or linked, downloaded or accessed from any page of this website. These materials are intended, but notpromised or guaranteed to be current, complete or up to date. However, honest efforts have been made to provide comprehensive informationfor the benefit of users. The documents and material displayed or mentioned on this site are not official copies. Please contact FPSC for updatedrules and regulations governing CSS examination.

Sponsors: ArgusVision vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 ­ 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.